The effect of contact, context, and social power on undergraduate attitudes toward persons with disabilities

There are approximately 54 million persons with disabilities in the United States and they represent one of the largest minority groups (National Council on Disability, 2005). As with other groups of minorities, federal legislation has had a significant effect of the lives of persons with disabilities. The historical importance and impact of legislation makes it necessary to recount federal polices and laws applicable to this population. Prior to the passage of key legislation such as the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 and the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, society's view of and attitudes toward persons with disabilities was less than favorable (Elston & Snow, 1986; Hergenrather & Rhodes, 2007). Historically, as persons with disabilities attempted to integrate into mainstream society and become more self-sufficient, such negative perceptions and attitudes served as a major barrier. (Cook, 1998; Livneh & Antonak 1997; Smart 2001). The social stigma associated with disability serve to limit individuals with disabilities views of self and self-efficacy (Wright, 1983). The negative self-perceptions that are often induced and reinforced by the broader society further limit efforts for inclusion. (Wright, 1983). Even though negative attitudes can be difficult to change, researchers suggest that "one of the most effective methods for doing so is to provide new information that challenge existing beliefs" (Hunt & Hunt, 2004, p. 266). Federal legislation reflects a major social reconstruction of how disability is viewed within American society (Olkin, 1999) and transformations within American society have assisted in the dismantlement of some of the historical barriers faced by persons with disabilities. Such barriers include perceptions of persons with disabilities as social deviants, educational and social welfare problems, and in need of medical treatment to "fix" their disabling conditions. These perceptions stemmed from the medical model and have fueled the development of barriers to employment and successful integration into society for those with disabilities (Mercer & Richardson, 1975). Such historical events have perpetrated negative attitudes and influenced society to view individuals with disabilities "in terms of their differences rather than their need," which is often similar to other marginalized groups (Brownlee & Carrington, 2000, p. 99). The dismantlement of barriers has created a paradigm shift in how persons with disabilities are viewed and treated (Cottone & Emener, 1990; Goodwin, 1986; U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, 1999). With this developing paradigm, disability is portrayed as normal part of life rather than an abnormal condition found in a few individuals. It also highlights the need for the changes that must take place in society to ensure that persons with disabilities are afforded effective and meaningful opportunities to integrate into society and have meaningful lives (Schalock, 2004; Silverstein, 2000). Despite this beginning trend toward a shifting consciousness and changes in legislative policies for persons with disabilities, research suggests that perceptions and attitudes toward this population are largely negative and often result in, "... societal prejudice and rejection of disabled persons" (Grand, Bernier, & Strohmer, 1982, p.165). These attitudes also serve as, "... invisible barriers encountered by persons with disabilities as they pursue opportunities and help-seeking behaviors" (Hergenrather & Rhodes, 2007, p. 66). Attitudinal barriers continue to be one of the most prominent issues faced by persons with disabilities (Donnell, Alston, Hampton & Bell, 1999; Sao, 2004). Further, negative societal attitudes are a roadblock on the pathway to successful integration into society and adjustment to disability. Unfortunately, invisible barriers (i.e., attitudes) decrease the chances for social interaction between persons with disabilities and those without disabilities (Grand, Bernier, & Strohmer, 1982). …