Implicit attitudes and discrimination against people with physical disabilities (original) (raw)

How and When Stereotypes Relate to Helping Behavior toward People with Disabilities

2017

Please check the document version of this publication: • A submitted manuscript is the version of the article upon submission and before peer-review. There can be important differences between the submitted version and the official published version of record. People interested in the research are advised to contact the author for the final version of the publication, or visit the DOI to the publisher's website. • The final author version and the galley proof are versions of the publication after peer review. • The final published version features the final layout of the paper including the volume, issue and page numbers. Link to publication General rights Copyright and moral rights for the publications made accessible in the public portal are retained by the authors and/or other copyright owners and it is a condition of accessing publications that users recognise and abide by the legal requirements associated with these rights. • Users may download and print one copy of any publication from the public portal for the purpose of private study or research. • You may not further distribute the material or use it for any profit-making activity or commercial gain • You may freely distribute the URL identifying the publication in the public portal. If the publication is distributed under the terms of Article 25fa of the Dutch Copyright Act, indicated by the "Taverne" license above, please follow below link for the End User Agreement:

Classical and modern prejudice: Attitudes toward people with intellectual disabilities

Research in Developmental Disabilities, 2006

In two studies, Study 1 and Study 2, we examine whether attitudes toward people with intellectual disabilities, like sexism and racism, consist of two forms-a classical and a modern, where the classical is overt and blatant and the modern is more subtle and covert. Self-report scales tapping these two forms were developed in Study 1. Based on confirmatory factor analyses, the results in Study 1 supported our hypothesis and revealed that the modern and classical forms are correlated but distinguishable. This outcome was replicated in Study 2. Construct and discriminatory validations of the scales provided further support for the distinction. The theoretical and practical importance of the results is discussed in relation to previous research on attitudes toward people with intellectual disabilities and other social outgroups. #

Cultural stereotypes of disabled and non-disabled men and women: Consensus for global category representations and diagnostic domains

British Journal of Social Psychology, 2010

Despite the fact that disabled people comprise ah eterogeneous social group, cross-impairment cultural stereotypes reflect ac onsistent set of beliefs used to characterize this population as dependent, incompetent, and asexual. Using a free-response methodology, stereotypical beliefs about disabled men (DM) and women (DW) were contrasted against the stereotypes of their non-disabled counterparts illustrating the dimensions considered most diagnostic of each group.Results revealed that both disabled and non-disabled participants expressed consensus about the contents of group stereotypes that exaggerate traditional gender role expectations of the non-disabled while minimizing perceived differences between DM and DW. Implications for the field of stereotyping and prejudice, and the individual and system justifying functions of cultural stereotypes arediscussed. The stereotyping and prejudice field has been late in recognizing disabled people as a social group struggling forc ivil rights and facing some of the samei ssues of discrimination and oppression as otherm inorityc onstituencies.R esearcho n stereotype change, prejudice reduction, and the effects of group identity on perceptions of women, people of colour and other minority groups has yett o examine how this workg eneralizes to the circumstances facing disabled people as a socially relevant membership category. Many remain unaware that disabled people comprise one of the largest minority groups in the USA (Fujiura &R utkowski-Kmitta, 2001) assuming that disability has more to do people'si mpairments (e.g., blindness, deafness, or spinal cord injury)t han with sociallyc onstructed disadvantage, shared misperceptions, or stereotype-congruente xpectations (Gill,2 001). Instead, social psychologists have almoste xclusivelya pproached disability prejudice as representing ad isparate collection of impairment-specific stigmas each contributing to unique patterns of avoidance, anxiety,a nd ostracism (Antonak &L ivneh, 2000; Jones et al.,1 984).

Attitudes toward individuals with disabilities: The effects of contact with different disability types

2015

Contact with individuals with disabilities influences positive attitudes toward such individuals. This research investigated if contact with individuals with specific disabilities has an effect on attitudes toward other disabilities. Specifically, this research investigated physical, developmental and behavioral disabilities. While participants reported the most contact with individuals with physical disabilities and the most negative attitudes toward individuals with developmental disabilities, contact with individuals with behavioral disabilities was the best predictor of positive attitudes toward all disability types. This demonstrates that the relation between contact and attitudes is more nuanced than originally thought and can help us better understand disability related bias.

Examining implicit attitudes towards exercisers with a physical disability

TheScientificWorldJournal, 2013

Background. Using measures of explicit attitudes, physical activity status has been established as a factor that reduces the stigma ablebodied people hold towards people with physical disabilities. This phenomenon is called the exerciser stereotype. However, whether the exerciser stereotype exists when using measures of implicit attitudes remains unknown. Objective. The aims of this study were to evaluate the prevalence of negative implicit attitudes towards people with physical disabilities and determine whether implicit attitudes towards people with physical disabilities were influenced by the exerciser stereotype. Methods. One hundred able-bodied participants (82 females, 18 males) completed two implicit association tests (IATs): the Disability-Attitudes IAT and the Disability-Activity IAT. The Disability-Attitudes IAT measured implicit attitudes towards people who were not disabled relative to disabled; the Disability-Activity IAT measured attitudes towards people with a physical disability who were active relative to inactive. Results. Results revealed that 83.8% of participants had negative implicit attitudes towards people with a disability. Participants held more positive attitudes towards active versus inactive people with a physical disability. Conclusions. The study findings indicate that the exerciser stereotype exists implicitly and may undermine negative attitudes towards people with physical disabilities.

Implicit Attitudes towards People with Intellectual Disabilities: Their Relationship with Explicit Attitudes, Social Distance, Emotions and Contact

PloS one, 2015

Implicit attitude research has expanded rapidly over the last decade and is seen as very promising as it counters biases present in much attitude research such as social desirability. However, most research in the area of intellectual disabilities has focused on explicit attitudes alone. This study examined implicit attitudes to this population and also examined their association with emotional reactions and contact, which have previously been found to have a significant influence on attitudes and stigma. A web based survey consisting of a single target Implicit Association Test, measures of explicit attitudes, social distance, and emotional reactions towards and contact with individuals with intellectual disabilities was completed by 326 adult UK residents. Implicit attitudes were not significantly associated with explicit attitudes, social distance or emotional reactions. Instead there were small to moderate associations between emotional reactions and explicit attitudes and socia...