Examination of disparity in accessing counselling services for Muslim men : an audit study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Since the events of September 11th 2001, Muslims have been under increased scrutiny experiencing discrimination, prejudice, and hate crimes. The consequences of this day have had a negative affect on Muslims and their communities’ mental health, making it imperative to ensure Muslims are able to access mental health professionals when needed. However, contemporary counselling and psychotherapy are still criticized for being Eurocentric, and research has shown that disparities in mental health services based on sociocultural variables have continued to persist. It has been noted that religion is an area that has not received much attention in the literature on mental health service disparities leading to a dearth in knowledge on how Eurocentric approaches impact Muslim clients. It is this broader context that highlights the pressing need to investigate the possibility of religious disparities and implicit bias in access to mental health services for Muslims. The goal of this study was to examine if there is possible implicit bias by counsellors and psychologists against Muslims who access counselling and psychotherapy services. An audit methodology utilizing emails examined the effects of clients’ perceived religion on counsellors and psychologists in Greater Vancouver in their openness to provide services. A total of 470 practitioners received an email either from a Muslim male or non-Muslim male potential client, requesting an appointment. The main analyses showed that perceived religion was not a statistically significant predictor of whether a response is received nor how receptive a practitioner will be. Exploratory analyses showed that perceived religion was associated with how long it takes practitioners to respond, with the Muslim man receiving statistically significant quicker responses, compared to the non-Muslim man. This study was the first Canadian study examining mental health services disparities using an audit methodology, as well as the first North American study examining mental health services disparities based on religion, which can help inform future research in this area.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".