No abstract

No abstract

We propose that stigma and legitimacy are distinct constructs. Drawing from extant research, empirical observations, and the theoretical assumptions of both constructs we assert that, in spite of increasing efforts to equate stigma as illegitimacy, the opposite of legitimacy, that it is not. Specifically, we argue that organizations and their actors can be both stigmatized and legitimate at the same time. With this recognized, we propose a stigma-focused research agenda, separate from-and untainted by-legitimacy. Further, we propose an agenda that broadens conceptualizations of audiences and their dynamics, addresses how normal "deviants" take action in the face of stigma, and reconceptualises how audiences and the stigmatized interact.

The between-group differences and the pattern of these differences clearly illustrate the polarizing and stressful impact SARS had at a hospital with only a small number of probable or suspect cases. The clear differences between groups defined by demographics, professions and clinical roles suggest a subtle and pervasive secondary impact of the SARS outbreak, with repercussions health care facilities must contend with while maintaining increased levels of vigilance in the wake of SARS.

No abstract