The effects of physical deviance upon face-to-face interaction: The other side.

Abstract

A study of interactions between physically disabled persons and physically normal persons was conducted to explore the behavioral output of the disabled persons in such interactions. The study employed an interviewlike situation in which a confederate served as either a physically disabled or a physically normal interviewer, while all subjects were physically disabled. Using a modified procedure of previous studies where it was found that physically normal persons contribute nonverbal cues of "discomfort" to normal-handicapped interactions, it was found in this study that the physically disabled persons also contribute cues of "discomfort" in such interactions. Consistent with expectations, physically handicapped subjects interacting with a physically normal interviewer, as compared to subjects interacting with a physically disabled interviewer, (a) terminated the interactions sooner, (.6) showed greater motoric inhibitions, (c) exhibited less smiling behavior, (d) demonstrated less eye contact with the interviewer, and (e) admitted feeling less comfortable during the interaction. Contrary to expectations, the subjects maintained a greater physical distance in the interaction with the disabled interviewer and demonstrated generally less variability in their verbal output when speaking to him.

Racial Variation in Reaction to Physical Stigma: A Study of Degree of Disturbance by Vitiligo Among Black and White Patients

“…Although sometimes traits attributed to the handicapped may be positive (Comer and Piliavin 1972), for the most part physically stigmatized individuals are likely to provoke negative emotions (Cash et al 1977); interactions between the physically stigmatized and others are often strained and tensionproducing (Goffman 1963;Jones et al 1984;Kleck 1968;Richardson et al 1961). Also, the physically stigmatized are often the victims of overt discrimination (Dietz, Littman, and Bentley 1984;Grey and Ashmore 1976;Piliavin, Piliavin, and Rodin 1975).…”

“…Also, the physically stigmatized are often the victims of overt discrimination (Dietz, Littman, and Bentley 1984;Grey and Ashmore 1976;Piliavin, Piliavin, and Rodin 1975). For these reasons impaired individuals may anticipate or experience discriminatory interaction with the nonhandicapped (Comer and Piliavin 1972;Kleck and Strenta 1980).…”

Perceptions of Functional Clothing By Persons with Physical Disabilities: A Social-Cognitive Framework

“…The resulting labels can influence subsequent social interactions and selfperceptions. This conflict leads to uncomfortable, controlled, stereotypical interactions between disabled and nondisabled persons in face-to-face situations (Kleck, Ono, and Hastorf, 1966;Kleck, 1968;Comer and Piliavin, 1972). There is some evidence that a physical disability serves as a novel stimulus that increases the tendency for an observer to make a dispositional, or personal, attribution about an observed person.…”

Meeting the Handicapped: A Case of Affective-Cognitive Inconsistency

“…To some extent normal individuals are aware of that tendency and generalize accordingly: led to believe that they themselves are regarded as deviant, they notice more negative emotion towards themselves in the behaviour of others (Kleck and Strenta, 1980;Strenta and Kleck, 1984). Discrimination in mixed contacts partly depends upon the social skills of the stigmatized person (Comer and Piliavin, 1972), therefore the awareness of being stigmatized can induce selffulfilling prophecies of negative discrimination (Snyder, Tanke and Berscheid, 1977).…”