A mixed method comparison of stigma toward autism and schizophrenia and effects of person-first versus identity-first language

Abstract

Introduction: While stigma toward autistic individuals has been well documented, less is known about how autism is perceived relative to other stigmatized disabilities. As a highly stigmatized condition with similar social cognitive features to autism, schizophrenia may offer a useful comparison for stigma. Previous studies have found that autistic people may be perceived more favorably than those with schizophrenia, but little is known about the underlying volitional thoughts that contribute to differences in how these conditions are perceived. Methods: The present study utilizes a mixed-methods approach, allowing for a detailed understanding of how young adults perceive different diagnostic labels. 533 college undergraduates completed questionnaires reflecting their perceptions of one of eight diagnostic labels: four related to autism (autism, autistic, autism spectrum disorder, or Asperger’s), two related to schizophrenia (schizophrenia or schizophrenic), and two related to an unspecified clinical condition (clinical diagnosis or clinical disorder). Participants also completed an open-ended question regarding their thoughts about, and exposure to, these labels. Responses were compared across broader diagnostic categories (autism, schizophrenia, general clinical condition), with thematic analysis used to assess the broader themes occurring within the open-ended text. Results: While perceptions did not differ significantly for person-first and identity-first language within labels, several differences were apparent across labels. Specifically, quantitative results indicated greater prejudice towards autism and schizophrenia than the generic clinical condition, with schizophrenia associated with more perceived fear and danger, as well as an increased preference for social distance, compared to autism. Patterns in initial codes differed across diagnostic labels, with greater variation in responses about autism than responses about schizophrenia or the general clinical condition. While participants described a range of attitudes toward autism (patronizing, exclusionary, and accepting) and schizophrenia (fear, prejudice, and empathy), they refrained from describing their attitudes toward the general clinical label, highlighting the centrality of a cohesive group identity for the development of stigma. Finally, participants reported a number of misconceptions about autism and schizophrenia, with many believing features such as savant syndrome to be core characteristics of the conditions. Conclusion: These findings offer a more detailed account of how non-autistic individuals view autism and may therefore aid in the development of targeted programs to improve attitudes toward autism.