Striking the golden section in stigma research

---

That is, his neatness emerges as the figure against a background of negative assumptions. In evaluating people’s responses to stigma, it is not enough for them simply to express positive sentiments about labelled individuals. It is the ratio of positive to negative attributions that matters. Reducing stigma may not be about eliminating all negative perceptions and replacing them with positive ones. From the perspective of golden section researchers, it is about altering the ratio of positive to negative evaluations so that they shift towards a traditional, not reverse, golden section pattern.
In some respects, the reverse golden section finding is counterintuitive because it says that positive aspects of stigmatised people actually stand out, while negative aspects fade into the background. However, when something stands out, that means it is seen as the exception rather than the rule. Stigma may best be conceptualised as occurring when negative assumptions form the baseline against which positive ones seem conspicuous. Only when positive attributes are taken for granted does stigma recede.
The golden section hypothesis may also be able to shed some new light on the old-time debate about whether it is labels or behaviour that matters most when it comes to generating stigma. Recent stigma research, exemplified in the work of Link, has upheld the importance of both behaviour and labels. The golden section hypothesis adds theoretical weight to these findings because it implies two things. Firstly, when lacking previous experience with something, people evaluate it using the golden section ratio. The golden section provides a basic framework for organising information in lieu of much else to go on. Whether a traditional or reverse golden section pattern occurs depends on whether negative or positive attributes form the background against which other information is contrasted. Secondly, as people have direct experiences with others, they no longer need to rely on the golden section ratio and instead often base their evaluations on the lessons of their experience.
Therefore, stigma may be reduced by helping shift the ratio of negative to positive evaluations from a reverse golden section pattern towards a traditional golden section pattern. It may also be reduced by increasing positive exposure to stigmatised people. After all, the more positive experience one has with someone, the more one’s evaluations are likely be based on that experience rather than on the reverse golden section’s default ratio for organising information. Researchers should also look at whether the reverse golden section can account for localised stigma unique to particular social groups.

Given that studies on stigma and the reverse golden section are so new, there are many fascinating and important questions to be examined about the relationship between them.

Jonathan D. Raskin is at the State University of New York at New Paltz raskinj@newpaltz.edu

This article originally appeared in “The Psychologist”, published by the British Psychological Society. For more, and to subscribe, see www.thepsychologist.org.uk

Polskie tłumaczenie tekstu