Abstract
Background: Stigmatizing attitudes toward persons with mental disorders is a well-established and global phenomenon
often leading to discrimination and social exclusion. Although previous research in the United States showed that
conservative ideology has been related to stigmatizing attitudes toward mental disorders, there is reason to believe that
this mechanism plays a different role in the context of a universal welfare state with a multi-party system such as Sweden.
Furthermore, “mental disorders” may signify severe psychotic disorders, which may evoke more negative attitudes.
This suggests the importance of specific studies focusing on the more common phenomenon of depression. This paper
investigates the relationship between political ideology and stigmatizing attitudes toward depression in Sweden.
Methods: This study is part of the New Ways research program. Data were collected by the Laboratory of Opinion
Research (LORE) at the University of Gothenburg in 2014 (N = 3246). Independent variables were political ideology
and party affiliation. The dependent variable was the Depression Stigma Scale (DSS). Data were analyzed with linear
regression analyses and analyses of variance.
Results: More conservative ideology (B = 0.68, standard error [SE] = 0.04, P<.001) and more conservative party
affiliation (F(8 2920) = 38.45, P<.001) showed more stigmatizing attitudes toward depression. Item-level analyses
revealed a difference where the supporters of the conservative party differed (P<.05) from supporters of the liberal
party, with a higher proportion agreeing that “people could snap out of ” depression if they wanted to; the populist
right-wing party differed from the conservative party with a higher proportion agreeing on items displaying people with
depression as “dangerous” and “unpredictable.” Even self-stigma was highest among the populist right-wing party with
22.3% agreeing that “if I had depression I wouldn’t tell….”
Conclusion: Political ideology was associated with stigmatizing attitudes toward depression in Sweden. The results also
confirm the need to distinguish between different forms of conservatism by observing social distance as being a more
important driver among voters for the populist right-wing party compared with personal agency and responsibility
among voters for the more traditional conservative party.