Participant Perceptions of Continued Mental Health First Aid (MHFA) Engagement, Help-Seeking Behavior, and Stigma Reduction: A Mixed-Methods Pilot Study.
Mental Health First Aid (MHFA) is an internationally recognized training program designed to improve mental health literacy, reduce stigma, and train non-clinicians with supportive skills to assist individuals experiencing psychological distress. Although prior research has demonstrated trainees' short-term improvements in knowledge and attitudes, less is known about their post-certification perceptions. Here, we assess the likelihood of trainees' continued application of MHFA concepts several months after certification. The current study examined the participants' self-reported perceptions of the behavioral and attitudinal outcomes three to six months following training, including, help-seeking behaviors, self-efficacy, stigma-related attitudes, and functional application of intervention skills.
A mixed-methods, cross-sectional design was employed using a structured web-based survey administered to MHFA-trained participants. The survey included demographic items, Likert-scale measures of confidence, behavioral engagement, and stigma-related attitudes, as well as open-ended qualitative prompts. Quantitative analyses included descriptive statistics, reliability testing using Cronbach's alpha, exploratory factor analysis, assumption diagnostics, and nonparametric hypothesis testing using Mann-Whitney U tests. Qualitative responses were analyzed using thematic analysis to identify recurring patterns related to long-term training impact.
Participants reported increases in self-confidence and behavioral engagement following MHFA training. More than 80% of participants indicated they had recommended professional mental health services to others after certification. Psychometric evaluation demonstrated strong internal consistency for the six-item self-stigma scale (α = 0.90), with a unidimensional factor structure explaining 60.4% of the variance, whereas the public stigma scale showed weaker internal reliability (α = 0.45). Qualitative themes included increased self-awareness, stigma reduction, advocacy behavior, professional empowerment, and institutional validation of mental health priorities.
The findings suggest participants perceived continued confidence, reduced internalized stigma, and engagement in supportive mental health behaviors following MHFA training. These findings should be interpreted cautiously given the cross-sectional design, self-reported measures, and highly engaged sample.
A mixed-methods, cross-sectional design was employed using a structured web-based survey administered to MHFA-trained participants. The survey included demographic items, Likert-scale measures of confidence, behavioral engagement, and stigma-related attitudes, as well as open-ended qualitative prompts. Quantitative analyses included descriptive statistics, reliability testing using Cronbach's alpha, exploratory factor analysis, assumption diagnostics, and nonparametric hypothesis testing using Mann-Whitney U tests. Qualitative responses were analyzed using thematic analysis to identify recurring patterns related to long-term training impact.
Participants reported increases in self-confidence and behavioral engagement following MHFA training. More than 80% of participants indicated they had recommended professional mental health services to others after certification. Psychometric evaluation demonstrated strong internal consistency for the six-item self-stigma scale (α = 0.90), with a unidimensional factor structure explaining 60.4% of the variance, whereas the public stigma scale showed weaker internal reliability (α = 0.45). Qualitative themes included increased self-awareness, stigma reduction, advocacy behavior, professional empowerment, and institutional validation of mental health priorities.
The findings suggest participants perceived continued confidence, reduced internalized stigma, and engagement in supportive mental health behaviors following MHFA training. These findings should be interpreted cautiously given the cross-sectional design, self-reported measures, and highly engaged sample.
Authors
Smith Smith, Marazzo Marazzo, Williams Williams, Fishon Fishon, Muhammad Muhammad, Muhammad Muhammad, Williams Williams, Shands Shands, Downer-Reid Downer-Reid
View on Pubmed