Background: This paper seeks to answer two fundamental questions: What is the basis of the current form of mental illness stigma? and Why do western cultures stereotype people with mental illness as dangerous, incompetent and blameful, rather than something else?
Material and discussion: We argue that a motivational model called system-justification offers several benefits for answering these questions. System-justification portrays stigma as a way of making sense of economic and political differences between the majority and stigmatized subgroups. We contrast system-justification with two cognitive models of stigma that seem to have strong support from naive psychology: mental illness stigma results as the normal perception of a group of people who are dangerous and/or blameworthy and there is a kernel of truth to the stigmatizing attitudes about people with mental illness. Although research supporting the latter two models is mixed, there are significant limitations to the models, as well as concerns that normal perception and kernel of truth might actually promote stigma.
Conclusions: As an alternative, system-justification combines three paradigms that suggest its worthiness for future research: 1) a review of historical and economic forces that influence social phenomena; 2) the need of humankind to understand these forces and organize them into a unitary framework; and 3) the cognitive mechanisms that are essential for this comprehension. Implications of this model for stigma change are discussed.