Swedish and English adolescents' attitudes toward the community presence of people with disabilities

Abstract

Predictions derived from North American formulations of normalization suggest that contemporary care policies for people with intellectual disabilities will have a positive impact on societal perceptions of this group. To test this, adolescents' attitudes towards the community presence of people with disabilities in a normalization-advanced country (Sweden) and a relatively less normalization-advanced country (England) were compared. It was expected that Swedish and English participants would hold equally positive views of people with a non-intellectual disability, whereas English participants would hold less positive views than Swedish participants of people with an intellectual disability. The results gave limited support to this expectation when dimensions of participants' attitudes derived from a factor analysis were analysed. These results are discussed with reference to other factors that may influence attitudes in the two countries. In addition, implications for future research and practice are outlined.

Early Exposure to People with Physical and Sensory Disabilities and Later Attitudes Toward Social Interactions and Inclusion

“…In the realm of social exposure, Hastings, Sjöström, and Stevenage (1998) found a small but significant relationship between contact with people with disabilities in general and positive attitudes toward their inclusion in daily life and leisure activities. This held true for both inclusion of people with intellectual impairment and inclusion of people with speech impairment.…”

“…The Social Inclusion Scale (Hastings et al, 1998) is meant to assess the respondent's attitudes regarding whether people with disabilities should participate in ordinary life and leisure activities using autonomy of choice. Twenty-one of 22 items in the original scale were used for this study.…”

“…Total scores were calculated by summing all items. The original 22 item scale showed good test-retest reliability (r = .71) and high internal consistency (Cronbach's α = .87; Hastings et al, 1998). Hastings et al (1998) initially tested the Social Inclusion Scale in two forms.…”

“…The original 22 item scale showed good test-retest reliability (r = .71) and high internal consistency (Cronbach's α = .87; Hastings et al, 1998). Hastings et al (1998) initially tested the Social Inclusion Scale in two forms. It was piloted using the generic phrase, "People with [type of disability] disabilities…" to represent the subject.…”

“…It was piloted using the generic phrase, "People with [type of disability] disabilities…" to represent the subject. The revised version of the scale contained a short vignette about a person named Steven with a learning [intellectual] disability or speech impairment and used the phrase, "People like Steven…" (Hastings et al, 1998). For the sake of simplicity and to avoid participant fatigue caused by using two measures that required reading vignettes, the scale used in the present study had phrasing similar to that used in the Hastings et al pilot study.…”