"stigma effect" is correct and usable in written English.
It is typically used to refer to the process whereby people are marginalized due to negative perceptions others have of them or of certain behaviors. For example: The stigma effect of poverty often leads to people being disenfranchised from certain civil and economic rights.
For all vignettes, generic lay labels were not associated with stigma, but also rarely had a counter stigma effect.
This is likely to be explained by a stigma effect where beneficiaries are perceived by the employers as inferior workers than otherwise identical workers (Kluve et al. 1999).
If social assistance is associated with a stigma effect, this coefficient is expected to be negative and significantly different from zero.
Economist G Cornelis van Kooten, of the University of Victoria in British Columbia, admits that he devised formulas "in spite of a paucity of data" and that factoring in a stigma effect was an afterthought, and "no empirical evidence for it exists".
Commonly, they're hard to reach they live in remote places, due to stigma effects or other issues, they don't wish to come to collect assistance provided three agencies.
This choice to take the lump sum may have been in part to avoid stigma effects.
His recent work has focused on developing tools for detecting and measuring state dependency ("stigma" effects) in unemployment dynamics.
In the economic literature, this behavior is explained by stigma effects associated with the use of social assistance (Moffitt, 1983).
They presumably resulted from stigma effects and creaming: Programme participants were not as hard-to-place as had been intended by the legislative authority.
One reason the EITC might be more effective than hiring credits at creating jobs is that it presumably does not generate stigma effects, since the employer typically has no idea whether an employee is eligible for or receiving the EITC.22 (And as a policy to increase income from work, for the many people already employed who get an EITC payment, stigma is irrelevant).
Given that assignment to groups was random, so that the only difference was the information given to employers and workers, it is plausible to interpret the worse outcomes for those with vouchers as indicating adverse stigma effects that reduced the effect of the hiring credits.
