BMC psychology · 2025
Unconscious stereotypes: An investigation into public attitudes toward disabled groups.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Fan Yuxin, Li Liyan, Shan Shuyu, Lei Xiuya, Yang Yang
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: China has a large population of individuals with physical disabilities and mental disorders. The public's implicit stereotypes of these groups are significant factors influencing their daily lives, social integration, and mental health. The intergroup contact theory implies that the public may have positive implicit stereotypes of physically disabled groups and negative implicit stereotypes of individuals with mental disorders. In contrast, the theory of intergroup discrimination and ingroup favoritism implies that the public may have opposite implicit stereotypes of these two groups.
OBJECTIVE: This study employed two IRAP experiments to examine whether there is a difference in the public's implicit stereotypes toward these two groups of disabled individuals and to determine which theory aligns more closely with contemporary reality.
METHOD: The Implicit Relational Assessment Procedure (IRAP) was employed to assess 60 participants.
RESULT: IRAP1 found that participants tended to affirm "physically disabled groups + positive words" (p<0.05) as well as "the group with mental disorder + negative words" (p<0.05), while IRAP2 found that participants tended to deny "physically disabled groups + positive words" (p<0.05).
CONCLUSION: IRAP1 directly supports the theory of intergroup contact, whereas IRAP2 provides indirect support for the theory of intergroup discrimination and ingroup favoritism. The public holds both positive and negative implicit stereotypes towards these two groups of disabilities. This study expands the application of IRAP, uncovers the public's complex implicit stereotypes, and enhances two theories closely related to the people with disabilities. It is crucial for understanding these implicit stereotypes and for mitigating and alleviating negative implicit stereotypes.
OBJECTIVE: This study employed two IRAP experiments to examine whether there is a difference in the public's implicit stereotypes toward these two groups of disabled individuals and to determine which theory aligns more closely with contemporary reality.
METHOD: The Implicit Relational Assessment Procedure (IRAP) was employed to assess 60 participants.
RESULT: IRAP1 found that participants tended to affirm "physically disabled groups + positive words" (p<0.05) as well as "the group with mental disorder + negative words" (p<0.05), while IRAP2 found that participants tended to deny "physically disabled groups + positive words" (p<0.05).
CONCLUSION: IRAP1 directly supports the theory of intergroup contact, whereas IRAP2 provides indirect support for the theory of intergroup discrimination and ingroup favoritism. The public holds both positive and negative implicit stereotypes towards these two groups of disabilities. This study expands the application of IRAP, uncovers the public's complex implicit stereotypes, and enhances two theories closely related to the people with disabilities. It is crucial for understanding these implicit stereotypes and for mitigating and alleviating negative implicit stereotypes.