Attitudes towards individuals with disabilities as measured by the implicit association test: a literature review.
Hidden negative bias toward disability is common and invisible to standard surveys.
01Research in Context
What this study did
Wilson et al. (2014) looked at 18 studies that used the Implicit Association Test, or IAT. The IAT is a quick computer task that shows if people link "disability" with "bad" faster than they link it with "good."
The team wanted to know if most people carry hidden negative views about disability. They pulled together every IAT paper that focused on intellectual or other disabilities.
What they found
Across all 18 studies, most people—even trained staff—showed negative implicit bias. These hidden attitudes did not match what people said on surveys.
In other words, someone might report "I value disability inclusion" yet still react faster to "disability + bad" on the IAT.
How this fits with other research
Ferreri et al. (2011) seems to disagree. Their conference survey found upbeat, positive views. The gap is simple: J et al. asked people directly, while Clare et al. caught the silent bias the IAT reveals.
Kim et al. (2023) adds that attitudes toward autistic people hinge on gender, autism knowledge, and quality of prior contact—factors the older IAT papers rarely measured.
Armas Junco et al. (2025) show the field is still growing. Their 2025 review found almost no work on sexuality and ID, reminding us that hidden bias studies have blind spots too.
Why it matters
If you trust only self-report data, you may miss your own staff's or students' hidden bias. Build an IAT check into yearly training. Pair it with real contact—high-quality interactions lower bias more than lectures do. Track calm, welcoming body language; Werner (2015) shows calm beats simply "not negative" for reducing social distance. Finally, audit teaching materials for sexuality content—Armas Junco et al. (2025) prove this area is still blank.
Want CEUs on This Topic?
The ABA Clubhouse has 60+ free CEUs — live every Wednesday. Ethics, supervision & clinical topics.
Join Free →Add a five-minute IAT demo to your next staff meeting and discuss results as a team.
02At a glance
03Original abstract
Research investigating attitudes towards individuals with disabilities has largely focused on self-reported explicit attitudes. Given that factors such as social desirability may influence explicit attitudes, researchers have developed tools which instead assess less consciously controllable implicit attitudes. Considering research on implicit attitudes thus seems pertinent. A review of studies measuring implicit attitudes towards individuals with physical disabilities (visual, motor or hearing) or intellectual disabilities via the Implicit Association Test (IAT; Greenwald, McGhee, & Schwartz, 1998) was carried out. Systematic searches of PsycINFO, CINAHL, EMBASE, ERIC, MEDLINE, PUBMED, Scopus and Web of Science databases identified relevant articles published between January 2000 and September 2012. Seventeen articles (reporting on 18 studies that employed the IAT) were identified. These investigated implicit attitudes towards individuals with; physical disabilities (N=13), intellectual disabilities (N=3), both physical and intellectual disabilities (N=1), and 'unspecified disabilities' (N=1). Across all studies, moderate to strong negative implicit attitudes were found and there was little to no association between explicit and implicit attitudes. Individuals' beliefs about the controllability of their future, sensitivity to the concept of disease, and contact with individuals with disabilities appear to be associated with implicit attitudes. A consistent pattern of moderate to strong negative implicit attitudes towards individuals with disabilities was evident. These studies provide a starting point, but methodological issues related to sampling and the employed IATs limit the generalizability of these results. Further research investigating implicit attitudes towards specific disability types, with a wider subject pool are necessary as well as further investigation of factors that contribute to these attitudes.
Research in developmental disabilities, 2014 · doi:10.1016/j.ridd.2013.11.003