Meeting the Handicapped: A Case of Affective-Cognitive Inconsistency

Heinemann, Wolfgang

doi:10.1080/14792779108401866

Cited by 12 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 26 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Firstly, theoretical and practical work is needed to identify the expected speed of change in societal attitudes towards people with disabilities. Secondly, even if people express positive attitudes towards those with disabilities, it does not necessarily follow that they interact any differently with them (Heinemann 1990). The quantity and quality of interactions have formed the basis of evaluations of individual integration or deinstitutionalization projects, and their application at a less specific level to compare different cultures should be explored.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Swedish and English adolescents' attitudes toward the community presence of people with disabilities

Hastings

Sjöström

Stevenage

1998

J intellect Disabil Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Predictions derived from North American formulations of normalization suggest that contemporary care policies for people with intellectual disabilities will have a positive impact on societal perceptions of this group. To test this, adolescents' attitudes towards the community presence of people with disabilities in a normalization-advanced country (Sweden) and a relatively less normalization-advanced country (England) were compared. It was expected that Swedish and English participants would hold equally positive views of people with a non-intellectual disability, whereas English participants would hold less positive views than Swedish participants of people with an intellectual disability. The results gave limited support to this expectation when dimensions of participants' attitudes derived from a factor analysis were analysed. These results are discussed with reference to other factors that may influence attitudes in the two countries. In addition, implications for future research and practice are outlined.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Swedish and English adolescents' attitudes toward the community presence of people with disabilities

Hastings

Sjöström

Stevenage

1998

J intellect Disabil Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…It has become increasingly evident that reactions toward minorities or outgroups at times re¯ect controlled, at times unintentional, processes; for example, friendly verbal responses that are under people's control may go hand in hand with subtle hostility in nonverbal behaviors including enhanced physical distance, reduced eye-contact, a high rate of speech errors, low behavioural variability, etc. (Bodenhausen & Macrae, 1996;Dovidio, Brigham, Johnson, & Gaertner, 1996;Fazio, 1990;Heinemann, 1990;Macrae, Bodenhausen, Milne, & Jetten, 1994). This poses a challenging problem for measuring prejudice as it appears unlikely that a single measure will be able to tap both the controlled and the unintentional component of prejudice.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Intentional control over prejudice: when the choice of the measure matters

Franco

Maass

1999

Eur. J. Soc. Psychol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We tested the idea that the correlation between implicit and explicit measures of prejudice depends on whether or not groups are normatively protected against discrimination. A pilot study (N 31) showed that 13 categories varied widely in the degree to which it is acceptable to express negative opinions about them. The main study involving 89 Catholic subjects found that explicit (reward allocation, liking ratings) and implicit measures (linguistic intergroup bias) of prejudice were correlated for the outgroup that is not normatively protected against discrimination (Islamic Fundamentalists) but uncorrelated for the outgroup that is protected (Jews).

show abstract

“…Anxiety and embarrassment can result when interaction partners do not know how to react, where to look, or how to hold a normal conversation (Heinemann, 1990). Hebl, Tickle, and Heatherton (2000) describe how most people can recall instances of "awkward moments" -clumsy words they wish they had not said -in interaction with a stigmatised individual.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Emotional Responses to Disfigured Faces: The Influences of Perceived Anonymity, Empathy, and Disgust Sensitivity

Stone

Potton

2014

Basic and Applied Social Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Two experiments investigated self-reported emotional reactions to photographs of people with attractive, unattractive or structurally disfigured faces. In Experiment 1 participants viewing disfigured faces reported raised levels of sorrow and curiosity but not raised levels of negative emotions. In Experiment 2 there was more negative emotion and less positive emotion reported under conditions of relatively high anonymity, compared to low anonymity, specific to disfigured faces, suggesting that self-reports are influenced by social desirability. Trait empathy was associated with sorrow and negative emotions when viewing disfigured faces. Disgust sensitivity was associated with negative emotions and inversely associated with positive emotions. (99 words)

show abstract

Meeting the Handicapped: A Case of Affective-Cognitive Inconsistency

Cited by 12 publications

References 26 publications

Swedish and English adolescents' attitudes toward the community presence of people with disabilities

Swedish and English adolescents' attitudes toward the community presence of people with disabilities

Intentional control over prejudice: when the choice of the measure matters

Emotional Responses to Disfigured Faces: The Influences of Perceived Anonymity, Empathy, and Disgust Sensitivity

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About