Should I Say “Disabled People” or “People with Disabilities”? Language Preferences of Disabled People Between Identity- and Person-First Language

Sharif, Ather; McCall, Aedan Liam; Bolante, Kianna Roces

doi:10.1145/3517428.3544813

Cited by 24 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 33 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Within disability communities, there are varying perspectives regarding identity-first language (i.e., “disabled people”) and people-first language (i.e., “people with disabilities”). Recent studies on the topic note that language preference varies at the individual and community levels (Bury et al , 2023; Sharif et al , 2022). Sharif et al 2022 also note that preferences differ throughout disabilities, age groups, and gender identities.…”

Section: Notesmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Critical pedagogy and disability in participatory research: a review

May

2024

ILS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose The literature review explores how multidisciplinary approaches based on critical pedagogy and participatory research can provide frameworks for equitable partnerships and genuine participation in educational design and research practices. Additionally, the essay aims to expand understandings of equitable engagement within educational research and design based on principles from critical pedagogy. Design/methodology/approach The essay draws from diverse literature in the learning sciences, health informatics, industrial design, disability studies, ethnic studies, rehabilitation science, and to a lesser extent HCI research to understand how critical pedagogy and participatory research methods can provide useful frameworks for disabled peoples' equitable engagement and genuine participation in educational research and design. The literature reviewed in the paper concern topics such as participatory approaches to community development with disabled adults, the implementation of university-initiated community partnerships, participatory research with students and disabled people, and the importance of culturally-responsive research practices. The design literature in this review explores various arenas such as the co-design of assistive technologies with disabled children and adults and the design of curricula for students with and without disabilities. This review focuses on research practices that engender disabled peoples' participation in educational research and design, with focus on developing multidisciplinary frameworks for such research. Findings The literature review concludes that participatory research methods and critical pedagogy provide useful frameworks for disabled peoples’ participation in educational design and research practices. Critical pedagogy and participatory design allow for the genuine participation of disabled people in the research process. Social implications Emphases on collaboration and collective knowledge-building in social transformation are present in scholarship concerning critical pedagogy, participatory research, and disability studies. However, these connections have been routinely underexplored in the literature. This paper aims to underscore these integral connections as a means to build solidarity between disabled and other marginalized people. Originality/value The connections between participatory research methods, critical pedagogy, and disability studies have been previously underexplored. The literature review proposes a combined approach, which has the potential to radically transform multiple realms of research beyond the learning and information sciences.

show abstract

Section: Notesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Recent studies on the topic note that language preference varies at the individual and community levels (Bury et al , 2023; Sharif et al , 2022). Sharif et al 2022 also note that preferences differ throughout disabilities, age groups, and gender identities.…”

Section: Notesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Critical pedagogy and disability in participatory research: a review

May

2024

ILS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In addition, individuals have their own naming preferences and will not always prefer person-first language (e.g. Endeavour Foundation, 2020; Sharif et al, 2022; Young, 2022). Some may prefer dis abled to indicate that they are disabled by society, highlighting ableism and disabling social processes.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Super, social, medical: Person-first and identity-first representations of disabled people in Australian newspapers, 2000–2019

Potts

Bednarek

Watharow

2023

Discourse & Society

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper provides an interdisciplinary, corpus-based study of naming practices for disabled people in a collection of Australian newspaper articles spanning 20 years. We analyse head nouns, modifiers, and coordinating structures for both person-first and identity-first language, drawing on social actor analysis as well as previously-identified models of media representation. Overall, we find similar usage of both naming practices with respect to the types of social actors that occur, the categorisations of disabilities that are referenced, and the associations that are established, with only minor differences. Additionally, both naming practices are strongly associated with the medical and social pathology models of media representation, which emphasise disadvantage, with almost a total absence of ‘progressive’ models, which represent people as multifaceted agents. We conclude by emphasising the need for the news media to incorporate the voices and preferences of disabled people themselves.

show abstract

“…We acknowledge that there are active and ongoing discussions around the two with some of them captured in Sharif et al . [ 120 ].…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Contributing to Accessibility Datasets: Reflections on Sharing Study Data by Blind People

Kamikubo

Lee

Kacorri

2023

Proceedings of the 2023 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

To ensure that AI-infused systems work for disabled people, we need to bring accessibility datasets sourced from this community in the development lifecycle. However, there are many ethical and privacy concerns limiting greater data inclusion, making such datasets not readily available. We present a pair of studies where 13 blind participants engage in data capturing activities and reflect with and without probing on various factors that influence their decision to share their data via an AI dataset. We see how different factors influence blind participants' willingness to share study data as they assess risk-benefit tradeoffs. The majority support sharing of their data to improve technology but also express concerns over commercial use, associated metadata, and the lack of transparency about the impact of their data. These insights have implications for the development of responsible practices for stewarding accessibility datasets, and can contribute to broader discussions in this area. CCS CONCEPTS• Human-centered computing → Human computer interaction (HCI); Accessibility; • Social and professional topics → People with disabilities; • Security and privacy → Human and societal aspects of security and privacy.

show abstract

Should I Say “Disabled People” or “People with Disabilities”? Language Preferences of Disabled People Between Identity- and Person-First Language

Cited by 24 publications

References 33 publications

Critical pedagogy and disability in participatory research: a review

Critical pedagogy and disability in participatory research: a review

Super, social, medical: Person-first and identity-first representations of disabled people in Australian newspapers, 2000–2019

Contributing to Accessibility Datasets: Reflections on Sharing Study Data by Blind People

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About