Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Stigma and stereotyping of marginalized groups often is insidious and shows up in unlikely places, for instance in how clinical trials consider dropouts in treatment research. A surprising number of studies presume that people who do not complete the study protocol relapse and code their data as if they had been observed. There is no good statistical rationale for this treatment of missing data and numerous and more defensible alternative methods are available. We need to be mindful about our attitudes and preconceptions about the people we are intending to help. There is no good reason to continue to support science built on this scientifically indefensible stereotyping, however unintentional.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Stephan Arndt (2009) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: