Disability and Social Attitudes: The Numbers Behind Everyday Prejudices

Scope’s research was based on an online survey of 4,015 adults with disabilities, conducted between May 12 and June 16, 2022. It also included telephone interviews with 100 people with disabilities and focus groups with 24 participants. Scope states that people with disabilities were involved in the development of the survey questions and categories.

The respondents reported the following experiences during the previous five years:

• 72% reported experiencing negative attitudes or behaviors.
• 33% reported that other people made assumptions about their abilities or judged them.
• 25% reported being accused of faking their impairment or not being disabled.
• 19% reported being stared at or receiving looks that they perceived as negative.

These figures should be interpreted carefully. The 72% figure captures the overall experience of negative attitudes or behaviors, while the other figures describe specific experiences. They should not be added together, as respondents may have experienced more than one form of negative treatment. The results describe the experiences reported by the participants, not the attitudes of the entire population of the United Kingdom.

Even with these limitations, the results provide a useful starting point for examining how ordinary interactions can convey exclusion, undermine a person’s credibility, or limit opportunities.

The finding that 33% of respondents experienced assumptions or judgments about their abilities points to a widespread societal problem: people may infer what a person with a disability can do based on a label or appearance, rather than inquiring about their individual circumstances.

Such assumptions can be presented as concern or helpfulness. Someone might assume that a person cannot complete a task, participate in an activity, or make an independent decision. Unsolicited help can also become intrusive when offered without first asking if it is wanted.

Disability encompasses a wide range of physical, sensory, intellectual, and psychosocial experiences. People with similar diagnoses may have different abilities, preferences, and support needs. When other people assume inability, they risk replacing the person’s self-description with their expectations.

Support can be essential for independence and participation. The problem is not the help itself. The difference lies between support that responds to a person’s expressed needs and treatment that assumes the person is unable to make decisions or act on their own. Respect requires recognizing people with disabilities as active participants in decisions that affect their lives.

Scope found that 25% of respondents reported being accused of faking their impairment or not being disabled. This highlights the fact that disability is not always visible.

Some impairments are easily recognizable. Others may be associated with chronic pain, exhaustion, fluctuating symptoms, or experiences that cannot be reliably inferred from appearance. A person may be able to manage an activity one day and have difficulty with it the next, or complete a task while experiencing significant pain or exhaustion.

When observers expect disability to look a certain way, experiences that do not conform to this expectation may be dismissed. People may then feel pressured to disclose private medical information, justify requests for accommodations, or prove that their needs are legitimate.

Administrative procedures for determining eligibility for support differ from everyday suspicion or humiliation. A review may serve a practical purpose, but it does not justify dismissive treatment. Appearance alone is not a reliable basis for deciding whether someone experiences disability or needs support.

Nineteen percent of respondents reported experiencing staring or looks that they perceived as negative. A single look may seem insignificant in itself, but social interaction is shaped by more than just explicit statements. Facial expressions, gestures, and patterns of attention can make a person feel singled out or unwelcome.

Not all staring is necessarily hostile, and the survey does not determine the intent behind individual interactions. However, unwanted attention can become significant when it is part of a repeated pattern. Ordinary activities, such as using public transportation, entering a workplace, or visiting a store, can become socially challenging when a person expects negative reactions.

Inclusion, therefore, encompasses more than just physical access. A building can be accessible, while the social environment remains unpleasant or discouraging. Both practical barriers and interpersonal treatment deserve attention.

The social model of disability, developed through disability activism and research, distinguishes between impairment and the barriers that society creates or perpetuates. These barriers can be physical, institutional, communicative, or attitudinal.

A building without an accessible entrance creates a practical obstacle. An employer who assumes that an applicant with a disability cannot perform a job can create a barrier through an unfounded judgment. A service provider who dismisses a person’s description of their needs can prevent that person from receiving appropriate support.

The social model does not require denying pain, illness, or the reality of an impairment. Instead, it calls on us to recognize that the difficulties people face are not always solely explained by their health conditions. The results from Scope do not prove that every reported interaction caused exclusion, but they document experiences that are relevant to understanding how attitudes can contribute to disabling environments.

This perspective shifts the focus away from asking only how people with disabilities should adapt to societal expectations towards asking which expectations, practices, and environments need to change.

A thematic report published by the UK government in January 2026 provides a broader context. Public Perceptions and Attitudes Towards Disabled People: A Thematic Report examined 69 studies published between 2010 and 2021. It identified recurring themes, including stigmatization, pity, ridicule, infantilization, and assumptions that focus on limitations rather than abilities.

The government report is a review of previous research, not a new national survey. Therefore, it serves a different purpose than the Scope study: it identifies patterns in existing knowledge, rather than providing the same type of survey data. The review also highlights differences among people with disabilities and gaps in the available knowledge.

Together, the sources offer complementary perspectives. Scope provides specific figures on reported experiences. The government review places these experiences within a broader research context. Neither source supports viewing people with disabilities as a homogeneous group, but both emphasize the importance of taking their accounts seriously.

What needs to change?

Improving attitudes requires more than just promoting politeness. People can refrain from inferring abilities or support needs from appearance and instead ask what help, if any, is wanted. Organizations can review whether their procedures, communication, and environments support autonomy and participation.

Media portrayal is also important. When people with disabilities are depicted only as objects of pity, as inspiring exceptions, or as people completely defined by their impairment, narrow narratives can reinforce stereotypes. More diverse portrayals can acknowledge disability without reducing a person to it.

Most importantly, people with disabilities should be involved in decisions about policies, services, and research that affect them. Their experiences should help shape the questions asked, the knowledge gathered, and the solutions developed. Awareness-raising initiatives can be helpful, but their value should be assessed based on whether they improve access, respect, and participation.

Scope’s research gives us reason to take everyday attitudes towards disability seriously. In the 2022 survey, 72% of respondents with disabilities reported experiencing negative attitudes or behaviors during the previous five years. Other findings documented assumptions about abilities, accusations of faking a disability, and unwanted looks.

These figures do not describe the experience of every person with a disability, nor do they measure the attitudes of the entire population of the United Kingdom. Their significance lies in documenting recurring forms of treatment that can undermine dignity and make participation in everyday life more difficult. The broader government review suggests that stigmatization and negative assumptions remain important concerns, while also highlighting gaps in knowledge.

The goal is not simply to replace hostility with sympathy. Even pity can be limiting if it denies a person equality or assumes that others know what is best for them. A more inclusive society recognizes people with disabilities as individuals with diverse abilities, needs, preferences, and goals.

The starting point is simple: do not assume what a person can do, what they need, or what their disability means. Ask, listen, and treat their experience with respect.

References

Scope. (2022). Attitudes research. https://www.scope.org.uk/campaigns/research-policy/attitudes-towards-disabled-people

Simmons, B., Read, S., Parfitt, A., and Blackmore, T. (2026). Public perceptions and attitudes towards disabled people: A thematic report. UK Government. https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/public-perceptions-and-attitudes-towards-disabled-people-in-the-uk/public-perceptions-and-attitudes-towards-disabled-people-a-thematic-report