Thesis
Reference
Understanding stigma: a communal perspective for overweight consumers
SAYARH LEBBAR, Nada
Abstract
This work provides a deeper understanding of how overweight stigma operates in a collective context. I investigate a French online community of overweight women. First, I identify the elements that contribute to experiencing the stigma of overweight and how they interact with consumption. Then, I look at the role of the community for consumers that have distanced themselves from the market. I explain how joining a community of similar others can change consumer coping from avoidance to approach. Finally, I discuss how communities contribute to approaching the market. I identify the communal practices that operate this change. I also identify how these practices are able to reverse the stigma process. In summary, this dissertation explores how an online community can have destigmatisation effects. It sheds light on a new role of the community and how it supports the market and improves consumer well-being.
SAYARH LEBBAR, Nada. Understanding stigma: a communal perspective for overweight consumers. Thèse de doctorat : Univ. Genève, 2016, no. GSEM 37
DOI : 10.13097/archive-ouverte/unige:98022 URN : urn:nbn:ch:unige-980222
Available at:
http://archive-ouverte.unige.ch/unige:98022
Disclaimer: layout of this document may differ from the published version.
UNDERSTANDING STIGMA: A COMMUNAL PERSPECTIVE FOR OVERWEIGHT CONSUMERS.
BY
NADA SAYARH LEBBAR
PHD DISSERTATION
This work is submitted in fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Economics and Management in the Geneva School of Economics and
Management of the University of Geneva, 2016
Doctoral Committee:
- Professor Michelle Bergadaà, Dissertation Director, University of Geneva.
- Professor SørenAskegaard, Syddansk University, Odense, Denmark - Professor Pierre-Jean Benghozi, Ecole Polytechnique, Paris, France - Professor Christian Hildebrand, University of Geneva
Geneva, October 19th 2016
ABSTRACT
Overweight women do not comply with their environment’s norms. They possess an attribute that diminishes them and justifies others’ evaluation of not “normal” (Goffman, 1963). Their difference makes them the target of stereotyping. These negative consequences impact several life domains such as education and employment. Stigma also affects their interaction with the marketplace, which extends societal stereotypes. In this regard, the
stigmatized’s interaction with the market can be very costly and reduces their opportunities. It may limit their access to market offers. In other instances they may find themselves excluded from the market. Yet, within consumer research, there is a need for more research to develop an in depth understanding of how stigma relates to its domain relevant consumption.
Most of the research relating to stigma explores this concept from an individual perspective. Yet, joining similar others seems to alleviate the problem from a social and psychological perspective, but little is known about how it impacts consumption. Hence, there is a need to develop an understanding of stigma within a consumption group context.
Research on consumption communities discusses how joining with similar others can offer unique sites for understanding and acceptance that may be missing in mainstream society.
This work provides a deeper understanding of how overweight stigma operates in a collective context. I investigate a French online community of overweight women. First, I identify the elements that contribute to experiencing the stigma of overweight and how they interact with consumption. Then, I look at the role of the community for consumers that have distanced themselves from the market. I explain how joining a community of similar others can change consumer coping from avoidance to approach. Finally, I discuss how communities contribute to approaching the market. I identify the communal practices that operate this change. I also identify how these practices are able to reverse the stigma process. In summary, this dissertation explores how an online community can have destigmatisation effects. It sheds light on a new role of the community and how it supports the market and improves consumer well-being.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
Working on this dissertation has been a long and enjoyable adventure. The times I worked on this project filled me with energy to go through some of the challenging times in my life. The completion of this dissertation would not have been possible without the support of my supervisor Dr. Michelle Bergadaà. She has inspired me to develop the necessary drive to move forward with my project. She has showed me how one has the ability to decide to bounce back no matter the hindrances. I would like to thank her for giving me the freedom to work on a topic that I am passionate about. I also want to thank her for supporting me in attending the various consumer culture theory doctoral schools that allowed me to improve my project by presenting it to academics around the world.
I would also like to thank my dissertation committee Dr. SørenAskegaard, Dr. Pierre- Jean Benghozi and Dr. Christian Hildebrand for giving me a thorough and valuable feedback that I felt step changed my work. As I was working on the revisions, I really felt that my work was improving. You have allowed me to improve the articulation of my work, in terms of structure, conceptualization and contextual rooting. I especially want to thank Dr. Søren Askegaard for his ongoing emotional and academic support since the start of my project. His humility and humanity gave me the opportunity to ask all the difficult questions including the one about: “Why we need to discuss epistemology in consumer research?”
I also want to thank the various people of my research lab OVSM. Some of you have come and gone, but each one of you has left a stamp on my work. I especially want to thank Cécilia Sainz and Céline Del Bucchia who have been true friends and a strong support for me in good and bad times.
I also want to thank all the CCT researchers that I had the opportunity to meet in various conferences and doctoral colloquia. I would like to thank them for welcoming my project and myself to their community. I have learned a lot through interacting with them from an academic but also a human perspective. I want to thank them for being so humble and accessible and for all their encouragements. Their attitude and research excellence has
inspired me and allowed me to project myself as to which researcher and person I want to become.
