Recommendations for Implementing Anti-Ableism Across the Psychology Curriculum

At the start of the COVID-19 pandemic, I had a student with a hearing impairment in my class. As we moved to remote learning, we communicated to ensure she had the access she needed. This was a turning point in my teaching; after, I updated all my course materials: captioning videos, adding image descriptions, and so forth. What is strange to me is that it took me until 2020 to think deeply about disability in relation to my teaching. I am a disabled faculty member and I was, myself, disabled as an undergraduate. But, as a professor, the truth is I did not really expect many of my students to be disabled, or to have certain kinds of disabilities. I also realize that, as a disabled undergraduate, I saw myself as outside the norm.

However, disability is within the range of normal human experience. Approximately 27% of “adults in the United States have some type of disability” (based on 2021 data; Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 2023a,b). The World Health Organization (WHO) suggests that approximately 16% of people worldwide have a “significant disability” (WHO, 2023). These statistics also may not yet show the full impact of COVID-19: In a large study of patients in the U.K., 20% had acquired a disability post-COVID (Evans et al., 2021). The ADA's definition of disabled people includes those who have or previously had “a physical or mental impairment that substantially limits one or more major life activities” (U.S. Department of Justice [DOJ], 2020). This is a broad definition, including people who are blind, have mobility impairments, learning disabilities, mental illnesses, and more.

Because the psychology curriculum guides students through the study of behaviors including thoughts, emotions, perceptions, and interactions between individuals, it could be ideal for promoting anti-ableism (although this is not always the case; Dunn, 2019). Here, I discuss disability, ableism, and the prejudice reduction literature. Then, I propose three topics that could be leveraged to promote anti-ableism, with suggestions for implementation.

Disability, Ableism, and Prejudice Reduction

The medical model of disability frames disability as a problem with the disabled individual, which requires fixing (Olkin & Pledger, 2003). As in the part of the ADA definition mentioned above, one is disabled if they have an impairment. Disability theory utilizes the social model of disability, distinguishing between impairment and disability (Oliver, 1996; Union of the Physically Impaired Against Segregation, 1976). Impairment may be physical (e.g., inability to walk), but disability is caused by society (e.g., stairs as standard vs. ramps; ableist attitudes that exclude disabled people).

Disability is a social construct. The ADA definition seems to acknowledge the socially constructed concept of disability, also including in its definition those “perceived by others as having such an impairment” (U.S. DOJ, 2020). This seems to recognize that, in society, disability is in the eye of the beholder. Concepts of disability are variable: while many see deafness as a disability, people who are Deaf often view themselves as a linguistic minority (Higgins & Lieberman, 2016). Our cultural concept of who is disabled is also changeable: Black people and Native Americans (along with White women) were considered intellectually disabled compared to White men (e.g., Bache, 1895), a view we now identify as scientific racism (Carter et al., 2022). Women are frequently considered excessively emotional compared to men, casting women as emotionally disabled, although alternate explanations, including perceivers’ attributions, counter this belief (Barrett & Bliss-Moreau, 2009). Homosexuality was a diagnosable mental illness until it was removed from the DSM in 1973 (O’Connor, 2021). In many ways, disability has been socially constructed as any deviation from a “white, able-bodied, heteronormative” norm (Morgan, 2023, p. 679).

Similarly, Lewis states ableism is, “a system of assigning value to people's bodies and minds based on societally constructed ideas of normalcy, productivity, desirability, intelligence, excellence, and fitness” (2022). Like other prejudices, ableism can be hostile or benevolent, explicit or implicit (Nario-Redmond et al., 2019; Young et al., 2019). Examples of ableism include disabled people being “excluded, ignored, misunderstood, rejected, dismissed, avoided, pitied, envied, objectified, dehumanized, manipulated, shamed, mocked, stereotyped, overprotected, condescended to, and/or provided with unwanted help” (Nario-Redmond et al., 2019, p. 727). In many cases, nondisabled people may engage in benevolent ableism with the genuine intent to help and belief that they are helping (Dunn, 2019).

