Visual perception and appraisal of persons with impairments: a randomised controlled field experiment using photo elicitation

References

• United Nations. Convention on the rights of persons with disabilities. New York: UN; 2006.
   Google Scholar
• Goffman E. Stigma. Notes on the management of spoiled identity. First Touchstone Edition. New York: Simon & Schuster, Inc.; 1963.
   Google Scholar
• Lengnick-Hall ML, Gaunt PM, Kulkarni M. Overlooked and underutilized: people with disabilities are an untapped human resource. Hum Resource Manage 2008;47:255–273.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Allport GW. The nature of prejudice. Reading (Mass.) and Palo Alto: Addison-Wesley; 1954.
   Google Scholar
• Shapiro A. Everybody belongs: changing negative attitudes toward classmates with disabilities. New York: Routledge Falmer; 2000.
   Google Scholar
• Cahill SE, Eggleston R. Managing emotions in public: the case of wheelchair users. Soc Psychol Q 1994;57:300–312.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lenney M, Sercombe H. ‘Did you see that guy in the wheelchair down the pub?’ Interactions across difference in a public place. Disabil Soc 2002;17:5–18.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Roth JA. Some contingencies of the moral evaluation and control of clientele: the case of the hospital emergency service. Am J Sociol 1972;77:839–856.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ravaud J-F, Stiker H-J. Inclusion/exclusion: an analysis of historical and cultural meanings. In: Albrecht G, Seelman KD, Bury M, editors. Handbook of disability. Thousand Oaks: Sage; 2001. pp 490–514.
   Google Scholar
• WHO. International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health: ICF. Geneva: WHO Press; 2001.
   Google Scholar
• Clark-Ibáñez M. Framing the social world with photo-elicitation interviews. Am Behav Sci 2004;47:1507–1527.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dobbs J. Why does facebook matter? Internet. 2009. Electronic citation. http://www.newmobility.com/articleViewIE.cfm?id=11499. Last accessed 11 January 2010.
   Google Scholar
• Devine PG. Stereotypes and prejudice: their automatic and controlled components. J Person Soc Psychol 1989;56:5–18.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Aloia GF. Effects of physical stigmata and labels on judgments of subnormality by preservice teachers. Mental Retard 1975;13:17–21.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Diamond KE, Hestenes LL. Preschool children's conceptions of disabilities: the salience of disability in children's ideas about others. Top Early Childhood Special Educ 1996;16:458–475.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Harper DC, Wacker DP, Seaborg CL. Presidential address: children's social preferences toward peers with visible physical differences. J Pediatric Psychol 1986;11:323–342.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kleck RE, DeJong W. Physical disability, physical attractiveness, and social outcomes in children's small groups. Rehabil Psychol 1983;28:79–91.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Longoria L, Marini I. Perceptions of children's attitudes towards peers with a severe physical disability. J Rehabil 2006;72:19–25.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Manetti M, Schneider BH, Siperstein G. Social acceptance of children with mental retardation: testing the contact hypothesis with an Italian sample. Int J Behav Dev 2001;25:279–286.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nabors L, Keyes L. Preschoolers' reasons for accepting peers with and without disabilities. J Dev Phys Disabil 1995;7:335–355.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Popp RA, Fu VR, Warrell SE. Preschool children's recognition and acceptance of three physical disabilities. Child Study J 1981;11:99–114.
   Google Scholar
• Mercer J, Andrews H, Mercer A. The effects of physical attractiveness and disability on client ratings by helping professionals. J Appl Rehabil Counsel 1983;14:41–45.
   Google Scholar
• Liesener JJ, Mills J. An experimental study of disability spread: talking to an adult in a wheelchair like a child. J Appl Soc Psychol 1999;29:2083–2092.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Robey K, Beckley L, Kirschner M. Implicit infantilizing attitudes about disability. J Dev Phys Disabil 2006;18:441–453.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bonfranchi. Visueller Eindruck, Geistige Behinderung, Gesellschaftliche Bedeutung : Eine empirische Studie über visuelle Eindrucksdeutung im sonderpädagogischen Bereich. Oberhausen: ATHENA; 2002.
