Imagined Contact Improves Intentions towards a Hypothetical Peer with Asperger Syndrome but not Attitudes towards Peers with Asperger Syndrome in General

Abstract

The aim of this study is twofold. First, to investigate whether the imagined contact method (an indirect method of contact) can improve behavioural intentions towards a hypothetical peer with Asperger syndrome (AS). Second, to test whether the effect of the method can be generalised on attitudes towards young people with AS in general.Participants were 416 young adolescents (M age= 15.2) who view a power-point presentation introducing a hypothetical male target with AS. A voice-over provided either descriptive or combined (descriptive plus explanatory) information about AS. Next, imagined contact participants were asked to imagine an encounter with the target boy while control participants were asked to simple think about him. Behavioural intentions towards the target were assessed by the Shared Activities Questionnaire while attitudes towards young people with AS in general were assessed by the Asperger Syndrome Questionnaire, a self-generated instrument. Results revealed that imagined contact compared to control participants exhibited greater behavioural intentions towards the target. However, no effect of the imagined contact method was observed on attitudes towards young people with AS in general. Combined information about AS had only a moderate effect. Implications and study limitations are discussed.

Promoting positive attitudes toward peers with disabilities: The role of information and imagined contact.

“…The authors found that this was associated with more positive attitudes, as compared to the results in the control condition describing their disability only (neutral information of the hypothetical classmate). However, other studies have not found an effect of information on attitudes and behavioral intentions toward peers with disabilities (e.g., Fleva, 2015;Swaim & Morgan, 2001). Therefore, results on the role of information are mixed.…”

Classroom-based peer interventions targeting autism ignorance, prejudice and/or discrimination: a systematic PRISMA review

“…Five studies assessed three outcomes (Campbell 2007;Gus 2000;Mavropoulou and Sideridis 2014;Ranson and Byrne 2014;Staniland and Byrne 2013), and nine reported data for a single outcome: attitudes (Cook 2017;Frederickson, Warren, and Turner 2005;Gardner et al 2014;James 2011;O'Connor 2016;Reiter and Vitani 2007); actual behaviour (Houston 1998;Owen-DeSchryver et al 2008); and knowledge (Scheil, Bowers-Campbell, and Campbell 2017). Of the remaining 13 studies, six assessed both attitudes and intended behaviour (Campbell et al 2004(Campbell et al , 2005Fleva 2014Fleva , 2015Morton and Campbell 2008;Silton and Fogel 2012;Swaim 1998;Swaim and Morgan 2001), six assessed both attitudes and actual behaviour (Collet-Klingenburg, Neitzel, and LaBerge 2012;Ezzamel 2016;Ezzamel and Bond 2017;Hughes et al 2013;Simpson and Bui 2016;Sreckovic 2015;Sreckovic, Hume, and Able 2017;Whitaker et al 1998), and one assessed knowledge and attitudes (Campbell et al 2019).…”

“…The gender was unreported for two (Mavropoulou and Sideridis 2014;Silton and Fogel 2012). Most were male (n = 8; Campbell 2007;Campbell et al 2019;Campbell et al 2004Campbell et al , 2005Fleva 2014Fleva , 2015Morton and Campbell 2008;Silton and Fogel 2012;Swaim 1998;Swaim and Morgan 2001), and there was one female (Silton and Fogel 2012). From the data reported, the mean age of unfamiliar target children was 12.71.…”

“…In contrast, participants in studies assessing stigma without a target child or towards unfamiliar peers with ASD were often those shown to be unknowing about autism (either from never having heard of autism, or an inability to provide a reasonable description/ definition) and/or in a school classroom that did not have any autistic children (Campbell et al 2004(Campbell et al , 2005Fleva 2014Fleva , 2015Morton and Campbell 2008;Scheil, Bowers-Campbell, and Campbell 2017;Silton and Fogel 2012;Swaim 1998;Swaim and Morgan 2001). In one case those classes with higher numbers of children with ASD were allocated to control conditions (Staniland and Byrne 2013).…”

“…There were eight different approaches to intervention. Vignettes about hypothetical children with ASD were used in just over a quarter of studies (Campbell 2007;Campbell et al 2004Campbell et al , 2005Fleva 2014Fleva , 2015Morton and Campbell 2008;Silton and Fogel 2012;Swaim 1998;Swaim and Morgan 2001). These interventions involved participants receiving information about ASD paired with either a PowerPoint of pictures, or a video of actors portraying an autistic child.…”