부산대학교 도서관

The article presents information on the research article, "Patient Attitudes toward Mental Hospitalization: A Review of Quantitative Research," by R.M. Weinstein. Patient attitudes are an important and too frequently neglected element in the creation of a rational mental health system. For this reason, Weinstein's intent to evaluate the available data on this subject is admirable. However, in his attempt to compare two general categories of studies, the author commits a number of errors that the authors feel are significant enough to warrant a response. In addition, they think this article presents information and opinions that are potentially dangerous in light of the vigorous debate about psychiatric patients' civil liberties, the viability of less restrictive alternatives, and the future of community-based treatment. Since Weinstein's assertions could be used to justify increased hospitalization of persons labeled mentally ill, it is important to point out some of the major weaknesses in his argument. From the start Weinstein makes a methodological error that undermines the entire article. In order to combine quantitative studies into some similar metric for interpretation, he unfortunately chooses to measure favorableness relative to the midpoint of the specific test, scale, or factor. That is, given an attitude scale with a range from 1 to 50, if over 50% of the sample of patients in the given study received a score above 25, the study was scored as indicating a favorable patient attitude toward the hospital. The logic of scale construction, however, will not allow for such inferences from a scale or test score to the state of the population. The distribution of scores on any attitude measurement instrument is due not only to the sentiment of agreement in the population, but to the appropriateness of the scale items as well. It would be inaccurate, however, to infer that patients' views of the hospital were unfavorable.