Department of Clinical Educational and Health Psychology, University College London, London, UK.
Res Dev Disabil. 2013 Jul;34(7):2200-10. doi: 10.1016/j.ridd.2013.03.024. Epub 2013 May 3.
Although evidence abounds that people with intellectual disabilities are exposed to stigma and discrimination, few interventions have attempted to tackle stigma among the general public. This study set out to assess the impact of two brief indirect contact interventions on lay people's inclusion attitudes, social distance and positive behavioral intentions, and to explore emotional reactions towards the two interventions. 925 participants completed the first online survey. Participants were randomized to watch either a 10 min film based on intergroup contact theory, or a film based on a protest message. In total, 403 participants completed the follow-up survey at one month. Both interventions were effective at changing inclusion attitudes and social distance in the short term and these effects were partially maintained at one month. The protest based intervention had a greater effect compared to the contact one on aspects of inclusion attitudes and evoked stronger emotional reactions. Despite small effect sizes, brief indirect contact interventions may have a potential role in tackling public stigma associated with intellectual disability but their effects on behavioral intentions are questionable.
尽管有大量证据表明智障人士受到污名化和歧视，但很少有干预措施试图解决公众对智障人士的污名问题。本研究旨在评估两种简短的间接接触干预措施对一般公众的包容态度、社会距离和积极行为意向的影响，并探讨他们对这两种干预措施的情绪反应。925 名参与者完成了第一次在线调查。参与者被随机分配观看基于群体间接触理论的 10 分钟电影或基于抗议信息的电影。总共有 403 名参与者在一个月后完成了后续调查。两种干预措施都能在短期内改变包容态度和社会距离，这些效果在一个月后仍能部分维持。基于抗议的干预措施在包容态度的某些方面比接触干预措施更有效，引起了更强的情绪反应。尽管效果较小，但简短的间接接触干预措施可能在解决与智力残疾相关的公众污名方面具有潜在作用，但它们对行为意向的影响值得怀疑。