I want to thank my husband Samir Lebbar for his ongoing support, but also for taking care of our family when I needed to be away. I want to thank him for taking interest in my
work despite that it was far from his areas of interest, for the long proofreading nights that came after a long working day. I genuinely felt that we were both working on this project and if it was possible I would have extended my degree to him. I also want to thank my kids Amin and Aya for taking interest in my work and always asking questions about my topic and constantly telling me that they are proud of me. Finally, I want to thank my parents for their ongoing encouragements and my mother for her abundant What’s app messages that came as a nice break during long writing days.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION... 8
CHAPTER 1: STIGMA AND STIGMA MANAGEMENT ... 14
I) UNDERSTANDING STIGMA...14
1) Conceptualizing Stigma...14
2) Other Theories Associated with Understanding Stigma...16
3) Stigmas are Not Equal ...17
4) Stigma in Consumer Research...19
5) Stigma Consequences on Consumption...20
6) Characteristics of Stigma ...22
7) Stigma and Communities...27
II) MANAGING STIGMA ...29
1) Stigma Assessment ...29
2) Reacting to Stigma...31
3) Positive Reactions to Stigma ...31
4) Negative Reactions to Stigma...32
III) STIGMA MANAGEMENT IN CONSUMER RESEARCH...34
1) Positive Stigma Management ...34
2) Negative Stigma Management...39
3) Critical Review of the Stigma Literature...42
CHAPTER 2: CONSUMPTION COMMUNITIES ... 45
I) COMMUNITIES IN CONSUMER RESEARCH ...45
1) Communities Beyond Consumer Research ...46
2) Communities within Consumer Research...48
3) Types of Consumption Communities ...50
II) STIGMATIZED COMMUNITIES AND MARKETPLACE RELATIONSHIP ...54
1) Distancing from the Marketplace ...54
2) Changing the Marketplace ...56
III) VIRTUAL COMMUNITIES AND STIGMA...59
1) The Reciprocity of Knowledge Sharing ...61
2) Safe Socialization ...63
3) Giving and Receiving Supportive Resources ...65
4) Freedom and Empowerment...67
5) Critical Review of the Communities Literature...68
CHAPTER 3: METHODOLOGY... 70
I) RESEARCH SUBJECT: THE STIGMA OF OVERWEIGHT...70
1) Eating Discourses ...70
2) Society and Image Requirements ...73
3) Discriminating Against the Overweight ...76
4) The Stigma of Overweight for this Research...78
II) RESEARCH STRATEGY ...79
1) Research Assumptions and Positioning...79
2) Choosing the Interpretive Paradigm ...84
3) Research Strategy ...87
4) Research Objectives...88
III) METHODOLOGY AND DATA COLLECTION ...91
1) Choosing Netnography ...91
2) Steps of Netnography...93
3) Data Collection for this Research ...99
IV) DATA ANALYSIS...106
1) Data Analysis Implementation...107
2) Evaluating the Research...111
CHAPTER 4: RESULTS... 115
I) THE STIGMA EXPERIENCE ...115
1) Experiencing Stigma...117
2) Stereotype Internalization. ...126
3) Threatening Environment ...132
4) The Negative Stigma Outcomes ...135
II) COMMUNITY ROLE ...147
1) Self-Enhancement...151
2) Need to Trust ...154
3) Understanding...157
4) Control ...161
5) Belonging...163
III) COMMUNITY PRACTICES...168
1) Positioning the Marketplace as Inclusive ...169
2) Establishing Communal Superiority...176
3) Accepting the Rejected Self...183
4) Conclusion of the Results Section ...191
CHAPTER 5: CONCLUSION AND DISCUSSION... 194
I) CONTRIBUTION ...199
1) Consumption Communities ...199
2) Overweight Stigma ...200
3) Consumer Well-being. ...202
4) Stigma Research ...203
5) Netnography...207
II) LIMITATIONS ...209
III) FURTHER RESEARCH ...211
REFERENCES... 213
APPENDIX ... 239
INTRODUCTION
“The only handicapping things in my case (I am size 52/54) are:
- Looking for a job, yes, currently I am looking for a job, and during interviews, I always have the impression that on my forehead one can read “obese = high risk of getting sick,” … If this continues, I will ask a doctor to write me a medical
certificate saying that I have no back problems, nor other health issues, and I will attach it to my résumé…
- Obviously the second handicapping thing is that it’s very
complicated to find beautiful big size and good quality clothes in regular stores but also in big size stores. Most of the time the clothes are dull, the cuts completely shapeless and come in like black, brown, khaki and most of all very very expensive.
We want beautiful clothes, well groomed, colorful, some pink, some blue, some white and most of all at reasonable prices.
When we are on a tight budget (like me and other jobless but also working people I think) it’s almost impossible to afford buying a nice item, or even a basic one.
Yesterday, I almost choked when I saw a pair of basic jeans selling at more than 40€... I remember a time (and I am only 24 years old, so it’s not so long ago) when you could get beautiful blue jeans for 20€ (with embroideries, glitter or other features).”
Carla.
The stigmatized are targets to diminishment by their social environment. They do not conform to societal norms, and are considered as not normal. The concept of stigma was first introduced by Irvin Goffman (1963) who identified it as an “attribute that is deeply
discrediting”. The environment challenges the stigmatized’s humanity, justifying
stereotypical and discriminatory actions against them (Crocker, Major, & Steele, 1998). In her article on vivelesrondes.com1 Anne provides tips to readers on how to answer common
weight related insults and mocking. She says that in France, the overweight are overtly called
“dirty fat,” “whale,” “elephant,” “Roseanne,” “sumo,” “Obelix,” “Babar,” and “mammoth.”
1”Insultes, moqueries: Ras le bol! 2004, 12 Novembre. In Vivelesrondes.com. Online.
http://www.vivelesrondes.com/?p=382 Accessed on October 17th, 2016.
Literature is filled with examples of this exclusion (Crocker, Cornwell, & Major, 1993; Dickins, Browning, Feldman, & Thomas, 2016). Stigma can have detrimental
consequences for self-esteem and well being. The stigmatized face more stress than the non- stigmatized. This stress translates into “marks of oppression” (Allport, 1954), which result in psychological and physical harm.
Several factors are involved in the stigmatization of overweight and obese women.
Within western societies, such as the French one, thinness is built as a health and beauty ideal.
With the abundance of food, it has become a sign of social success, prosperity and distinction (Poulain, 2002). The images portrayed by the media are set as an objective that should be achieved (Durif-Bruckert, 2007). The body is perceived as an entity that can be shaped as desired (Shilling, 2003). This implies that people who are overweight are held responsible for their failure to comply with this image and are subject to discrimination. According to Saguy (2012), the problem comes from how we evaluate fat as a public issue. It is meditated as immoral as a medical issue and a public health crisis. Hence, the overweigh body is not evaluated as a size diversity but rather disparaged as a disease.
One article published on the BBC2 magazine discusses “The perils of being fat, female and French.” Here, the author explains how being fat makes it impossible to get a job in France. She describes the French as a society “obsessed with thinness and conformity” and having “ zero tolerance for fat”. The author interviews Sonia, who is the editor in chief of a popular guide to health and beauty for teenage girls. She says: “ to be a fat female is to be a failure.” And that “Fat women are seen as stupid. Their lives must be out of control, they are judged ugly, weird losers.”
Overweight people are seen as incapable of self-mastery over their impulses, appetite and weaknesses (Fischler, 1993). They also have higher chances to regress in social class, face discrimination in the workplace, and be associated with negative stereotypes like lazy, ugly, and gluttonous (Cogan, 1999). In their research on Weight Watchers groups, Moisio and
2« The perils of being fat, female and French ». 2013, 27 Septembre. In BBC Magazine. Online.
http://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-25215641. Accessed October 17th , 2016
Beruchashvili (2010) discuss that being overweight is seen as a result of a controllable preference, being lazy, decadence and absence of self mastery.
This discrimination is proliferated by societal institutions such as the dieting industry, the fashion industry and the healthcare field. For example, the French doctor and social figure Dukan has advised the French president to provide school grade incentives to overweight teenagers that manage to lose their excess weight (Dukan, 2012).
The proliferation of obesity makes stigmatizing overweight consumers even more problematic as it increases the number of targets. As a matter of fact the French sociologist Poulain (2011) argues that stigma can sustain and aggravate obesity stigma. It has been identified as one of the reasons for the obesity epidemics’ proliferation (Tibere, Poulain, Pacheco da Costa Proenca, & Jeannot, 2007). Global trends show a constant increase in population body weight. According to Knowles, the head of Global pharmaceutical research at Roche, Obesity is attaining an astounding magnitude globally. In the US, it has become the leading cause of disability and death after smoking. More than half of the American
population is overweight, and one third obese. In Europe around 20 percent of the population is overweight. In France, almost half the population is overweight or obese3. According to the ObEpi Survey implemented by the Inserm, the Sofres and Roche laboratories, the obesity rate of French adults went from 8.2 % in 1997 to 12.4 % in 2006. This increase happened across all age, sex and income groups.