Many interventions attempting to reduce prejudice, including ableism, include an educational component (Devine et al., 2012; Reddyhough et al., 2023; Young et al., 2019), awareness of implicit bias (Devine et al., 2012; Young et al., 2019), contact (including via videos, e.g., Reddyhough et al., 2023; Young et al., 2019), and/or training in bias-reducing strategies. These examples may allow us to build these kinds of elements into course activities and make predictions about whether and how different activities might impact ableism, aiding future study.

Devine et al. (2012) describes a racial bias intervention aimed at reducing implicit bias. The intervention approached implicit bias as a habit to be changed through intentional, long-term effort. In the study, both control and experimental group participants took an Implicit Association Test (IAT; Greenwald et al., 1998) and were given their results to develop an awareness of their own implicit bias. Participants in the experimental group then learned about bias, and developed concern about how bias affected others. Materials explained the idea of prejudice as a habit, implicit bias and its relation to discrimination and real-world outcomes. These participants also learned strategies to combat implicit biases. Strategies included, among others, perspective-taking and stereotype replacement. Participants applied the strategies to their own lives, reflecting on the process. All participants were assessed again using the IAT and measures of explicit bias at 4 and 8 weeks after the intervention. Results showed that those who participated in these activities had lower implicit biases in both assessments, with increased awareness and concern about implicit bias, compared to the control group.

Similarly, Young et al. (2019) implemented an intervention, based on Devine et al. (2012), designed to reduce mental illness bias. They compared participants receiving the combination of education about mental illness bias, bias feedback, and video contact; just education and bias feedback; just contact; and a control group. For bias feedback, participants took an implicit bias Go/No-Go Association Task (GNAT; Nosek & Banaji, 2001), although participants were all told they had implicit bias related to mental illness. Implicit biases were reduced for those who experienced all three interventions or education and bias feedback (but not contact alone or the control group). Reddyhough et al. (2023) assessed only an educational intervention with video contact, attempting to reduce mental illness bias specifically related to voice-hearing. Participants completed assessments of implicit and explicit bias before and after training. Analyses showed that the training reduced explicit—but not implicit—bias.

Using these examples, we can strategically implement education, awareness of implicit bias, contact, and training in bias-reducing strategies into our courses and programs. For instance, contact alone may not reduce implicit bias, although it has been shown to reduce explicit bias. Thus, implementing videos of disabled people into one course may reduce explicit bias and, in combination with education and awareness of implicit bias, perhaps in another course, implicit biases may be reduced. Of course, these predictions must be assessed.

Teaching About Prejudice

Probably the most obvious place we could establish anti-ableism in a psychology curriculum is when discussing prejudice and social psychology (Bogart & Dunn, 2019), as in a Social Psychology course or Introduction to Psychology. When teaching about prejudice, one could easily implement educational content about ableism and introduce students to bias-reducing strategies. Some amount of ableism appears to be a result of misunderstandings and incorrect assumptions about disabled people and their lives. Ableist beliefs often reduce disabled people's experience to only their disability (or nondisabled people's perception of it), and are also related to nondisabled people's reaction to these over-simplified and/or inaccurate views of disabled people and their lives. Giving examples of ableism, allowing students to consider the assumptions behind ableist behaviors (especially benevolent ableism), and discussing in-group/out-group dynamics may all be beneficial (see OSF project page for lesson plan and other materials, Calma-Roddin, 2024).

