The British Journal of Psychiatry (2008) 193: 410-415. doi: 10.1192/bjp.bp.107.045823
© 2008 The Royal College of Psychiatrists
This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Online supplement
Right arrow Submit an eLetter
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via CrossRef
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Ali, A.
Right arrow Articles by King, M.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Ali, A.
Right arrow Articles by King, M.

A measure of perceived stigma in people with intellectual disability

Afia Ali, MBBS, MRCPsych

Tower Hamlets Learning Disability Service, Mile End Hospital, London

Andre Strydom, MSc, MBChB, PhD, MRCPsych and Angela Hassiotis, MA, PhD, FRCPsych

Department of Mental Health Sciences, Faculty of Biomedical Sciences University College Medical School (Bloombury campus), London

Rachael Williams, BSc, MSc and Michael King, MD, PhD, FRCP, FRCGP, FRCPsych

Department of Mental Health Sciences, Faculty of Biomedical Sciences, University College Medical School (Hamstead campus), London, UK

Correspondence: Afia Ali, Tower Hamlets Learning Disability Service, Beaumont House, Mile End Hospital, Bancroft Road, London E1 4DG, UK. Email: Afia.Ali{at}thpct.nhs.uk

Declaration of interest

None.

Background

There is a lack of validated instruments measuring perceived stigma in people with intellectual disability.

Aims

To develop a valid and reliable self-rated instrument to measure perceived stigma that can be completed by people with mild to moderate intellectual disability.

Method

A literature search was used to generate a list of statements. Professionals, individuals with intellectual disability and carers were consulted about the suitability of statements. An instrument was developed containing statements about stigma with accompanying photographs. Test–retest reliability, internal consistency and the factor structure of the instrument were evaluated.

Results

The instrument was completed by 109 people once and 88 people twice. Items with limited variability in responses and kappa coefficients lower than 0.4 were dropped. Exploratory factor analysis revealed two factors: `perceived discrimination' (seven items) and `reaction to discrimination' (four items). One item loaded onto both factors. Cronbach's alpha for the ten-item instrument was 0.84.

Conclusions

This instrument will further our understanding of the impact of stigma in people with intellectual disability in clinical and research settings.