   Google Scholar
• Man M, Rojahn J, Chrosniak L, Sanford J. College students romantic attraction toward peers with physical disabilities. J Dev Phys Disabil 2006;18:35–44.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rojahn J, Komelasky KG, Man M. Implicit attitudes and explicit ratings of romantic attraction of college students toward opposite-sex peers with physical disabilities. J Dev Phys Disabil 2008;20:389–397.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tringo J. The hierarchy of preference toward disability groups. J Special Educ 1970;4:295–306.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Deal M. Disabled people's attitudes towards other impairment groups: a hierarchy of impairments. Disabil Soc 2003;18:897–910.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• United Nations. Committee on economic, social and cultural rights: Substantive issues arising in the implementation of the international Convent on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (CESCR). General comment 5. Chapter 19. Geneva: United Nations; 1994. Electronic citation. http://www2.ohchr.org/english/bodies/cescr/comments.htm. Last accessed 25 May 2009.
   Google Scholar
• Barron K. The bumpy road to womanhood. Disabil Soc 1997;12:223–239.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Aiello D, Capkin L, Catania H. Strategies & techniques for serving the disabled assault victim: a pilot training program for providers & consumers. Sexual Disabil 1983;6:135–144.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nisbett DJ, Johnson KKP. Clothing fashionability and students with a disability : Impression of social and mental competencies. Cloth Text Res J 1992;11:39–44.
   Google Scholar
• Osgood CE. Method and theory in experimental psychology. New York: Oxford University Press; 1953.
   Google Scholar
• Weber M. Economy and society: an outline of interpretative sociology [orginally published in 1921]. New York: Bedminster Press; 1968.
   Google Scholar
• Thorndike E. A constant error in psychological rating. J Appl Psychol 1920;4:25–29.
   Google Scholar
• Yaffee RA. Mixed analysis of variance models with SPSS. New York: University of New York; 2004. Electronic citation. http://www.nyu.edu/its/socsci/Docs/SPSSMixed.ppt. Last accessed 19 May 2009.
   Google Scholar
• McCulloch CE, Searle SR, Neuhaus JM. Generalized, linear & mixed models, 2nd ed. Hoboken: Wiley Series in Probability & Statistics; 2001.
   Google Scholar
• West BT, Welch KB, Galecki AT. Linear mixed models: a practical guide using statistical software. London: Chapman & Hall/CRC; 2007.
   Google Scholar
• Cohen J, Cohen P, West SG, Aiken LS. Applied multiple regression/correlation analysis for the behavioral sciences. 3rd ed. Mahwah (NJ): Lawrence Erlbaum Associates; 2003.
   Google Scholar
• Jaccard J, Turrisi R. Interaction effects in multiple regression. Newbury Park: Sage; 2003.
   Google Scholar
• Hardy MA. Regression with dummy variables. Newbury Park: Sage; 1993.
   Google Scholar
• Leonard R, Crawford J. Two approaches of seeing people with disabilities. Aust J Soc Issues 1989;24:112–125.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Foucault M. Madness and civilization [originally published 1961]. New York: Random House; 1988.
   Google Scholar
• Amsel R, Fichten CS. Effects of contact on thoughts about interaction with students who have a physical disability. J Rehabil 1988;54:61–65.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Farnall O, Smith KA. Reactions to people with disabilities: personal contact versus viewing of specific media portrayals. J Mass Commun Q 1999;76:659–672.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Roper P. Changing perception through contact. Disabil Handicap Soc 1990;5:243–255.
   Google Scholar
• Kruskal W, Mosteller F. Representative sampling. III. The current statistical literature. Int Stat Rev. 1979;47:245–265.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hoffmeyer-Zlotnik JHP. Random-Route-Stichproben nach ADM. In: Gabler S, Hoffmeyer-Zlotnik JHP, editors. Stichproben in der Umfragepraxis. Opladen: Westdeutscher Verlag; 1997, pp. 33–42.
   Google Scholar
• Nosek BA, Greenwald AG, Banaji MR. The implicit association test at age 7: a methodological and conceptual review. In: Bargh JA, editor. Social psychology and the unconscious: the automaticity of higher mental processes. London: Psychology Press; 2007, pp. 265–292.
   Google Scholar
• Robey KL, Beckley L, Kirschner M. Implicit infantilizing attitudes about disability. J Dev Phys Disabil 2006;18:441–453.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Krahé B, Altwasser C. Changing negative attitudes towards persons with physical disabilities: an experimental intervention. J Commun Appl Soc Psychol 2006;16:59–69.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pernice R, Lys K. Interventions for attitude change towards people with disabilities: how successful are they? Int J Rehabil Res 1996;19:171–174.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar