Public attitudes toward people with intellectual disabilities: a cross-cultural study.

Scior et al. (2010) asked adults in Hong Kong and the UK how they feel about people with intellectual disabilities.

They used the same paper survey in both places. People answered questions about friendship, work, and rights.

Hong Kong adults gave less friendly answers than UK adults. The gap was small but real.

The study shows culture can shape how the public sees disability.

Rieth et al. (2022) later asked Dutch adults the same kind of questions during COVID-19. They found stigma stayed steady even under pandemic stress. This extends Katrina’s work by showing negative views do not fade on their own.

Tsai et al. (2018) and Shannon et al. (2008) looked at autism, not ID. They found that telling people a child has autism can improve ratings. These studies seem to clash with Katrina’s grim picture, but the difference is control. In the autism experiments, adults got clear labels and short stories. In Katrina’s survey, no labels were given, so old stereotypes ruled.

Liao et al. (2022) interviewed ABA staff in the UK and China. Both groups said stigma is high and services are thin. Their real-world view backs Katrina’s survey numbers.

If you run programs in Hong Kong or similar cultures, expect extra stigma. Add short, positive facts about ID when you meet teachers, bus drivers, or employers. One sentence like “People with ID can learn job skills with good training” can cut bias before it starts.