Also, being overweight in France is challenging when it comes to fashion consumption.
The clothing industry is resisting the ongoing size and weight increase of the French population. For example, in France, 40% of French women wear size 44 or more; whereas most of the stores only carry up to size 42. Also, overweight related Stigmatisation is
perpetuated by various institutions. For example, a funeral home refused the cremation of an
3“Près de la moitie des français souffrent de surpoids”. 2008, 7 aout. In Le figaro. Online.
<http://www.lefigaro.fr/sante/2008/08/07/01004-20080807ARTFIG00316-pres-de-la-moitie-des-francais- souffrent-de-surpoids-.php> Accessed on December 1st, 2010.
overweight person due to her body size 4. Another example is the airline company Air France that tried to charge double the price for overweight people needing extra seating space 5.
From a consumption perspective, the stigmatized have a hard time getting their needs met. They experience the stigma from the marketplace. For example, this includes inadequate seating, small seatbelts in planes, scarcity of plus size clothing(Lewis et al., 2011). This comes in addition to the consumption costs associated with social encounters of potentially stigmatizing people such as store personnel. Literature in consumer research highlights how marketplace encounters can become a source of vulnerability and lack of assertiveness for stigmatized consumers.
Although stigma can be detrimental to consumption, scholarly work on the matter has been relatively limited in consumer research, with very few on, literacy levels (Adkins &
Ozanne, 2005) coupon redemption (Argo & Main, 2008), self empowerment (Henry &
Caldwell, 2006) and religious practices (Sandikci & Ger, 2010; Zwick & Chelariu, 2006).
Other scholars have also addressed stigma indirectly by investigating sexual orientation (Kates, 2002), affiliation to subcultures (Kozinets, 2001), an abandoned community (Muniz &
Schau, 2005), age (Tepper, 1994), consumption of plastic surgery (Schouten, 1991),
homelessness (Hill & Stamey, 1990), cultural background (Penaloza, 1994) and food choices (McFerran, Dahl, Fitzsimons, & Morales, 2009). This literature focused mainly on the
individual. Understanding stigma within a group context has been overlooked in the literature.
Yet, the work of Moisio and Berushashvili (2010) discusses how joining with similar others can offer therapeutic and spiritual benefits to ease the suffering of overweight
consumers and improve their well being. Other research has discussed how affiliation with other overweight women enables collective coping that alleviates stigma (Scaraboto &
Fischer, 2009, 2013). Other work outside of consumer research discusses how participating in such gatherings provides participants with feelings of inclusion that allow them to better
4« Crémation refusée la défunte obese sera incinérée à Toulouse ». 2010, September 27th . In Temps Réel. Online.
<http://tempsreel.nouvelobs.com/actualite/societe/20100927.OBS0418/cremation-refusee-la-defunte-obese- sera-incineree-a-toulouse.html> Accessed, December 2nd, 2010.
5« Sur air France les obeses devront payer plus cher ». 2010, January 19th . In le Monde. Online.
http://www.lemonde.fr/societe/article/2010/01/19/sur-air-france-les-obeses-devront-payer-plus- cher_1294050_3224.html. Accessed, December 20th, 2010.
manage their stigma and the discrimination associated with it. While this research infers to the potential of these groups to alleviate stigma, it does not directly uncover the processes by which destigmatisation can happen. Hence, further research is needed to uncover how these groups contribute to alleviating stigma.
In this dissertation, we will explore the stigma of overweight in France. We will investigate a group of French overweight women. We will examine how coming together in an online community, contributes to alleviating their stigma. Online communities tackling different topics have been flourishing since the wake of the web. They offer unique possibilities to connect like consumers from remote locations. These gatherings have been recognized for being a safe terrain for discussions related to sensitive topics (Postmes, Spears,
& Lea, 1998). This is because members of these groups have the possibility to preserve their anonymity. Also communities overall, can be a source of support to cope with various life challenges. They offer unique avenues for overweight consumers to meet in gatherings that do not revolve around weight loss.
CHAPTER 1: STIGMA AND STIGMA MANAGEMENT
In order to frame the conceptualization of stigma, I first give a holistic review of the literature inside and outside of the consumer research field on stigma. I include perspectives relating to sociology and social psychology. Stigma research provides a disproportionate focus on the individual. Not many known works have investigated the stigma construct from a group perspective. Most of the scholars have focused on how people perceive stigma and its outcomes while interacting with the outside world. They did not try to analyze how stigmatized people experience and manage stigma within a context of being with similar others. This chapter also discusses how efforts in consumer research remain very scant when it comes to investigating stigma.
I) UNDERSTANDING STIGMA
1) Conceptualizing Stigma
Many scholars have attempted to define stigma, however their multidisciplinarity and the variations in terms of their research focus resulted in diverging perspectives. Hence, it is hard to find a common stigma definition within the same research field. This is because varying theoretical frameworks have been used to look at the concept, which has resulted in
heterogeneous conceptualizations. Goffman (1963, p. 3) was the first to describe stigma as an
“attribute that is deeply discrediting” and that diminishes its holder “from a whole and usual person to a tainted, discounted one.” Goffman’s work on stigma constitutes the basis for all stigma definitions across fields. Jones and al. (1984) have built on Goffman’s theory and emphasized the relationship between “ an attribute and a stereotype. They regard stigma as a
“mark” that relates individuals to an undesirable trait that results in stereotyping them. Other scholars such as Stafford and Scott have identified stigma in terms of “norms”. Stafford and Scott (1986) define stigma as a “characteristic of persons that is contrary to a norm of a social unit.” Major et al. (1998) look at stigma from a social identity perspective. They specify, “ a person who is stigmatized is a person whose social identity, or membership in some social category, calls into question his or her full humanity- the person is devalued, spoiled, or flawed in the eyes of others” (Major, Spencer, Schmader, Wolfe, & Crocker, 1998, p. 504). It
is important to note the commonalities between stigma definitions. Most scholars in the field describe it as an experience where people are labeled as deviant. This triggers stereotyping and leads to experiencing devaluation and exclusion from their social environment. Hence, not all marginalizations are stigmatizations. In order for stigma to occur, the individual needs first to be labeled as deviant from the underlying social norms.
The construct of stigma applies to a wide range of issues. Stigma pertains to physical disabilities, gender, race, obesity, mental illness and smoking (Argo & Main, 2008) but also to urinary incontinence, exotic dancing, leprosy, cancer, mental illness (Link & Phelan, 2001).
Many fields have taken interest in studying stigma including the fields of psychology, sociology, anthropology politics and public health. This has created variations in its
conceptualization depending on the field of reference. Hence, the definition of stigma remains vague, limited and lacks consensus among scholars. Also different fields have taken interest in looking at different stigma aspects.
For instance, Social psychologists have focused on individual cognitive processes. They have used social cognitive theories to generate knowledge on how people build categories and link them to stereotypes (Pinel, 1999). They have utilized coping theories to illuminate how stigma is managed (Major & O’Brien, 2005). They have looked at negative attitudes and how they translate into stigmatizing representations with the objective to reduce stigma (Puhl &
Heuer, 2009). Sociologists on the other hand focused on conceptualizing stigma and looking at its nature and consequences rather than it’s sources (Link & Phelan, 2001). They have taken a strong interest in researching stigma as a social and collective phenomenon and at power interplays to understand how exclusion happens (Link & Phelan, 2014). For example, those who have researched obesity stigma, have challenged dominant obesity discourses and looked at how cultural stigmatizing structures emerge (Lewis et al., 2011). While these two fields differ from an axiological and epistemological perspective, they tend to concur
ontologically. They both regard stigma as a social construction that happens within a specific context. They view the label as imposed by the underlying social environment. Another commonality is that they converge that stigma involves stereotyping. We consider these approaches as complementary and we believe that scholars should not hesitate to tap into both fields in order to develop a thorough understanding of stigma.
Stigma is Contextual. Crocker, Major and Steele (1998) make the case that
stigmatization happens when the individual holds a characteristic that is regarded negatively
by others within a particular cultural context. For example, overweight women are highly regarded in some African cultures but are diminished in some more westernized ones where thinness is established as the beauty ideal (Fischler, 1993). In order for stigma to occur, the person needs not only to be deviant, but also this deviance needs to be devalued within a particular social environment. For example, being overweight in western cultures used to be a sign of wealth and prestige, but now with the cultural change in beauty values, thinness is becoming the beauty ideal (Fischler, 1993). This means that bearing excess weight is evaluated as a stigma. Also, from a consumption standpoint, wearing jeans used to be associated with motorcycle gangs (Davis, 1989) whereas now, they are more perceived as a fashionable consumption practice and are worn by a majority of consumers in the western world.
Contextual factors influence how stigma is experienced and operate at the micro, macro and meso levels of social life (Pescosolido, Martin, Lang, & Olafsdottir, 2008). The micro level concerns psychological, socio-cultural and individual factors that affect the stigma experience. The macro level assumes that stigma is embedded in a social context that
influences the degree to which stereotypes occur. The meso level pertains to social networks and organizational level factors.
2) Other Theories Associated with Understanding Stigma
Other scholars besides Goffman have also looked at deviance. For example, in Becker’s book Outsiders: Studies in the Sociology of Deviance (1963) which has been written at about the same time as Goffman’s book, highlights the sociological challenges that pertain to the definition of deviance. Becker pinpoints the difficulties related to separating the normals from the deviant. He explains that a person can be perceived as deviant while being within or outside the norms. He also explains that some can be secretly deviant by transgressing the norms while still being perceived as non-deviant. For example, world road racing cyclist Lance Armstrong that secretly used drugs to improve his performance. In contrast with Goffman, he offers a perspective that separates the deviant from the normals in terms of the groups and social classes that constitute society. Although Becker’s conceptualizations of deviance offer a valuable addition in understanding deviance overall, they will not be used in this dissertation. This is because our focus is on studying overweight women, which do not
constitute a predefined group within society’s social structures. This work will adopt a Goffmanian perspective on separating the stigmatized from the normals. It will look at it in terms of context based experiences of the stigmatized individual rather than societal
structures.
On the other hand René Girard offers illuminations to the stigma concept through his conceptualization of the “Scapegoat” (Girard, 1982). He explains that stigma originates from a need for a scapegoat that bears the violence and aggression to enable harmony within social groups. The scapegoat is sacrificed and becomes subject to persecution and violence. The stigmatized, according to this perspective become the identifiable ‘enemy.’ Girard, provides four main attributes of collective persecution. It starts first with a crisis that he labels
‘generalized indifferentiation’; then a crime that is the source of the crisis. Third, there is a need for an offender that suffers the accusations because he bears victimizing signs and not necessarily because he was directly engaged in the crime. Finally, a violence happens that bears a sacred character. Girard’s theories on the scapegoat bring out an interesting
perspective to looking at stigma that is based on theological underpinnings. Yet, his theories remain ‘structural’ and mythological when he discusses the sacrificial thesis of myth. His work lacks theorizations to understand our research object from the perspective of the lived experience of the stigmatized and hence was not used for this dissertation.
3) Stigmas are Not Equal
Different stigmas can be experienced at various degrees of adversity. Many scholars have offered theorizations to identify the factors that influence the stigma experience. In this section we introduce the most recurring perspectives. For instance, Link and Phelan (2001) state that stigma is not a binary construct rather it exists as a matter of degree. Some scholars argue that this relates to the prominence of how differences are labeled. It depends on the amount of stereotypes associated with a label and the strength of connection between the label and stereotypes. For example, the experience of weight bias, stigmatization and
discrimination is greater for females than for males. This is because women are more exposed to the stereotypes related to the “thin ideal” imposed by western societies (Lewis et al., 2011;
Puhl & Heuer, 2009). Also, in our collective paper on stigma, we have argued that the intersectionality of several stigmatizing attributes can also increase the stigma experience
(Mirabito et al., 2016). For example, fat stigma can intersect with the stereotypes associated with sexualizing and objectifying the female body(Chrisler, 2012; Fikkan & Rothblum, 2012).
Goffman (1963) highlights three types of stigma. First, abominations of the body that are related to corporal irregularities. These are negatively regarded by society. They include all kinds of physical disabilities and physical deformities such as being overweight. Second, blemishes of individual character pertain to the personality of the individual such as mental disorders, alcohol consumption and homosexuality. Third, tribal stigma concerns belonging to a race, religion or a nation that is negatively regarded. For example, overweight people belong in Goffman’s first two categories. They are regarded as physically deviant because they look bigger than others. They are also evaluated as moral failures because they do not have the necessary willpower and self control to remove the excess weight. Abominations of the body are portrayed as more adverse than blemishes of the individual character because the stigma is more visible.
Indeed, stigma visibility influences how stigma is experienced. According to Jones et al.
(1984, p. 35) “in general, people who have concealed marks (are) better adjusted than people whose blemish is apparent.” People bearing stigmas that can be hidden may choose when to interact with others. They can avoid the stigma consequences. These argue that visible stigmas are more adverse than the nonvisible ones. Their bearers face a permanent risk to encounter stigmatizing behaviors (Crocker et al., 1998). According to Jones et al. (1984) individuals with visible stigmas, publicly troublesome ones have higher chances to internalize the stigma. They accept stigma and integrate it to their identity, which further jeopardizes their success in social situations. For example, the high visibility of being overweight often makes fatness the main attribute by which these people are defined from the personal and societal perspective (Dickins et al., 2016; Puhl & Brownell, 2003)
Other scholars have discussed how controllability influences the degree of stigmatization. Controllable stigma is judged more harshly than the non-controllable one (Shih, 2004). When stigmas are not perceived to be caused by, or under the control of the individual, their consequences are not adverse (E. E. Jones et al., 1984). This dimension is linked with responsibility. People that are held responsible by society for their stigma are negatively regarded. Furthermore, Crocker and Major (1994) have argued that perceiving oneself as responsible or in control of their stigma may lead people to engage in self-blame
and consider that they deserve unfavorable behavior from others. There is a dominant discourse around fatness that supports that overweight is the consequence of individual deviance stemming from being lazy, stupid, overeating and lacking willpower (Puhl & Heuer, 2010). The weight loss industry and the medical field have reinforced these discourses. They put the weight management responsibility on the individual. Fatness is hence associated with personal and moral failure (Dickins et al., 2016)..
4) Stigma in Consumer Research
Within the consumer research field, there is a slim body of research that discusses stigma in the marketplace. Consumer research has looked at stigma in relation to belonging to a subculture of consumption (Kates, 2002; Kozinets, 2001; Schouten & McAlexander, 1995), coupon redemption (Argo & Main, 2008), overeating (Moisio & Beruchashvili, 2010), religious affiliation (Sandikci & Ger, 2010), music preference (Henry & Caldwell, 2006), cultural origins (Penaloza, 1994; Üstüner & Holt, 2007), Age (Tepper, 1994) casino gambling (Cotte & Latour, 2009), smoking (Gibson, 1998), low literacy (Adkins & Ozanne, 2005;
Viswanathan, Rosa, & Harris, 2005; Wallendorf, 2001) and consumption of a stigmatized product (Ellen & Bone, 2008; Liu & Johnson, 2005; Muniz & Schau, 2005; Wooten, 2006).
Most of these papers do not directly investigate the stigma concept nor how it is managed.
Rather they hint to it. Similarly to the literature in sociology, psychology and social psychology, the few articles that discuss stigma management look at it from an individual perspective. Little research has tried to understand how stigma operates in the consumption and communal context.
One of the main consequences of stigma with consumer research is the market's perceived failure to meet the need of stigmatized consumers. The market can in some instances marginalize stigmatized consumers despite their willingness to pay for the goods and services. This constitutes another prejudice that they have to deal with in addition to the social consequences resulting from being stigmatized. This increases their hardship. For example Sandikci and Ger (2010) explain that Turkish women adopting the Islamic veiling felt that the market did not offer enough choice for their category. Also Scaraboto and Fischer (2009) discuss how plus size consumers perceived the market as not offering enough options
in terms of fashionable clothes. Societal institutions and systems can reflect social stigma within their systems and structures leading to structural stigma (Pryor & Reeder, 2011).
Despite the little research dealing with stigma within the consumer context, there is some evidence that it has a detrimental impact on the consumption experience of the stigmatized.
Adkins and Ozanne (2005) suggest that the market does not meet the needs of the stigmatized consumers, which impacts their self-confidence and restrains their shopping. Stigmatized consumers are at risk of experiencing vulnerability in the marketplace, because they are disadvantaged (Wallendorf, 2001). Below, we have reviewed the literature within consumer research and identified three ways in which stigma can be harmful to consumption. These confirm the relevance of stigma for consumer research. They support the necessity for more research on stigma in our field.
5) Stigma Consequences on Consumption
A large body of research exists within sociology, and psychology that discusses how stigma is harmful for the individual ex. (Link & Phelan, 2001; Major & O’Brien, 2005). Yet within consumer research, there is a scarcity of literature that discusses how stigma can be harmful for consumers. This is mainly because stigma has not been directly investigated. So there is a lack of clear articulations about it’s potential consequences. Here we review the literature within consumer research and identify three main negative outcomes of stigma at the consumption level.
- Foregoing Consumer Opportunities
In their research on coupon redemption Ashworth et al. (2005) show that as consumers try to avoid stigmatization, they give up marketplace opportunities. They would forgo the opportunity of redeeming their coupons, and taking advantage of financial benefits, to avoid looking cheap or greedy (Argo & Main, 2008). This behavior happens despite the economic and psychological advantages coming from price deals.
Ashworth et al (2005) explain that this counter-rational behavior can be traced to the consumer utility maximization theories where a purchase is made only when the benefits provided by the good outweigh the cost of acquisition. In this case, the counter rational behavior of not using the coupon can be explained by the high social costs associated with the
coupon redemption. The shopper’s response becomes a coping strategy whose objective is to satisfy social goals.
This research suggests that one way to restore equilibrium into the utility equation and to encourage engaging into coupon redemption happens through increasing the financial value of the coupon or reducing the social cost. This can be done by either placing the coupon in a socially non visible area of the product or using coupons in online settings where there are no social interactions between shoppers. These recommendations are relevant as they provide solutions during a specific instance of stigmatization, which is the purchase occasion. This research provides a solution to a stigmatizing situation that is associated with a deviant behavior. It does not offer insights on how to restore the consumer utility equation.
Especially, in instances of a deviant personality that extends the stigma experience. For example, this is the case for consumers with physical deformities.
- Limiting Consumption Behavior
Stigma can sometimes limit the purchasing opportunities of the consumer. In their research on the low literate consumer, Adkins and Ozanne (2005) found evidence that, consumers with low literacy levels experience restrained shopping experience that often interferes with getting their needs met. Not only they are disadvantaged but become vulnerable to consumption experiences (Wallendorf, 2001). For example society expects consumers to easily be able to fill a check at the checkout line of a grocery store. For
consumers with low literacy levels this is a main challenge as they are not always able to do it. This implies that the flexibility provided by this method of payment is sometimes forgone.
These scholars also show that the illiterate consumers often restrain themselves to purchasing familiar products and do not engage in exploring new products as it involves a need to master reading product labels and packaging.
- Consumer Disempowerment.
In their research on heavy metal enthusiasts, Henry and Caldwell (2006) portray stigma as detrimental to well-being and as instilling feelings of powerlessness to the
consumer. This perspective is in line with Goffman’s view of the negative effects of stigma that diminish its holder “ from a whole and usual person to a tainted and discounted one”
(Goffman, 1963, p. 3). They explain that it results in feelings of being undeserving and lower self-esteem. This may impact the consumers’ market assertiveness whose basic premises lie on standing up for one’s own best interest without unjustifiable anxiety (Richins, 1983). The market exerts a tremendous pressure on consumers, which may push them to internalize societal norms rather than challenging them to their best interest. In their research on impoverished mothers, Hill and Stephens (1997) discuss how powerlessness leads these mothers to avoid leveraging the welfare system not to suffer the meeting of public officials that stigmatize them.
6) Characteristics of Stigma
In this section, we review the literature to identify the elements that constitute stigma and fuel it. These are based on Link and Phelan’s elements that drive stigma formation. Link and Phelan’s (2001) work constitutes the most comprehensive and recognized contribution in terms of identifying the factors that fuel the stigmatization process. They explain that stigma occurs when many elements converge to produce its components. First, the difference needs to be identified, and then a connection between the person and the stereotype is established.
Third, there is a distancing between the categories of ‘them’ versus ‘us’. Fourth, the person becomes subject to behaviors of discrimination from the dominant culture. Finally, the discriminators need to have access to power in order to reinforce their behaviors.
Power is key to experiencing stigma. It is the mean used to reinforce the social rules and sanctions (Link & Phelan, 2001). These are processes that enable the stigmatizers to achieve their objectives of exploitation, control or exclusion of their targets (Link & Phelan, 2014).
Power drives the direction of each of the elements discussed below. We argue that depending on who holds the power stigma can be reinforced or attenuated. In our collective paper on stigma, we discussed that when power is held by the stigmatized, the stigma process can be reversed and stigma hindered (Mirabito et al., 2016). For example, Turkish women have managed to change veiling from a stigmatized practice to a fashionable alternative by gaining social power (Sandikci & Ger, 2010). This implies that if the stigmatized manage to acquire the necessary power to influence the below elements backwards, they can succeed in
attenuating stigma. For example, overweight people are put in a subordinate power position
because of the social perception of fat and it’s link with disease and disability (Dickins et al., 2016). This low power is more prevalent when they encounter power holders such as doctors, the media …)
- Labeling the Stigmatized as Not Normals
Link and Phelan (2001) explain that one of the main components of stigma is related to identifying the disparities. According to this perspective, humans have a selective attention when it comes to differences. Society defines which disparities matter most and which are not worthy of attention. Once the differences are identified, they become part of normalcy and people start being categorized based on specific attributes as for example “fat” or “thin”,
“gay” or “straight”. The labels attributed to the stigmatized often carry potent negative meanings. They reflect the deviance, the flaws and the undesirability associated with the stigma (Ellen & Bone, 2008). For instance, senior citizens that use discount coupons are associated with negative labels such as “being financially dependent,” “unable to afford full price,” having “ a lower status or class” and “Undeserving of equal rights” (Tepper, 1994).
For example, there is a plethora of social discourses in western societies that moralize body size (Askegaard et al., 2014). Being thin is evaluated as “good” and “healthy” while having a fat body is evaluated as “bad” and “unhealthy”. These labels that are socially constructed are believed to be true even among health professionals despite that extant
research has discussed that health is not necessarily thinness related. In fact, being overweight and healthy is possible if one eats healthy foods and excises. On the other hand, thin people can be medically unhealthy if they have a sedentary lifestyle. Messages about the moral failings of fat people are so prevalent that they have spread globally to include populations that have historically been known to have a positive attitude towards fat (Brewis, Wutich, Falletta-Cowden, & Rodriguez-Soto, 2011). Fat or obesity are used globally to evaluate the social and personal qualities of the individual. In sum, there is global spreading of body norms and a conception of the ideal body that labels fat as “bad” and fat as “unhealthy.”
These negative associations contribute to distancing the stigmatized from normalcy.
Goffman (1963, p. 5) explains that stigma divides the “normals” in society from those that hold an “undesired differentness.” Being negatively labeled challenges people’s desire to experience normalcy and using consumption to achieve identities that are acceptable to themselves (Baker, 2006). For example, the overweight consumers who have a desire to buy
new clothes or to look fashionable, may not be able to appear as normal when they do not find fashionable clothing their size.
- Stereotypes Experience and Internalization
Stereotyping happens when the identified dissimilarity is associated with negative characteristics. Goffman (1963) was the first to identify the link between labels and stereotypes. Once the person is identified as deviant, she is associated with the cultural stereotype. Fiske (1998) asserts that this human approach is performed in an automatic way with the objective to ease “cognitive efficiency”. These categorizations exist at the
preconscious level and allow people to be quicker at decision making in order to be able to free themselves for other environmental inquiries. For example, veiled women are associated with issues and threats related to the Islamic religion (Sandikci & Ger, 2010). This puts a label on them that blocks them from taking advantage of marketplace opportunities. For instance, in France, veiled women cannot access education in public schools as the government prohibits their entry (Bowen, 2007).
Another example concerns fat stigma. Being fat is associated with ugliness, sexlessness, and undesirability (Brewis et al., 2011; Cordell & Ronai, 1999). The social stereotypes about obesity are highly prevalent and hard to change as they are portrayed as a contagious phenomenon that can be caught. Some scholars have argued that exposure to a high visibility of fatness in the social environment increases tolerance for adiposity and encourages the adoption of weight gaining behaviors (Brewis et al., 2011). These stereotypes are deeply entrenched in western societal structures. For example, when the movie Precious, featuring an obese main character, was released, its reviews focused mainly on the weight of the main actor. Writers overlooked other attributes of the movie and mainly reacted with fatphobic reviews (Stoneman, 2012).
Stigmatized people can internalize the stereotypes associated with their condition and start acting in accordance with these stereotypes. For example, if an employer expects an employee who just got a life threatening disease to underperform, he/she may freeze the employee’s salary increase. This may decrease the employee’s motivation and lead to underperformance. Self-fulfilling prophecies’ research has shown that most of the time, subjects end up adopting behaviors that are in accordance with the expectations of others (Crocker & Major, 1989; Jussim, Palumbo, Chatman, Madon, & Smith, 2000).
People that internalize society’s view of the stigmatized accept the negative behavior of others and risk having a low self-esteem (E. E. Jones et al., 1984). This internalization, in the case of newly acquired stigmas, may have happened before the person becomes subject to stigma. Previous research has shown that stigmatized people who agree with the unfavorable behaviors have lower self-esteem than the ones who do not agree with them (Crocker &
Major, 1989). The internalization of opinions, labels and stereotypes held against the
stigmatized may result in self-stigma and self-hatred. Stereotypes are the basis of self stigma (Corrigan & Watson, 2002). Self-stigma is related to the reaction that stigmatized people have towards themselves. Self-stigma occurs when the negative beliefs and stereotypes are about the self. Here, the stigmatized can become as prejudicial and discriminatory towards oneself as the stigmatizing others.
Obese people often internalize the dominant negative attitudes within their
environment. They tend to concur with the moral judgments and negative stereotypes held against them. This increases their experience of indirect stigma which is associated with feelings of being stared at and evaluated and the fear of facing discrimination and humiliation (Lewis et al., 2011). When they accept the negative evaluation of the environment they develop feelings of shame, failure and inferiority for not being able to reach the ideal beauty standards set by society (Eberle & Robinson, 1980). This leads to a drop in their self-esteem and their morale and results in internal pain (Tibere et al., 2007).
