Public stigma in intellectual disability: do direct versus indirect questions make a difference?

Area of Science:

• Social Psychology
• Disability Studies
• Public Health

Background:

• Stigma negatively impacts individuals with intellectual disabilities (ID).
• Previous research predominantly used direct methods to assess stigma.
• This study investigated public stigma toward individuals with ID in Israel using direct and indirect questioning.

Purpose of the Study:

• To compare the effectiveness of direct versus indirect questioning in measuring public stigma toward individuals with ID.
• To examine public attitudes within a representative Israeli sample.

Main Methods:

• Vignette methodology with two questionnaire versions.
• Direct questionnaire: Participants reported their own thoughts, feelings, and behaviors (n=306).
• Indirect questionnaire: Participants reported on a hypothetical 'other man's' thoughts, feelings, and behaviors (n=301).

Main Results:

• Indirect questioning yielded significantly higher reported levels of stigma.
• Subjective knowledge of ID was a weaker correlate of stigma in the indirect condition compared to the direct condition.

Conclusions:

• Indirect questioning may be more effective in eliciting immediate, potentially less socially desirable, beliefs.
• The findings underscore the need for comprehensive, multi-level interventions to combat stigma against individuals with ID.