Skip to contentScholarGate
LibraryBookshelfDeskReview StudioAssistant
Sign in
On this page
IntuitionHow it worksWhen to use itStrengths & limitationsCommon pitfallsApplicationsFrequently asked🔒 Read the full methodSourcesRelated methods
Cite this pageSpotted an issue on this page? Report or suggest a fix →
Home›Psychiatric Rehabilitation›Link Stigma Scale (Perceived Devaluation-Discrimination Scale)
Process / pipelinestigma-measurement

Link Stigma Scale (Perceived Devaluation-Discrimination Scale)

Perceived Devaluation-Discrimination Scale (Link Stigma Scale) · Also known as: Link Scale, PDD Scale

The Link Stigma Scale, also called the Perceived Devaluation-Discrimination Scale, is a measure of perceived stigma developed by Bruce G. Link in 1987. It assesses the extent to which individuals with serious mental illness perceive that society devalues people with mental illness and discriminates against them. Unlike internalized stigma (self-directed negative beliefs), the Link Scale captures perceived external stigma—beliefs about how others view and treat people with mental illness. The scale is widely used in stigma research and mental health services to understand stigma as a social and structural phenomenon.

ScholarGate
  1. Process / pipeline
  2. v1
  3. 1 Sources
  4. PUBLISHED
Cite this page →
Tools & resources
Download slides
Learn & explore

Read the full method

Members only

Sign in with a free account to read this section.

Sign in

Method map

The neighbourhood of related methods — select a node to explore.

Link Stigma Scale
Internalized Stigma of M…Recovery Assessment ScaleSelf-Stigma of Seeking H…Social Inclusion Scale

When to use it

The Link Scale is recommended for research on stigma as a barrier to care, employment, housing, and recovery outcomes. It is useful in stigma reduction interventions, particularly anti-stigma campaigns in the general population, which may reduce the stigma that individuals with mental illness perceive. The scale is valuable for identifying contexts or groups where perceived stigma is particularly high, informing targeted anti-stigma efforts. It is less suited for individual clinical assessment; rather, it provides a window into societal and community-level stigma perception.

Strengths & limitations

Strengths
  • Captures perceived external stigma, distinct from internalized stigma and complementary to other stigma measures.
  • Grounded in sociological theory and empirical research on stigma processes.
  • Relatively brief and straightforward; good feasibility in research and clinical settings.
  • Demonstrates reasonable internal consistency (Cronbach's α 0.60–0.80, varying by version) and test–retest reliability.
  • Sensitive to anti-stigma interventions and changes in social context or attitudes.
  • Widely translated and validated internationally.
Limitations
  • Lower internal consistency in some versions relative to other stigma scales (α sometimes <0.70).
  • No universally agreed item set or scoring method; multiple versions with different lengths and response scales exist.
  • Limited subscale distinction between 'devaluation' and 'discrimination' in some versions.
  • Vulnerable to social desirability bias if response format is transparent.
  • Perception of stigma may not always align with actual discrimination, potentially conflating awareness with exaggeration.

Frequently asked

Is high perceived stigma the same as paranoid thinking?

Not necessarily. High scores on the Link Scale often reflect accurate awareness of real discrimination in employment, housing, and social relationships. Extensive research documents that discrimination against people with mental illness is widespread and measurable. High perceived stigma may include realistic concern about mistreatment, not paranoid distortion. However, in individuals with active psychosis, distinguishing between realistic perception and paranoid interpretation can be clinically challenging.

How does the Link Scale differ from the ISMI (Internalized Stigma Scale)?

The Link Scale measures perceived external stigma—the belief that 'society devalues people with mental illness.' The ISMI measures internalized stigma—the degree to which the individual has personally adopted negative self-beliefs. The two are related but distinct. A person may perceive high societal stigma but resist internalizing it (high Link, low ISMI), or internalize stigma despite low perceived societal stigma (low Link, high ISMI). Using both provides a comprehensive picture.