Giving students opportunities to explore their own implicit biases through tests like the IAT or GNAT would also be helpful. Although it is not sufficient on its own, it is clear that being made aware of one's own implicit bias is key to creating motivation to try reducing that bias (Devine et al., 2012; Young et al., 2019). These tests can be easily implemented as some tests, such as a Disability IAT, can be found freely available online (Project Implicit, 2011). A potential challenge in using the IAT may be students’ resistance or negative emotions related to a result suggesting implicit bias. This challenge might be addressed by allowing students to take and reflect on the IAT without having to disclose their results (see OSF project page for example assignment, Calma-Roddin, 2024). Further discussion of the IAT (including disclaimers in the results that an individual's results are unlikely to predict behavior) may also help. Finally, it may be useful to emphasize that we all have implicit bias and can work to change this. Introducing students to bias-reducing strategies would assist them as they learn to identify and challenge ableism (see assignment mentioned above, Calma-Roddin, 2024).

Teaching About the Fundamental Attribution Error

Some work suggests a role for the Fundamental Attribution Error (Ross, 1977) and Actor-Observer Effect (Jones & Nisbett, 1987) in ableism. As these are common topics in Social and Introduction to Psychology courses, it may be practical to build in lecture and discussion to unpack how these effects contribute to ableism. For instance, Bogart & Dunn point out that, in line with the Fundamental Attribution Error, nondisabled people fail to consider how situational attributions, such as the inaccessibility of the environment, affect the behavior of disabled people (2019). Instead, people may assume that the behavior of a disabled person is affected primarily by individual attributions, namely, the disability or impairment the person has. Dunn (2019) expands on this idea by referencing the Actor-Observer Effect, suggesting that people may rely on these individual attributions for others, but recognize the situational explanations for their own behavior. Dunn parallels this with the insider-outsider distinction, which describes how disabled people (insiders) think about their disabilities differently from how nondisabled people (outsiders) think of disabilities (e.g., Dembo, 1964; Dunn, 2015). Faculty can include lecture content on these concepts and students can discuss how observers discount situational factors that may affect disabled peoples’ behaviors (e.g., lack of accessibility), instead attributing disabled peoples’ behaviors to their disability (see OSF project page for example assignments, Calma-Roddin, 2024).

Seeing disabled people share their own stories may make this more relevant and powerful for students, while merging education with contact. Many disabled content creators can be found on social media, sharing their experiences with activities like travel or attending concerts (see OSF project page for examples, Calma-Roddin, 2024). Such examples may raise students’ awareness of inaccessibility and situations in which they may witness or engage in ableism. These examples can help students think through examples of the Fundamental Attribution Error regarding ableism, and better understand prejudice (as discussed above).

Teaching About Impairments and Diagnoses

Many psychological courses, including Abnormal Psychology, Biopsychology, and Introduction to Psychology, cover different kinds of impairments and diagnoses. In these topics, we can do better to take an anti-ableist approach. It is important for my students to understand symptoms, related neurotransmitters, and treatments. They should also know how diagnosis changes over time, with entries added, edited, and removed from the DSM with each iteration. And as with disability, diagnosis is socially constructed. As discussed earlier, to determine an “abnormal” we compare to a norm, and we must recognize the underlying assumptions in these conversations.

It is important for students to consider how we value some bodies, traits, and behaviors over others, critically thinking about prejudice—including ableism—and what this might mean for diagnosis and treatment. As mentioned above, homosexuality was a diagnosable mental illness in the too-recent past. Conversion therapy “treatments” are now denounced as physically and psychologically harmful (United Nations, 2020). Similarly, Black Americans escaping from slavery in the 1800s could be diagnosed with drapetomania, with harsh punishments as “treatments” to prevent escape (Washington, 2006). More recently, much discussion has been given to the neurodiversity movement as a new model for understanding autism and other diagnoses (Dwyer, 2022). Autistic people have raised concerns over autism treatments, like ABA therapy, as generally being aimed at producing neurotypical-looking behavior, resulting in masking and psychological distress (Dwyer, 2022). These facts provide important context for the information more traditionally found in our textbooks (see OSF project page for assignment example, Calma-Roddin, 2024).

Hearing the stories of disabled people with different diagnoses is also important so that students understand the experience of the very real people we are talking about. This prevents dehumanization, such as disabled people being reduced to a list of symptoms, or something broken to be fixed. Further, when students hear about bias and ableism from those who are affected by it, this allows them an opportunity to develop concern about how bias affects others, an important element for reducing bias (e.g., Devine et al., 2012).

