Strong Fears, Weak Ties, and Nonsuicidal Self-Injury: Medical Inquiries About Injury, Wound, and Scar Care from a Self-Harm Subreddit.

IF 3 3区 医学 Q1 COMMUNICATION Health Communication Pub Date : 2025-02-11 DOI:10.1080/10410236.2025.2462063
Lindsay A Lundeen, Lizy Humphrey, Amanda L Sams
{"title":"Strong Fears, Weak Ties, and Nonsuicidal Self-Injury: Medical Inquiries About Injury, Wound, and Scar Care from a Self-Harm Subreddit.","authors":"Lindsay A Lundeen, Lizy Humphrey, Amanda L Sams","doi":"10.1080/10410236.2025.2462063","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Through the theoretical lens of the Strength of Weak Ties Theory, this study examined medical advice sought within a self-harm subreddit. Using a social constructionist epistemology and employing a Reflexive Thematic Analysis, we explored 596 inquiries for medical advice about nonsuicidal self-injury-related injuries, wounds, and scar care. Five overarching themes were identified: (a) pleading for wound care help from weak-ties, (b) expressing fear of hospitalization deterring requests to strong-ties, (c) seeking validation for harm-reduction from weak-ties (d) asking weak-ties how to navigate unexpected outcomes, and (e) requesting help from weak-ties to conceal wounds, injuries, and scars from strong-ties. Our findings align with previous research by describing Reddit as a valuable resource when strong-ties are inaccessible or unapproachable. They extend the existing literature by highlighting users' frequently asserted preference for online medical inquiries due to stigma and involuntary hospitalization fears often associated with medical and mental health providers. We discuss the need for injury and wound care best practices in accessible spaces while offering theoretical and practical implications for key stakeholders. Given the frequent spread of mis/disinformation on user-generated social networks, we also emphasize the importance of users' verifying the accuracy of medical advice received before implementing suggestions received online from anonymous weak ties connections. Ultimately, this study highlights the nuances between online medical inquiries, social support, and barriers to accessible and empathetic healthcare for individuals engaging in nonsuicidal self-injury.</p>","PeriodicalId":12889,"journal":{"name":"Health Communication","volume":" ","pages":"1-13"},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Health Communication","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/10410236.2025.2462063","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"COMMUNICATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Through the theoretical lens of the Strength of Weak Ties Theory, this study examined medical advice sought within a self-harm subreddit. Using a social constructionist epistemology and employing a Reflexive Thematic Analysis, we explored 596 inquiries for medical advice about nonsuicidal self-injury-related injuries, wounds, and scar care. Five overarching themes were identified: (a) pleading for wound care help from weak-ties, (b) expressing fear of hospitalization deterring requests to strong-ties, (c) seeking validation for harm-reduction from weak-ties (d) asking weak-ties how to navigate unexpected outcomes, and (e) requesting help from weak-ties to conceal wounds, injuries, and scars from strong-ties. Our findings align with previous research by describing Reddit as a valuable resource when strong-ties are inaccessible or unapproachable. They extend the existing literature by highlighting users' frequently asserted preference for online medical inquiries due to stigma and involuntary hospitalization fears often associated with medical and mental health providers. We discuss the need for injury and wound care best practices in accessible spaces while offering theoretical and practical implications for key stakeholders. Given the frequent spread of mis/disinformation on user-generated social networks, we also emphasize the importance of users' verifying the accuracy of medical advice received before implementing suggestions received online from anonymous weak ties connections. Ultimately, this study highlights the nuances between online medical inquiries, social support, and barriers to accessible and empathetic healthcare for individuals engaging in nonsuicidal self-injury.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
8.20
自引率
10.30%
发文量
184
期刊介绍: As an outlet for scholarly intercourse between medical and social sciences, this noteworthy journal seeks to improve practical communication between caregivers and patients and between institutions and the public. Outstanding editorial board members and contributors from both medical and social science arenas collaborate to meet the challenges inherent in this goal. Although most inclusions are data-based, the journal also publishes pedagogical, methodological, theoretical, and applied articles using both quantitative or qualitative methods.
期刊最新文献
Impact of UK National Clinical Communication Guidelines on Adults' Perceptions of Doctors and Treatment Commitment. Prioritizing the Values, Wishes, and Needs of Patients with Advanced Cancer: A Secondary Linguistic Analysis. Reporting on the "Next Generation of Nicotine Addicts": A Mixed-Methods Analysis of How the Australian Media has Covered and Constructed Youth Vaping (2018-2023). Strong Fears, Weak Ties, and Nonsuicidal Self-Injury: Medical Inquiries About Injury, Wound, and Scar Care from a Self-Harm Subreddit. Thinking Outside of Yourself: The Potential of Awe in Mitigating Psychological Reactance Via Inspiring Self-Transcendence.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1