Character Strengths Across Disabilities: An International Exploratory Study and Implications for Positive Psychiatry and Psychology

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to examine the differences in character strengths for people with disabilities by using an international dataset by the VIA Institiute on Character. Specifically, we aimed to explore (a) the top and bottom five character strengths reported by different disability groups and all people with disabilities more broadly, and (b) group differences in each character strength and total character strengths. The investigator contacted the VIA Institute on Character (http://www.viacharacter.org/) for obtaining the dataset for the current study. After data cleaning, our sample size resulted in 11,699 people with disabilities. Among most people with disabilities, the top five character strengths scores were love of learning, honesty, appreciation of beauty and excellence, kindness, and fairness. The bottom five character strengths scores were self-regulation, perseverance, zest, spirituality, and prudence. Knowing that there is heterogeneity in character strengths across groups gives us a better understanding of the areas that people with different disabilities and conditions might thrive and provides clinicians and practitioners with a more nuanced understanding for how to possibly intervene with their clients. Positive psychiatry and psychology implications are discussed.

Examining cognitive accessibility of the VIA Inventory of Strengths for adults with intellectual disability

“…Recent research suggests that adults with intellectual disability may report lower levels of strengths compared to adults with other types of disabilities (Umucu et al, 2022). However, additional research is needed to identify if this is due to internalised ableism, lack of accessi-…”

“…Lastly, we observed the importance of revising items that require reverse use of the response scale. In a previous study of character strengths in individuals with a range of disabilities, including intellectual disability, the VIA Inventory Strengths‐Positive was used (Umucu et al, 2022). This version of the VIA only includes positively worded items.…”

“…The VIA Inventory of Strengths provides individuals with intellectual disability the valuable opportunity to reflect on their strengths. Recent research suggests that adults with intellectual disability may report lower levels of strengths compared to adults with other types of disabilities (Umucu et al, 2022). However, additional research is needed to identify if this is due to internalised ableism, lack of accessible measures, and/or measures that are not inclusive of strengths unique to adults with intellectual disability.…”

“…These findings are aligned with other studies' findings on the use of self‐report measures for youth and young adults with intellectual and developmental disabilities, which indicate that providing visuals, examples, self‐pacing, simple language, and other individualised supports can improve access for this population (e.g., Greenberg et al, 2021; Nicolaidis et al, 2020; Schwartz et al, 2018; Stancliffe et al, 2014). Of note, recently, the VIA‐Positive (a version of the VIA Inventory that includes only positively worded items) was used by 306 people with intellectual disability in an international sample; however, the authors did not report any exploration of accessibility or valid use (Umucu et al, 2022). Together, these preliminary studies suggest that the VIA Inventory of Strengths holds promise for use with adults with intellectual disability.…”

Creating a college adjustment index score for student veterans with and without disabilities

“…Our scale will also help researchers and clinicians have a balanced practice given our scale measures emotional immunity, college problems, and help seeking attitudes, which is a holistic approach. This will also help researchers and clinicians have strength-based research and practice focusing on positive psychology factors such as grit, character strengths, gratitude, resilience in rehabilitation practice including psychiatric rehabilitation [e.g., (71,(91)(92)(93)(94)(95)].…”