Incorporating videos into class activities is an easy way to implement this. YouTube is a helpful source for these, including TED/TEDx Talks. Selecting videos in a way consistent with Young et al. (2019) may be helpful. They used a TED talk with a young college student speaker to encourage “engagement and connection” due to students’ similarity to the speaker (p. 957). One might select videos with speakers who are diverse and/or representative of the student population to facilitate such connection (see OSF project page for example videos and lesson plan, Calma-Roddin, 2024).

For instance, when I teach about aphasia, I show videos to demonstrate different speech patterns associated with damage to different brain areas and to discuss recovery. We follow Sarah (Scott) Dickens, who experienced a stroke in her late teens, over more than ten years. Just months after her stroke, it is clear she has difficulty speaking (Instant Neuro, 2016). Later videos show improvement in speech, and an opportunity to get to know Sarah. Nine years after her stroke, Sarah mentions she is working a full time-job (SymphUK, 2018). Two years later, she is engaged (SymphUK, 2020). As we watch, I ask students what they notice about her speech and any other reactions they have. This year, when Sarah announced her engagement, one student asked, “how can she get married with aphasia?” This question was related to whether Sarah has memory deficits that would impact her memory of her husband. This is perhaps a misunderstanding of aphasia, but perhaps also an assumption of additional cognitive impairments because of Sarah's speech impairment. This question also potentially connects to other ableist assumptions many of us hold about disabled people's lives. I corrected the misunderstanding about Sarah's memory. I noted that Sarah has a full-time job and there is no reason she cannot have a full, normal life, even if, at times, her speech and how she does things may be different than how people without aphasia do things. Looking back, I could have asked students to consider why such a difference even has meaning to us. We could have reflected on our own interdependence in relationships and uniqueness as individuals, qualities sometimes more salient in disabled people, but no less true of nondisabled people.

We watch other videos of individuals with depression, bipolar disorder, OCD, and schizophrenia. These videos challenge stereotypes about disability and diagnoses. Students see that these disabled individuals are not helpless or scary. In fact, they are a lot like them. It is important to pair these videos with discussions to correct misconceptions, help students unpack ableism where it surfaces, and help prevent students from adopting ableist views. For instance, these activities should give students the opportunity to see people with diverse disabilities living ordinary lives like the ordinary people they are. It is important to avoid students seeing these examples as “inspiration porn” (Young, 2012), a common form of ableism in which disabled people are held up as inspirational heroes simply for doing everyday tasks.

Conclusion

The psychology curriculum, with its focus on behavior, cognitions, and affect, is an often-untapped opportunity for promoting anti-ableism. The methods recommended previously and materials shared are a starting point for building anti-ableism into topics many of us already teach. Specifically, these suggestions build bias-reducing interventions into curriculum in the form of educational content, raising awareness of implicit bias, contact, and training in bias-reducing strategies.

Although methods like contact (e.g., videos) might not reduce implicit bias (Reddyhough et al., 2023; Young et al., 2019), they may still reduce explicit bias (Reddyhough et al., 2023). This is useful as explicit attitudes have been found to be more related to intended behaviors than implicit attitudes (Karpinski et al., 2005), suggesting that addressing explicit bias may reduce some manifestations of ableism that entail conscious decisions to act, such as offering unwanted help.

Future research should assess the strategies named here, not only for their effectiveness, but also to test how long any effect may last. It may be of interest to test not only individual activities, but a coordinated effort to implement these types of strategies across the psychology curriculum. Implementation across the curriculum would give psychology students continued exposure—across courses and years—to anti-ableist ideas and practice with strategies. This is consistent with recommendations and evidence for long-term bias reduction in the literature, which suggest the need for interventions at multiple times to create long-term effects (Devine et al., 2012; Young et al., 2019).