- Isolating the Stigmatized from the Nonstigmatized
According to Link and Phelan (2001), the labels associated with the stigmatized imply the separation of ‘us’ from ‘them’. ‘Them’ becomes a threat to ‘us’ and justifies the negative stereotypes associated with this trait. This separation can manifest itself within societal and/or market structures. For example, the fact that overweight consumers have a hard time finding clothing their size is a form of separation. Also big size clothing stores constitute a marker for this separation because they isolate the overweight from mainstream stores. Some market actors such as the founder of the brand “Abercrombie and Fitch” have explicitly voiced this separation by refusing to make clothes for people beyond size 40.
In extreme cases, where the difference between ‘us’ and ‘them’ is significantly big,
“them” are seen as not so human which justifies all the diminishing reactions in their regard.
This promotes reactions that lead to isolating the stigmatized when elements of power come
into play. This is because the normal majority can hold the necessary power to enforce this separation. For example, the media portray messages about physical beauty that shape the cultural perception and infer the exclusion of overweight people from desirable consumption (Dittmar, 2007). Dickins et al. (2016) explain how by medicalizing fatness, the media and the weight loss industry replicate moral judgments that make the overweight feel excluded.
People conforming to the thin ideal often do not need to challenge these dominant discourses and internalize them. This results in stigmatization, social rejection and exclusion of the overweight (Crandall & Martinez, 1996; Puhl & Brownell, 2006). It jeopardizes their ability to get proper healthcare, education and to build positive relationships with others (Puhl &
Heuer, 2009)
Social isolation can also come from the stigmatized, who integrate societal stereotypes and act in accordance with the idea that the stigmatized do not belong with the normals. One example is tuberculosis patients who believed that their family and friends avoided them responded by isolating themselves (Kelly, 1999). Improving feelings of social isolation is very demanding. It implies changing the dominant societal discourses.
- Stigmatized’s Status Loss
The stigmatized are at risk of being diminished and deprived from social status. This is a direct consequence of the labeling and stereotyping of these people. Link and Phelan (2001) discuss that humans are used to classifying people according to hierarchies. Those hierarchies are not related to levels of performance but to external societal rankings. Within this
framework, members of discriminated groups are unconsciously expected to perform lower regardless of their skill level. This low status can generate discriminatory behavior as the person becomes less attractive to engage with. Hence, discrimination happens when the negative labeling impacts behavior and leads the labeler to engage in discriminatory actions.
Status loss and discriminations may generate reductive environments that actively limit the participation of the stigmatized person (Corrigan et al., 2005) and hence become threatening. For example service providers within healthcare can have a hidden bias against obese people perceiving them as responsible for their health issues, being lazy, lacking motivation and self-discipline (Puhl & Heuer, 2009). This results in a diminishing conduct from healthcare professionals such as disrespectful behavior, negative attitudes and using medical equipment that is too small for obese patients. It makes them feel like a second class
patient. This creates a threatening environment for these patients that results in delaying or avoiding to seek medical treatment.
Also, various industries and public authorities contribute to reinforcing the low status of the stigmatized through keeping their voice unheard. This is true for industries like fashion and diet as well as public health. For example, the fashion industry serves mainly slim
females. It features advertising that perpetuates the desirability of thinness by exclusively using exceedingly thin models (Saguy & Ward, 2011). While a growing plus size industry features larger female bodies, it remains a small segment within the fashion industry that lacks the necessary power to change social standards.
7) Stigma and Communities.
Several scholars have discussed how joining similarly stigmatized others is beneficial to attenuating stigma. From a sociological perspective communities can have the potential to reduce stigma through developing a common understanding, norms and prescription (Mirabito et al., 2016). They can act as a source of power for the stigmatized. Stigmatized people that highly identify with similar others, have higher chances to be empowered (Shih, 2004). Through connecting with stigmatized others, they become aware of the constructive facet of group affiliation (Corrigan & Watson, 2002; Frable, Platt, & Hoey, 1998). They also have lower chances to internalize the disapproving cues from their surrounding environment.
According to Slack and Whitt (1992), stigma bearers will most of the time look for affiliation with others in similar situations as they integrate easier with them. However, this strategy may be risky in case they stop trying to belong to the larger society and instead focus on belonging to their group. Joining similarly stigmatized people may be a refuge for better acceptance (Oyserman & Swim, 2001).
Within consumer research, Consumption Communities are sites where members strive to manage their stigma feel empowered, improve their well-being and self-esteem. For example, in their research on heavy metal fans, Henry and Caldwell (2006) explain how heavy metal fans that are stereotyped as “social misfits” who have “violent tendencies” join together to combat the powerlessness related to their prolonged stigmatization. They used multiple coping strategies such as resignation, confrontation, Enclave withdrawal, mainstream
engagement, concealment, escapism, hedonism, spiritualism, nostalgia and creative production to self-empower. Being with similar others provided them with a feeling of superiority over other consumers. The group allowed them to build perceptions of power that provided them with the necessary confidence to reinvent themselves. We can infer that the community not only gave more power to these consumers but also helped in changing themselves and their consumption patterns. For example some of them as a result of
community membership, constructed new lifestyles that are different from the norms such as wearing skulls crossbones.
Similarly, Star Treck fans are able to form a powerful community that helps them legitimize the stigma associated with their fandom. Star Treck fandom is linked with stereotypes such as “fanaticism, immaturity, passivity, escapism, addiction, obsessive
consumption and the inability to distinguish between fantasy and reality” (Kozinets, 2001, p.
73). Group membership empowers them to negotiate consumption meanings and practices to distance themselves from their stigma. They acquire a sense of freedom and self-acceptance that can be assimilated to homosexual uncloseting (Saguy & Ward, 2011).
Scaraboto and Fischer (2009) discuss how online communities provide the stigmatized oversize consumers the opportunity for communication and collective identity formation.
These fat acceptance movements refuse to lose weight to fit with societal norms. They try to fight stigma by separating being fat from the associated stereotypes of being unattractive and lazy. The group is a resource for safe affiliation and for developing collective coping
strategies to alleviate their stigma. It provides with power because it gives them the possibility to obtain political and social influence (Miller, 2006).
Joining with similar others is however harder for overweight people. This is because society does not offer them opportunities to form face to face groups. Most of those available for the overweight have the objective for weight loss (Moisio & Beruchashvili, 2010).
However, the Internet has given the opportunity for these people to join around other causes such as fat acceptance or social activism. It has provided new avenues for them to meet and form relationships and to develop strategies to manage the negative impact of stigmatization.
II) MANAGING STIGMA
Stigma has a negative psychological impact on its bearer (Goffman, 1963). This non- conformity to group norms leads to painful interactions with a society that devalues the target’s attributes. The stigmatized often face behaviors of prejudice and discrimination.