Can the Link Scale be used in peer support or consumer-operated services?

Yes. Peer support and consumer-run services sometimes monitor perceived stigma as a proxy for perceived community acceptance and inclusivity. If perceived stigma decreases over time in program participants, it may reflect improved community attitudes or the individual's increased confidence despite awareness of societal stigma. However, the Link Scale is better suited to research than individual clinical monitoring.

What is the relationship between perceived stigma and help-seeking?

High perceived stigma is associated with delayed help-seeking, reluctance to disclose mental illness, and treatment dropout. The 'why try effect'—perceiving that stigma is pervasive and inescapable—can undermine help-seeking motivation. Anti-stigma efforts that reduce perceived stigma, or peer support that demonstrates successful help-seeking despite stigma, can facilitate engagement with care.

Sources

  1. Link, B. G. (1987). Understanding labeling effects in the area of mental disorders: An assessment of the effects of expectations of rejection. American Sociological Review, 52(1), 96-112. DOI: 10.2307/2095395 ↗

How to cite this page

ScholarGate. (2026, June 3). Perceived Devaluation-Discrimination Scale (Link Stigma Scale). ScholarGate. https://scholargate.app/en/psychiatric-rehabilitation/link-stigma-scale

Related methods

Internalized Stigma of Mental Illness ScaleRecovery Assessment ScaleSelf-Stigma of Seeking Help ScaleSocial Inclusion Scale

Which method?

Set this method beside its closest kin and read them side by side — the library lays the books on the table; the choice is yours.

  • Internalized Stigma of Mental Illness ScalePsychiatric Rehabilitation↔ compare
  • Recovery Assessment ScalePsychiatric Rehabilitation↔ compare
  • Self-Stigma of Seeking Help ScalePsychiatric Rehabilitation↔ compare
  • Social Inclusion ScalePsychiatric Rehabilitation↔ compare
Compare side by side →

Referenced by

Internalized Stigma of Mental Illness ScaleSelf-Stigma of Seeking Help Scale

Similar methods

Internalized Stigma of Mental Illness ScaleSelf-Stigma of Seeking Help ScaleSocial Inclusion ScaleRecovery Assessment ScaleEmpowerment ScaleQuestionnaire about the Process of RecoveryPositive and Negative Syndrome ScaleMultidimensional Scale of Perceived Social Support

Related reference concepts

Mental Health Stigma and DiscriminationCultural Competency and Mental Health DisparitiesStigma and Discrimination in Addiction MedicineAssessment and Rating ScalesCommunity Mental Health and RecoverySocial Determinants of Mental Health

Spotted an issue on this page? Report or suggest a fix →

ScholarGate — Link Stigma Scale (Perceived Devaluation-Discrimination Scale (Link Stigma Scale)). Retrieved 2026-07-21 from https://scholargate.app/en/psychiatric-rehabilitation/link-stigma-scale · Dataset: https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.20539026
Quick facts
Originator
Link, B. G.
Subfamily
stigma-measurement
Year
1987
Type
Self-report questionnaire
Related methods
Internalized Stigma of Mental Illness ScaleRecovery Assessment ScaleSelf-Stigma of Seeking Help ScaleSocial Inclusion Scale
ScholarGate

A content-first reference library for research methods — what each one is, how it works, and where it comes from.

Open data (CC-BY)

Explore

  • Library
  • Search the library…
  • Browse by field
  • Fields
  • Journey
  • Compare
  • Which method?

Reference

  • Subjects
  • Atlas
  • Glossary
  • Methodology
  • Philosophy

Your tools

  • Bookshelf
  • Desk
  • Chat

Company

  • About
  • Pricing
  • Contact
  • Suggest a method

Entries are compiled from published sources for reference. Verifying the accuracy and suitability of any information for your own use remains your responsibility.

© 2026 ScholarGate · A research-method reference library
  • Privacy
  • Cookies
  • Terms
  • Delete account