A comparison of three strategies for reducing the public stigma associated with stuttering

Michael Boyle, Lauren Dioguardi, Julie E. Pate

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleResearchpeer-review

10 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Purpose The effects of three anti-stigma strategies for stuttering—contact (hearing personal stories from an individual who stutters), education (replacing myths about stuttering with facts), and protest (condemning negative attitudes toward people who stutter)—were examined on attitudes, emotions, and behavioral intentions toward people who stutter. Method Two hundred and twelve adults recruited from a nationwide survey in the United States were randomly assigned to one of the three anti-stigma conditions or a control condition. Participants completed questionnaires about stereotypes, negative emotional reactions, social distance, discriminatory intentions, and empowerment regarding people who stutter prior to and after watching a video for the assigned condition, and reported their attitude changes about people who stutter. Some participants completed follow-up questionnaires on the same measures one week later. Results All three anti-stigma strategies were more effective than the control condition for reducing stereotypes, negative emotions, and discriminatory intentions from pretest to posttest. Education and protest effects for reducing negative stereotypes were maintained at one-week follow-up. Contact had the most positive effect for increasing affirming attitudes about people who stutter from pretest to posttest and pretest to follow-up. Participants in the contact and education groups, but not protest, self-reported significantly more positive attitude change about people who stutter as a result of watching the video compared to the control group. Conclusion Advocates in the field of stuttering can use education and protest strategies to reduce negative attitudes about people who stutter, and people who stutter can increase affirming attitudes through interpersonal contact with others.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)44-58
Number of pages15
JournalJournal of Fluency Disorders
Volume50
DOIs
StatePublished - 1 Dec 2016

Fingerprint

Stuttering
protest
Education
stereotype
attitude change
contact
Emotions
emotion
video
Social Distance
group education
education
social distance
Stigma
Stutter
questionnaire
Hearing
empowerment
myth
Control Groups

Keywords

  • Anti-stigma programs
  • Empowerment
  • Public stigma
  • Stereotypes
  • Stuttering advocacy

Cite this

@article{44e91e482bb942408f44325f1de8eafc,
title = "A comparison of three strategies for reducing the public stigma associated with stuttering",
abstract = "Purpose The effects of three anti-stigma strategies for stuttering—contact (hearing personal stories from an individual who stutters), education (replacing myths about stuttering with facts), and protest (condemning negative attitudes toward people who stutter)—were examined on attitudes, emotions, and behavioral intentions toward people who stutter. Method Two hundred and twelve adults recruited from a nationwide survey in the United States were randomly assigned to one of the three anti-stigma conditions or a control condition. Participants completed questionnaires about stereotypes, negative emotional reactions, social distance, discriminatory intentions, and empowerment regarding people who stutter prior to and after watching a video for the assigned condition, and reported their attitude changes about people who stutter. Some participants completed follow-up questionnaires on the same measures one week later. Results All three anti-stigma strategies were more effective than the control condition for reducing stereotypes, negative emotions, and discriminatory intentions from pretest to posttest. Education and protest effects for reducing negative stereotypes were maintained at one-week follow-up. Contact had the most positive effect for increasing affirming attitudes about people who stutter from pretest to posttest and pretest to follow-up. Participants in the contact and education groups, but not protest, self-reported significantly more positive attitude change about people who stutter as a result of watching the video compared to the control group. Conclusion Advocates in the field of stuttering can use education and protest strategies to reduce negative attitudes about people who stutter, and people who stutter can increase affirming attitudes through interpersonal contact with others.",
keywords = "Anti-stigma programs, Empowerment, Public stigma, Stereotypes, Stuttering advocacy",
author = "Michael Boyle and Lauren Dioguardi and Pate, {Julie E.}",
year = "2016",
month = "12",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1016/j.jfludis.2016.09.004",
language = "English",
volume = "50",
pages = "44--58",
journal = "Journal of Fluency Disorders",
issn = "0094-730X",
publisher = "Elsevier Inc.",

}

A comparison of three strategies for reducing the public stigma associated with stuttering. / Boyle, Michael; Dioguardi, Lauren; Pate, Julie E.

In: Journal of Fluency Disorders, Vol. 50, 01.12.2016, p. 44-58.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleResearchpeer-review

TY - JOUR

T1 - A comparison of three strategies for reducing the public stigma associated with stuttering

AU - Boyle, Michael

AU - Dioguardi, Lauren

AU - Pate, Julie E.

PY - 2016/12/1

Y1 - 2016/12/1

N2 - Purpose The effects of three anti-stigma strategies for stuttering—contact (hearing personal stories from an individual who stutters), education (replacing myths about stuttering with facts), and protest (condemning negative attitudes toward people who stutter)—were examined on attitudes, emotions, and behavioral intentions toward people who stutter. Method Two hundred and twelve adults recruited from a nationwide survey in the United States were randomly assigned to one of the three anti-stigma conditions or a control condition. Participants completed questionnaires about stereotypes, negative emotional reactions, social distance, discriminatory intentions, and empowerment regarding people who stutter prior to and after watching a video for the assigned condition, and reported their attitude changes about people who stutter. Some participants completed follow-up questionnaires on the same measures one week later. Results All three anti-stigma strategies were more effective than the control condition for reducing stereotypes, negative emotions, and discriminatory intentions from pretest to posttest. Education and protest effects for reducing negative stereotypes were maintained at one-week follow-up. Contact had the most positive effect for increasing affirming attitudes about people who stutter from pretest to posttest and pretest to follow-up. Participants in the contact and education groups, but not protest, self-reported significantly more positive attitude change about people who stutter as a result of watching the video compared to the control group. Conclusion Advocates in the field of stuttering can use education and protest strategies to reduce negative attitudes about people who stutter, and people who stutter can increase affirming attitudes through interpersonal contact with others.

AB - Purpose The effects of three anti-stigma strategies for stuttering—contact (hearing personal stories from an individual who stutters), education (replacing myths about stuttering with facts), and protest (condemning negative attitudes toward people who stutter)—were examined on attitudes, emotions, and behavioral intentions toward people who stutter. Method Two hundred and twelve adults recruited from a nationwide survey in the United States were randomly assigned to one of the three anti-stigma conditions or a control condition. Participants completed questionnaires about stereotypes, negative emotional reactions, social distance, discriminatory intentions, and empowerment regarding people who stutter prior to and after watching a video for the assigned condition, and reported their attitude changes about people who stutter. Some participants completed follow-up questionnaires on the same measures one week later. Results All three anti-stigma strategies were more effective than the control condition for reducing stereotypes, negative emotions, and discriminatory intentions from pretest to posttest. Education and protest effects for reducing negative stereotypes were maintained at one-week follow-up. Contact had the most positive effect for increasing affirming attitudes about people who stutter from pretest to posttest and pretest to follow-up. Participants in the contact and education groups, but not protest, self-reported significantly more positive attitude change about people who stutter as a result of watching the video compared to the control group. Conclusion Advocates in the field of stuttering can use education and protest strategies to reduce negative attitudes about people who stutter, and people who stutter can increase affirming attitudes through interpersonal contact with others.

KW - Anti-stigma programs

KW - Empowerment

KW - Public stigma

KW - Stereotypes

KW - Stuttering advocacy

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84990246920&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.jfludis.2016.09.004

DO - 10.1016/j.jfludis.2016.09.004

M3 - Article

VL - 50

SP - 44

EP - 58

JO - Journal of Fluency Disorders

JF - Journal of Fluency Disorders

SN - 0094-730X

ER -