These may include benefiting from less support from others, having to deal with glass ceilings in the workplace, getting less positive body language and facing uncomfortable social
exchanges, more often than others (Shih, 2004).
The undermining associated with stigma may be a source of stress for the stigmatized (Miller & Major, 2000). According to Miller (2006), this stress generates many psychological unconscious responses such as irritation, nervousness, depression, bitterness and
apprehension. Its negative impact may extend physically to lead to increased cardiovascular activity (Miller & Kaiser, 2001). The stigmatized has to live with the likelihood of
encountering discriminatory behaviors (E. E. Jones et al., 1984). Many scholars have argued that this may increase their helplessness (Crocker et al., 1998). Yet, in some instances the consequences may not always be detrimental to the individual (Shih, 2004). Many stigma bearers have managed to sustain a high self-esteem, are good performers, have achieved a state of well-being and have high resilience (Dovidio, Major, & Crocker, 2000). While these counterexamples exist, their incidence is low compared to ones portraying stigma’s negative impacts. Most of the work discussing stigma sees it as a major threat to well-being (Dovidio et al., 2000).
In the following sections we describe how individual framing of stigma influences whether it is experienced as a threat or a challenge. We also review the literature on stigma management and identify the positive and negative coping responses relating to stigma.
1) Stigma Assessment
Before responding to stigma people need to first evaluate the situation to determine its relevance and threat to the self (Miller, 2006). The identification step is mandatory to assess weather the prejudice is linked to the stressor or not. Corrigan and Watson (2002) argue that
the impact of stigma on self-esteem depends heavily on how legitimate the individual perceives it and the meaning allocated to the situation On the other hand (Crocker, 1999).
Swim and Thomas (2006) propose a process of coping response selection. They explain that goals play a central role in selecting a response to prejudice. Hence,
discriminatory situations are evaluated in light of the five core social goals. These include the need to self enhance in order to maintain one’s self-esteem, the need to trust others and feel safe, the need to understand and be understood and have shared meanings with others, the need to control and feel competent and the need to belong. These needs determine whether the individual frames a given situation as a threat or an opportunity. Framing the situation as a threat leads to negative coping responses whose objective is to avoid an antigoal (loss) and whose consequences are negative for the well being of the individual. Framing the situation as a challenge leads to positive coping responses that are beneficial to the individual. The table below shows how this framing impacts the coping responses of individuals and their
emotions.
Table1 : Comparison of framing orientations (Adapted from (Swim & Thomas, 2006))
Framing Threat Prevention Challenge Promotion
Concern or focus Avoid loss Avoid antigoal Avoid costs
Seek gain Seek goal Seek benefits
Affect Anxiety
Behavioral inhibition system
Anger
Behavioral Approach system
Coping responses Avoidance
Disengagement Approach
Engagement/Effort.
Other scholars concur with the view that stigma is defined depending on the
perception of the stigmatized individual (Swim & Stangor, 1998). Literature shows that not all people evaluate stigma in similar ways and relate it to responsibility. Some people accept the stigma and have to live its detrimental consequences. Others reject it, and are able to
generate healthy reactions to overcome its negative outcomes. Adopting one attitude or the other depends on whether the individual feels responsible or not for their condition (Adkins &
Ozanne, 2005). The perceived legitimacy of stigma also affects how the individual appraises it (Corrigan & Watson, 2002). People are more likely to accept stigma that they feel is justified.
2) Reacting to Stigma
Many scholars have argued that holding a stigma does not always generate failure and negative outcomes (Corrigan & Watson, 2002; Crocker & Major, 1989). It depends on how the individual lives and responds to the stigmatizing situation. As discussed in the previous section, Stigma impact depends heavily on the individual’s personality and skills. It also depends on how the individual evaluates the situation. For stigma to be harmful, it needs to be appraised by the individual as a source of stress.
Stress researchers have demonstrated that tension happens when people face requests that are beyond their adaptive resources (Lazarus & Folkman, 1984). The individual evaluates the requests they receive and the resources available to deal with these. Stress occurs when the request exceeds the adaptive assets available to manage the stressor. Hence, if the stigmatized has enough resources to manage the stigma outcomes, stress does not occur. These resources vary in nature, and can be emotional, collective, behavioral, financial or educational (Miller &
Kaiser, 2001).
Within the stigma literature, coping responses have been classified in two categories.
These are approach/avoidance (Miller & Kaiser, 2001), fight vs. flight (Swim & Thomas, 2006) and disengagement vs. engagement (Compas, Connor-Smith, Saltzman, Thomsen, &
Wadsworth, 2001). Although scholars propose different labels and categories, the concepts they describe are very similar. Scholars researching stigma coping within agree that stigma challengers have a better resilience and a higher well being than withdrawers. Withdrawal is typically associated with vulnerability and not pursuing one’s goals. Scholars judge
withdrawal as maladaptive and conducive to psychological distress (Miller & Kaiser, 2001).
Next, we provide an overview of these dichotomous categorizations.
3) Positive Reactions to Stigma
Some people chose to resist stigma to make it ineffective (Crocker et al., 1998). These stigma challengers choose to struggle harder to overcome the hindrances of stigma (Allport, 1954; Miller & Myers, 1998). Their objective is to prove that the stereotypes that are held against them are wrong. Goffman (1963, p. 11) discussed this category of stigma resisters. He said that the bearer of stigma “ may also see the trials he has suffered as a blessing in
disguise, especially because of what it is felt that suffering can teach one about life and people”. In this case, stigma acts as an activator for trespassing social stereotyping and reconstructing the self (Shih, 2004). It contributes to building skills such as assertiveness and persistence. These can manage their stigma through challenging it (Compas et al., 2001).
They strive to gain control over the prejudicial event by changing it. For example, prejudiced targets that engage in activism to change social beliefs or regulations to alleviate
marginalization.
Others choose to resist stigma through compensation strategies. They strive to become overcompetent in other domains to distance themselves from the negative labels. In their study on obesity stigma, Miller et al. (1995) found that obese women who believed were visible to their telephone partner engaged in compensatory behavior. They tried to be likeable and showed more social skills. On the other hand, obese women that did not believe their telephone partner could see them did not do so. People that engage in compensation strategies are able to protect themselves from the negative consequences of stigma and achieve
successful results (Shih, 2004).
Others try to anticipate the stereotyping and take corrective actions upfront. In their research, Kaiser and Miller (2001) found that women that thought to be evaluated by a sexist grader wrote essays that include less feminine connotation. Hence, they distanced themselves from the stereotypical attribute. This was not the case for other women that did not believe they were evaluated by a prejudiced grader.
4) Negative Reactions to Stigma
Withdrawal is the most recurring reaction to stigma. The person adopts a flight attitude (Miller & Kaiser, 2001) and tries to avoiding the stressor (Compas et al., 2001).
According to Swim and Thomas (2006), these are associated with behavioral inhibition, that is associated with feelings anxiety. People adopting this strategy opt to change themselves to
