Content area
Full text
Abstract
Studies in the area of intellectual disability (ID) stigma are few and atheoretical. This study examined the adequacy of the conceptual framework of stigma from the mental illness field regarding ID. Telephone interviews were conducted with a nationally representative sample of 304 adults in Israel. Participants were read a vignette describing a man with ID and answered items related to cognitive, emotional, and behavioral reactions. Behavioral dimensions included: Withdrawal, Social distance, and Helping behaviors. The stigma process leading to Withdrawal was drawn through Negative affect, whereas the process to Social distance was drawn through Calm affect. One unique aspect of the stigma process in ID is the importance of Calm affect, which helped reduce Social distance.
Key Words: attitudes; conceptualization; intellectual disability; model; pubic stigma
Intellectual disability (ID) is characterized by significant limitations in intellectual functioning and in adaptive behavior comprising three skill types: conceptual, social, and practical skills. ID originates before the age of 18 years (Schalock et al., 2010). A recent meta-analysis of population-based studies found that the overall prevalence of ID is 10.37/1000 of the general population (Maulik, Mascarenhas, Mathers, Dua, & Saxena, 2011).
People with ID are often negatively affected by stigma (Schalock et al., 2010; Siperstein, Parker, Bardon, & Widaman, 2007). Public stigma, which refers to the attitudes of the general population toward stigmatized persons (Phelan, Bromet, & Link, 1998), is harmful and negatively affects individuals' inclusion in community life (Jahoda & Markova, 2004; Mirza, Tareen, Davidson, & Rahman, 2009; World Health Organization, 2001). Public stigma may lead to increased social distance and diminished willingness to engage in social relationships with people with disabilities (Abraham, Gregory, Wolf, & Pemberton, 2002; Dagnan & Waring, 2004). Further, public stigma has been linked to psychological distress (Dagnan & Waring, 2004), decreased self-esteem (SzivosBach, 1993), and increased vulnerability to mental health problems (Caine & Hatton, 1998).
Despite these negative consequences, empirical research in the area of ID stigma is limited and atheoretical (Scior, 2011). Most research on stigma comes from the mental illness field (Pescosolido et al., 2013). One of the main conceptual frameworks for stigma developed in the mental illness field conceptualized stigma as a process comprising three dimensions: stereotypes, prejudice, and discrimination. Stereotypes,the cognitive dimension, are knowledge structures or attitudes...