Search

The Classic Text is an outline of the Stirling County Study as conceptualized by Alexander H Leighton. It was first presented at a conference held in 1949 organized by the Milbank Memorial Fund, an American philanthropic foundation. The meeting brought together 30–40 experts from across North America. Leighton succinctly explained his frame of reference for the epidemiology of mental disorders and the methodology of the community-based study he conducted in Nova Scotia. The introduction to the text explains contextual points, certain specificities of Leighton’s framework, and the discussions that surrounded it, largely dominated by a group of Harvard professors, including Erich Lindemann and John E Gordon.

Recent historiography has revealed a growing interest in the developments of psychiatric epidemiology. This volume aims to explicitly tackle the problem of transforming a diversity of knowledge into a structured scientific unit. Furthermore, it aims to answer this by bringing together historical studies that demonstrate how epistemic authority has led to the hierarchization of knowledge and the institutionalization of psychiatric epidemiology. Interdisciplinary research teams are traced back in history, and their organization is interrogated. Tracing the history of psychiatric epidemiology involves an exploration of disciplinary divisions of labour, such as how survey methods are based on theoretical frameworks, how research programmes are regulated with political and moral ideals, and how the wider public recognizes public health expertise.

Epidemiology of mental disorders emerged in the post-1945 era at the intersections of different areas of knowledge. Given its ambitions, the Stirling County Study provides an instructive case study. It is also a good example of how the epidemiology applied methodological skills from social sciences. This paper aims, first, to reconstruct one of the first episodes in the development of psychiatric epidemiology. Its second purpose is to provide a detailed description of interdisciplinarity at work, and to examine its effects. After explaining some of the major features of the Stirling County Study, I emphasize the links between some of the first results, particularly regarding young people as a population at risk, and the job market after the Great Depression.

In this paper I compare the methodology of two of the most famous epidemiological studies: The Midtown Manhattan Study (1952–60) and the Epidemiologic Catchment Area Study (1980–5). At first sight, there are few features that distinguish them; both were studies of large samples of the general population; they both used highly sophisticated methods of data analysis and standardized instruments; and they involved interviewers who were not professional clinicians. However, if we carefully compare the protocols that define how ‘clinical’ information is collected, we realize that some important changes in methodology were not only due to practical necessities, but also involved an important transformation in the role of the interviewer and the skills traditionally associated with the clinician.

In 1957, the British-Indian child psychiatrist Dr Elwyn James Anthony travelled to the Zurich International Congress of Psychiatry to show a film featuring 70 children with such complex symptomatology and behaviour that they betrayed the certainty of contemporary theories of developmental psychology and psychoanalysis. This article examines the significance of Anthony’s film to the creation of new scientific models in international developmental psychology and psychiatric epidemiology. It marked a significant change in the use of filmed evidence that sought to create a truly global and universalist approach to atypical child development based purely on scientific observations. This new observational work was important in shaping new internationally ratified models to study the epidemiology of children’s psychiatric conditions.

The post-World War II international mental health movement placed significant emphasis on the concept of the ‘social environment’, a true paradigm shift in thinking about the causes of mental illness. Rather than focusing on individual risk factors, experts and policy-makers began to consider the interplay between social context and mental health and illness. Also, during this period, quantification gained prominence within the expanding field of Western psychiatry. Eventually, the concept of the ‘social’ became fragmented into quantifiable social determinants that could be correlated with mental illness and subjected to systematic neutralization. This trajectory paved the way for the prevailing biomedical psychiatric epidemiology. This broader inquiry challenges us to redefine our understanding of the ‘social’ in the context of mental health research and practice.

This article explores the Chicago School of Sociology’s influence on psychiatric epidemiology. While the Chicago School text usually associated with psychiatric epidemiology is the 1939 book by Faris and Dunham, it is important to acknowledge the influence of earlier Chicago School projects during the 1920s. These projects, tackling everything from homelessness and delinquency to the ghetto and suicide, provided models not only for Faris and Dunham, but also for numerous methodological and theoretical insights for the social psychiatry projects that would emerge after World War II. The social sciences and the humanities still have important roles to play in informing contemporary approaches to psychiatric epidemiology and deriving ways to tackle the socio-economic problems that contribute to mental illness.