Perceived Social Status Impacts Early Psychosis


Writing in the British Journal of Clinical Psychology, London researchers find that perceptions of lower social rank and inferiority amongst 24 individuals with early psychosis impact on feelings of satisfaction with and feelings of exclusion from peer groups, possibly resulting in lost friendships and on clinical course and recovery.

Abstract → 


Mad in America hosts blogs by a diverse group of writers. These posts are designed to serve as a public forum for a discussion—broadly speaking—of psychiatry and its treatments. The opinions expressed are the writers’ own.

Previous articleFear in Infants Predicts Guilt in Toddlers, Later Psychopathology
Next articleLetters From the Front Lines
Kermit Cole
Kermit Cole, MFT, founding editor of Mad in America, works in Santa Fe, New Mexico as a couples and family therapist. Inspired by Open Dialogue, he works as part of a team and consults with couples and families that have members identified as patients. His work in residential treatment — largely with severely traumatized and/or "psychotic" clients — led to an appreciation of the power and beauty of systemic philosophy and practice, as the alternative to the prevailing focus on individual pathology. A former film-maker, he has undergraduate and master's degrees in psychology from Harvard University, as well as an MFT degree from the Council for Relationships in Philadelphia. He is a doctoral candidate with the Taos Institute and the Free University of Brussels. You can reach him at [email protected]


  1. The government forcing you into the mental patient role is not a ‘perception’. It’s an objective fact.

    “Individuals with early psychosis viewed themselves as being of lower social rank and inferior in relation to matched controls, and also reported engaging in submissive behaviours more frequently and felt more entrapped by external events.”

    You tend to feel pretty “entrapped by external events” when your government has raped your brain and stolen your human rights. Not to mention smeared you with the stigma of being criminalized in a way, as in the stigma that comes from being forced in to the mental patient role in society’s witch hunt psychiatry rituals.

  2. I think it’s telling, and speaks to how separate the world of ‘researcher’ and ‘clinician’ are from the world of the people they hold out at arm’s length and examine as if they are specimens, that over 90% of the ‘in the news’ section of brings us articles that can’t even be read by people without an institutional paid subscription to the content.

    The rarefied world of the privilege of even reading about what these so called ‘experts on us’ have to say about ‘us’, is hidden behind expensive paywalls.

    That says a lot about the whole enterprise. It’s an ivory tower quagmire of piece by piece alienation from the real human beings this enterprise claims to be in some giant human scientific endeavor to ‘help’.

    It might be ‘in the news’ for people with institutional subscriptions to academic journals, but it’s certainly not ‘in the news’ for the average internet surfing serf.

  3. One only needs to use ones common sense to conclude that the people having breakdowns are the ones who are constantly being kicked in the teeth by fate, luck and their fellow human beings, who find it impossible to get jobs who are being judged by luckier folk, etc