In prior work, we proposed that the related processes of status differentiation and stigmatization both diminish the status of negatively labeled groups, but that only stigma also engenders social rejection, in part via appraisals of abnormality (Lucas & Phelan, 2012, Phelan, Lucas, Ridgeway, & Taylor, 2014. We found support for this model using behavioral measures of influence and social distance. In this article, we compare status and stigma processes using both explicit (self-reported, consciously controlled) and implicit (relatively less consciously controlled) associations in a large, online volunteer sample (N ϭ 1,348) based on appraisals of "uneducated people" (low status) and "mentally ill people" (high stigma). As expected, we found that both uneducated and mentally ill people elicited negative explicit and implicit appraisals on the dimension of incompetence, and that mentally ill people elicited explicit and implicit appraisals of abnormality. Contrary to our prediction, uneducated people were also viewed, explicitly and implicitly, as abnormal, suggesting pervasive bias across two very disparate groups (uneducated and mentally ill), appraisal types (explicit and implicit), and appraisal dimensions (incompetent and abnormal). Notably, in follow-up manipulation checks to better understand the impact of the uneducated people category label, using independent samples, we showed that the term uneducated tends to elicit representation of individuals who did not complete high school, and we replicated the original findings that uneducated people (especially those with less than a high school education) are appraised as both incompetent and abnormal.

Past research has emphasized changing families, most typically by lowering expressed emotion, with little emphasis on the families' strengths, in particular, prosocial family processes that may enhance the life satisfaction of their loved one. As a recovery orientation focuses on the strengths of adults with mental illness, it also should focus equally on the supportive presence of families in the lives of clients.

We discuss the state of the research literature on physical disability in sociology, focusing particularly on social psychology. We first trace the history of treatments of disability in the field, noting a movement from a medical model that located disability in the individual to a social model that recognizes physical disability as an important social characteristic that is both produced by and has important consequences for social interactions. We then summarize contemporary research, identifying areas in which sociological research tends to be located, particularly in critical approaches, health‐related outcomes, and stigma. Finally, we discuss areas in which more research on physical disability would be fruitful. We believe that research on group processes, intersectionality, and identity would each especially benefit from greater attention to physical disability.