Disclosing a disability: Do strategy type and onset controllability make a difference?

Abstract

In hiring contexts, individuals with concealable disabilities make decisions about how they should disclose their disability to overcome observers' biases. Previous research has investigated the effectiveness of binary disclosure decisions-that is, to disclose or conceal a disability-but we know little about how, why, or under what conditions different types of disclosure strategies impact observers' hiring intentions. In this article, we examine disability onset controllability (i.e., whether the applicant is seen as responsible for their disability onset) as a boundary condition for how disclosure strategy type influences the affective reactions (i.e., pity, admiration) that underlie observers' hiring intentions. Across 2 experiments, we found that when applicants are seen as responsible for their disability, strategies that de-emphasize the disability (rather than embrace it) lower observers' hiring intentions by elevating their pity reactions. Thus, the effectiveness of different types of disability disclosure strategies differs as a function of onset controllability. We discuss implications for theory and practice for individuals with disabilities and organizations. (PsycINFO Database Record

The Participation of People with Disabilities in the Workplace Across the Employment Cycle: Employer Concerns and Research Evidence

“…Thus, understanding with whom disclosure occurs (e.g., direct manager, colleagues, HR department personnel) and the discourse strategies employed by workers in each of these discussions are important. This work is crucial because there are differential outcomes for acknowledging or disclosing disabilities depending on the strategy employed or the type of disability discussed (Lyons et al, 2016;Lyons, Volpone, Wessel, & Alonso, 2017). As a result, managers at all levels play an important role in ensuring an organizational culture/climate that makes disclosure and acknowledgement discussions safe and constructive.…”

Identity Management Strategies for Workers with Concealable Disabilities: Antecedents and Consequences

“…Also, downplaying a disability might effectively reduce negative evaluations for individuals with impairments with uncontrollable onset. However, downplaying a disability has been shown to increase reactions of pity and negative job evaluations if the disability onset was perceived as controllable (e.g., hearing loss from listening to loud music; Lyons, Volpone, Wessel, & Alonso, ). Additional research suggests that disclosing may be the best route to preserve social relationships, contrary to what one might expect when facing concerns about disability‐related stigma.…”

Eating Disorders in the Workplace: A Qualitative Investigation of Women’s Experiences

“…As a result, those with psychological disorders may be faced with the dilemma of whether or not to disclose their conditions (Griffin, 1992). This decision is complicated, particularly for those managing stigmas that are perceived as controllable (Lyons, Volpone, Wessel, & Alonso, 2017), because the decision not to disclose can shield them from stigma altogether (Ellis & Riggle, 1996;Schneider, 1987). To avoid experiencing stigma, individuals with psychological disorders may behave in ways similar to those with other invisible stigmatized identities and choose to hide this information at work (Ellis & Riggle, 1996;Newheiser, Barreto, & Tiemersma, 2017;Toth & Dewa, 2014).…”