Stigma, Science, and the search for belonging

Authors: Cailee M. Nelson & Sophie Cramer-Benjamin

This week, the B-RAD lab talked about stigma—how it can lead to ostracism (ignoring or excluding of an individual) and how it shows up in neuroscience research. To guide our discussion, we watched a short video explaining what stigma is and how it develops both in society and within individuals. We especially appreciated how the video broke down social stigma into stereotypes, prejudice, and discrimination, and showed how these forces can push people out of social groups. The video also highlighted self-stigma, which happens when people internalize negative beliefs about themselves, often leading to less social participation and reinforcing the cycle of stigma. 

​First, we talked about how stigma has shaped neuroscience itself. For a long time, neuroscience research was used to rank brains and promote ideas about “superiority”, helping justify and reinforce white supremacy. Neuroscience, as we see it, should be framed as a tool for understanding differences in how brains are wired and how those differences may inform us on how to promote well-being. Stigma also contributes to misdiagnosis, overdiagnosis, and misunderstandings of psychiatric and neurodevelopmental conditions. These issues are especially evident in the autistic community, where autistic girls are often underdiagnosed due to stereotypes about both autism and how girls are expected to behave in society.  

Next, we explored how stigma is closely connected to social exclusion, using a model from Reinhard and colleagues (2020) to ground the conversation. This model describes a “vicious cycle” of ostracism, in which psychiatric symptoms increase the likelihood of being excluded, and exclusion in turn reinforces those symptoms. A major point of discussion was the need to better understand how individual factors might influence or interrupt this cycle. These factors include neurobiological differences, social environments, and sensitivity to rejection. While some level of ostracism is a common human experience, people who are stigmatized often face it more frequently and more intensely. This highlights the importance of identifying ways to support individuals through resources, adaptive coping strategies, and resilience-building efforts. 
​
Finally, we turned to the question of where intervention efforts should be focused—on individuals, environments, or both. Many of us agreed that effective change likely requires a combination of approaches. Individual-level interventions can help build coping skills and resilience, while environmental interventions can focus on school- or community-based programs that prevent ostracism, offer support groups, and provide resources to reduce its impact. We also reflected on what this means for our own lab’s work. Beyond producing research findings, we want to create meaningful deliverables for the community, such as accessible resources that explain how differences in brain responses relate to well-being and how both individuals and communities can take action to support social connection and minimize impacts of stigma.