Identity management in the workplace: Coworker perceptions of individuals with contested disabilities

IF 1.2 Q3 REHABILITATION Journal of Vocational Rehabilitation Pub Date : 2022-08-04 DOI:10.3233/jvr-221208
Rebecca Godard, Mikki R. Hebl, Christine L. Nittrouer
{"title":"Identity management in the workplace: Coworker perceptions of individuals with contested disabilities","authors":"Rebecca Godard, Mikki R. Hebl, Christine L. Nittrouer","doi":"10.3233/jvr-221208","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"BACKGROUND: Much of the existing research on disability and disability-related workplace accommodations presume that disabilities are visible and commonly accepted. Yet, many disabilities are invisible and contested, or perceived as fake, low-severity/minor, and/or illegitimate. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this research is to investigate the effect of identity management strategies that individuals with contested disabilities might use when requesting accommodations in a workplace setting. METHODS: We used two electronic experiments to investigate the effect of identity management strategies on perceived fairness of accommodations and attributions about individuals requesting accommodations. Studies 1 and 2 used online surveys to collect data from 117 and 184 working adults, respectively. RESULTS: Study 1 indicates that four invisible disabilities (chronic fatigue syndrome, attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder, generalized anxiety disorder, and chronic migraine) are viewed as significantly less legitimate than the visible disability paraplegia. In study 2, any form of disclosure of a contested disability (vs. no disclosure) resulted in higher perceived fairness and more positive attributions about the person requesting accommodations. There were minimal differences between the different identity management strategies tested. CONCLUSIONS: Workplaces should work to create spaces in which employees can disclose contested disabilities to managers and coworkers without fear of enhanced stigmatization.","PeriodicalId":47208,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Vocational Rehabilitation","volume":"32 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.2000,"publicationDate":"2022-08-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Vocational Rehabilitation","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3233/jvr-221208","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"REHABILITATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Much of the existing research on disability and disability-related workplace accommodations presume that disabilities are visible and commonly accepted. Yet, many disabilities are invisible and contested, or perceived as fake, low-severity/minor, and/or illegitimate. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this research is to investigate the effect of identity management strategies that individuals with contested disabilities might use when requesting accommodations in a workplace setting. METHODS: We used two electronic experiments to investigate the effect of identity management strategies on perceived fairness of accommodations and attributions about individuals requesting accommodations. Studies 1 and 2 used online surveys to collect data from 117 and 184 working adults, respectively. RESULTS: Study 1 indicates that four invisible disabilities (chronic fatigue syndrome, attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder, generalized anxiety disorder, and chronic migraine) are viewed as significantly less legitimate than the visible disability paraplegia. In study 2, any form of disclosure of a contested disability (vs. no disclosure) resulted in higher perceived fairness and more positive attributions about the person requesting accommodations. There were minimal differences between the different identity management strategies tested. CONCLUSIONS: Workplaces should work to create spaces in which employees can disclose contested disabilities to managers and coworkers without fear of enhanced stigmatization.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
工作场所的身份管理:同事对残疾人士的看法
背景:许多关于残疾和残疾相关的工作场所住宿的现有研究假设残疾是可见的和普遍接受的。然而,许多残疾是不可见的、有争议的,或者被认为是虚假的、低严重性/轻微的和/或不合法的。目的:本研究的目的是调查有争议性残疾的个人在工作场所要求住宿时可能使用的身份管理策略的效果。方法:我们采用两个电子实验来研究身份管理策略对住宿公平感知的影响,以及对住宿请求个体归因的影响。研究1和研究2分别通过在线调查收集了117名和184名在职成年人的数据。结果:研究1表明,四种隐性残疾(慢性疲劳综合征、注意缺陷/多动障碍、广泛性焦虑障碍和慢性偏头痛)的合法性明显低于可见残疾截瘫。在研究2中,任何形式的披露有争议的残疾(与不披露相比)都会导致更高的公平感和对请求住宿的人的更积极的归因。所测试的不同身份管理策略之间的差异很小。结论:工作场所应该努力创造空间,让员工可以向经理和同事透露有争议的残疾,而不必担心会增加污名化。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.70
自引率
33.30%
发文量
45
期刊介绍: The Journal of Vocational Rehabilitation will provide a forum for discussion and dissemination of information about the major areas that constitute vocational rehabilitation. Periodically, there will be topics that are directed either to specific themes such as long term care or different disability groups such as those with psychiatric impairment. Often a guest editor who is an expert in the given area will provide leadership on a specific topic issue. However, all articles received directly or submitted for a special issue are welcome for peer review. The emphasis will be on publishing rehabilitation articles that have immediate application for helping rehabilitation counselors, psychologists and other professionals in providing direct services to people with disabilities.
期刊最新文献
Needs of human resource professionals in implicit bias and disability inclusion training: A focus group study. Effect of company-driven disability diversity initiatives: A multi-case study across industries Vocational rehabilitation applicants, the services they receive, and their employment outcomes Discovering ME: An innovative planning tool for students with significant disabilities ABLE account use among supplemental security income recipients
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1