Related Experiment Video
Updated: May 3, 2026

Inverse Probability of Treatment Weighting Propensity Score using the Military Health System Data Repository and National Death Index
Published on: January 8, 2020
Stigma, status, and population health
Jo C Phelan1, Jeffrey W Lucas2, Cecilia L Ridgeway3
1Department of Sociomedical Sciences, Mailman School of Public Health, Columbia University, 722 W. 168th Street, 16th floor, New York, NY 10032, USA.
Abstract:
Stigma and status are the major concepts in two important sociological traditions that describe related processes but that have developed in isolation. Although both approaches have great promise for understanding and improving population health, this promise has not been realized. In this paper, we consider the applicability of status characteristics theory (SCT) to the problem of stigma with the goal of better understanding social systemic aspects of stigma and their health consequences. To this end, we identify common and divergent features of status and stigma processes. In both, labels that are differentially valued produce unequal outcomes in resources via culturally shared expectations associated with the labels; macro-level inequalities are enacted in micro-level interactions, which in turn reinforce macro-level inequalities; and status is a key variable. Status and stigma processes also differ: Higher- and lower-status states (e.g., male and female) are both considered normal, whereas stigmatized characteristics (e.g., mental illness) are not; interactions between status groups are guided by "social ordering schemas" that provide mutually agreed-upon hierarchies and interaction patterns (e.g., men assert themselves while women defer), whereas interactions between "normals" and stigmatized individuals are not so guided and consequently involve uncertainty and strain; and social rejection is key to stigma but not status processes. Our juxtaposition of status and stigma processes reveals close parallels between stigmatization and status processes that contribute to systematic stratification by major social groupings, such as race, gender, and SES. These parallels make salient that stigma is not only an interpersonal or intrapersonal process but also a macro-level process and raise the possibility of considering stigma as a dimension of social stratification. As such, stigma's impact on health should be scrutinized with the same intensity as that of other more status-based bases of stratification such as SES, race and gender, whose health impacts have been firmly established.
More Related Videos
09:57Harnessing the DNA Dye-triggered Side Population Phenotype to Detect and Purify Cancer Stem Cells from Biological Samples
Published on: May 10, 2017
11:13The Social Dimension of Stress: Experimental Manipulations of Social Support and Social Identity in the Trier Social Stress Test
Published on: November 19, 2015
Related Concept Videos
Dimensions of Health and Illness
Models of Health Promotion and Illness Prevention II
The agent-host-environment model states that disease results...
Levels of Health Promotion and Illness Prevention
In primary prevention, actions taken before disease onset prevent the disease from...
Factors Affecting Illness
For instance, risk factors are connected to illness,...
Overview of Biostatistics in Health Sciences
Stress Prevention and Stress Management Techniques VI
Motivation and Self-Determination
Motivation, the driving force behind behavior, plays a pivotal role at every stage of the change process. The research...