Abstract
A significant proportion of undergraduates report having mental health concerns (MHC), which are associated with reduced academic success. Students with MHC are encouraged to seek help from their instructors but may not because of perceived negative reactions by instructors and peers. This suggests stigma about MHC may differentially impact disclosure perceptions of students with MHC compared with their peers, yet the perceptions of both groups have been unexplored. This study surveyed students with and without MHC in the same classes about their hypothetical disclosure of MHC. Students in several introductory biology classes were asked whether they identified as having MHC, whether they would or would not hypothetically disclose MHC to an instructor, and why. Thematic analysis identified reasons underlying their disclosure choices, which were sorted into the three beliefs of the Theory of Planned Behavior: attitudes, subjective norms, and behavioral control. Of the 803 respondents, 50% self-identified as having MHC. Students with MHC were less likely to say they would disclose their MHC to an instructor than students without MHC. Students with and without MHC who said ‘yes’ to disclosure gave similar reasons aligned with attitude beliefs. Students with MHC who said ‘no’ to disclosure perceived that the instructor wouldn’t care (attitude beliefs). Students without MHC who said ‘no’ to disclosure talked more about keeping their MHC private (subjective norms beliefs). Students without MHC who said ‘it depends’ talked more about impact on their course performance (attitude) than students with MHC. This research indicated that students with and without MHC do perceive disclosure differently and suggested that students with MHC focus more on negative instructor reactions, while those without MHC focus on privacy and performance. These differential perceptions may contribute to students with MHC seeing disclosure as a negative social cost versus a positive academic benefit.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
This study did not receive any funding
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
IRB of The University of Tennessee gave ethical approval of this work.IRB-23-07777-XP
I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable.
Yes
Data Availability
Data produced in the present work are contained in the manuscript.
