Rethinking Stigma Assessment

Traditional stigma scales that measure agreement with negative stereotypes have been found to potentially reinforce indicators of stigmatisation. This study examines alternative stigma item wordings using a 3 (wording: original, positively rephrased, semantic differential) × 3 (target stigma: obesity, schizophrenia, sexually transmitted diseases) between-subject design (N = 1,428). Wording types are evaluated based on their effects on stigma indicators as well as on participants’ perceptions regarding quality, clarity, and validity. The findings do not provide unequivocal support for our hypotheses favouring alternative item wordings. Only the positively rephrased items showed a measurable benefit in reducing desired social distance, primarily among participants with limited prior experience with the stigmatised group. Although further validation is needed, adapting item wordings to emphasise positive language may be a promising approach to reducing stigmatising effects of measurement. The findings can inform the development of more sensitive and effective tools for assessing public stigma.