Search citation statements
Paper Sections
Citation Types
Year Published
Publication Types
Relationship
Authors
Journals
Disabled people need to be activists given the many problematic lived realities they face. However, they frequently encounter obstacles in traditional offline activism. Online activism could be a potential alternative. The objective of this scoping review is to examine the extent and nature of the coverage of disabled people in the academic literature that focuses on online activism. We searched the abstracts in Scopus, Web of Science, and the 70 databases in EBSCO-HOST for the presence of 57 terms linked to online activism or online tools or places for online activism, which generated 18,069 abstracts for qualitative analysis. Of the 18,069 abstracts, only 54 discussed online the activism by disabled people. Among these 54 relevant abstracts, only one contained the term “Global South”. No relevant abstracts were found that contained the terms “Metaverse” or “Democrac*” together with “activis*”. Only two relevant abstracts contained the phrase “digital citizen*”. Out of the 57 terms, 28 had no hits. The thematic analysis identified 24 themes: 6 themes in 30 abstracts had a positive sentiment, 7 themes in 30 abstracts had a negative sentiment, and 11 themes present in 23 abstracts had a neutral sentiment. There were three main themes: the positive role and use of online activism; the technical accessibility barriers to online activism; and the attitudinal accessibility problems arising from ableist judgments. The intersectionality of the disability identity with other marginalized identities and the issue of empowerment were rarely addressed, and ability judgment-based concepts beyond the term’s “ableism” and “ableist” were not used. The study underscores the necessity for further research given the few relevant abstracts found. The study also indicates that actions are needed on barriers to online activism and that examples for best practices exist that could be applied more often. Future studies should also incorporate a broader range of ability judgment-based concepts to enrich the analysis and to support the empowerment of disabled activists.
Disabled people need to be activists given the many problematic lived realities they face. However, they frequently encounter obstacles in traditional offline activism. Online activism could be a potential alternative. The objective of this scoping review is to examine the extent and nature of the coverage of disabled people in the academic literature that focuses on online activism. We searched the abstracts in Scopus, Web of Science, and the 70 databases in EBSCO-HOST for the presence of 57 terms linked to online activism or online tools or places for online activism, which generated 18,069 abstracts for qualitative analysis. Of the 18,069 abstracts, only 54 discussed online the activism by disabled people. Among these 54 relevant abstracts, only one contained the term “Global South”. No relevant abstracts were found that contained the terms “Metaverse” or “Democrac*” together with “activis*”. Only two relevant abstracts contained the phrase “digital citizen*”. Out of the 57 terms, 28 had no hits. The thematic analysis identified 24 themes: 6 themes in 30 abstracts had a positive sentiment, 7 themes in 30 abstracts had a negative sentiment, and 11 themes present in 23 abstracts had a neutral sentiment. There were three main themes: the positive role and use of online activism; the technical accessibility barriers to online activism; and the attitudinal accessibility problems arising from ableist judgments. The intersectionality of the disability identity with other marginalized identities and the issue of empowerment were rarely addressed, and ability judgment-based concepts beyond the term’s “ableism” and “ableist” were not used. The study underscores the necessity for further research given the few relevant abstracts found. The study also indicates that actions are needed on barriers to online activism and that examples for best practices exist that could be applied more often. Future studies should also incorporate a broader range of ability judgment-based concepts to enrich the analysis and to support the empowerment of disabled activists.
According to the World Bank, the world will not meet the SDG of ending extreme poverty in 2030. Disabled people live disproportionally below the poverty line. Many societal developments and discussions can influence the poverty level of disabled people. This study aimed to better understand the academic engagement with the poverty of disabled people in general and in Canada. To fulfill this aim, we performed a scoping review of academic abstracts obtained from SCOPUS, the 70 databases of EBSCO-HOST, and Web of Science. We performed a frequency count and a content analysis of abstracts containing the terms “poverty” or “impoverish*” or “socioeconomic” or “SES” or “income”. We ascertained how the abstracts engaged with the poverty of disabled people in general and in Canada and in conjunction with keywords linked to a select set of societal developments and discussions we saw as impacting poverty and being impacted by poverty. We also looked at the use of concepts coined to discuss ability judgments and social problems with being occupied, two areas that impact the poverty of disabled people. We found that disabled people were mentioned in 0.86% of the abstracts using the term “poverty” in general and 4.1% (88 abstracts) for Canada. For the terms “impoverish*”, “socioeconomic”, “SES”, and “income”, the numbers were 3.15% in general and 0.94% for Canada. The poverty of disabled people who also belong to other marginalized groups was rarely covered. Our qualitative content analysis revealed that many of the hit-count positive abstracts did not cover the poverty of disabled people. We found 22 relevant abstracts that covered the poverty of disabled people in conjunction with technologies, eight in conjunction with accessibility not already mentioned under technology, eight with intersectionality, seven with “activis*” or advocacy, three with sustainability, two with climate change, and none for burnout or ally. The occupation and ability judgment-focused concepts were rarely or not at all employed to discuss the poverty of disabled people. Our findings suggest many gaps in the coverage of the poverty of disabled people that need to be fixed.
Health equity is an important aspect of wellbeing and is impacted by many social determinants. The UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD) is a testament to the lack of health equity and the many health inequity issues based on social determinants experienced by disabled people. The health equity/health inequity situation of disabled people is even worse if their identities intersect with those of other marginalized groups. Many societal developments and discussions including discussions around the different sustainability pillars can influence the health equity/health inequity of disabled people. The general aim of this study was to better understand the academic engagement with the health equity and health inequity of disabled people beyond access to healthcare. To fulfill our aim, we performed a scoping review of academic abstracts using a hit count manifest coding and content analysis approach to abstracts obtained from SCOPUS, the 70 databases of EBSCO-HOST, Web of Science, and PubMed. Health equity and health inequity abstracts rarely cover disabled people as a group, less with many specific groups of disabled people, and even less or not at all with the intersectionality of disabled people belonging to other marginalized groups. Many social determinants that can influence the health equity and health inequity of disabled people were not present. Ability-based concepts beyond the term ableism, intersectionality-based concepts, and non-health based occupational concepts were not present in the abstracts. Our qualitative content analysis of the 162 abstracts containing health equity and disability terms and 177 containing health inequity and disability terms found 65 relevant abstracts that covered problems with health equity disabled people face, 17 abstracts covered factors of health inequity, and 21 abstracts covered actions needed to deal with health inequity. Our findings suggest a need as well as many opportunities for academic fields and academic, policy, and community discussions to close the gaps in the coverage of health equity and health inequity of disabled people.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.