X. Qian, K. Shogren, Omolola A. Odejimi, T. Little
{"title":"自我决定在残疾类别中的差异:来自2012年全国纵向过渡研究的发现","authors":"X. Qian, K. Shogren, Omolola A. Odejimi, T. Little","doi":"10.1177/1044207320964396","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Researchers have established variability in self-determination scores across disability groups, but most nationally representative research has used data collected over a decade ago from the National Longitudinal Transition Study 2 (NLTS2). To provide an updated analysis of differences in characteristics of self-determination (i.e., autonomy, psychological empowerment, self-realization) across disability groups, this study analyzed data from the recently completed National Longitudinal Transition Study 2012 (NLTS2012). The authors tested measurement equivalence across seven disability groups: high-incidence disabilities (learning disabilities, emotional disturbances, speech or language impairments, and other health impairments), sensory disabilities (visual and hearing impairment), multiple disabilities (multiple disabilities and deaf-blindness), intellectual disability, traumatic brain injury, orthopedic impairments, and autism spectrum disorder (ASD). Students in the multiple disabilities, intellectual disability, and ASD groups showed lower self-determination scores compared with other disability groups. Greater variability was also found in scores among these groups. Implications for assessment research practice, and policy are highlighted.","PeriodicalId":46868,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Disability Policy Studies","volume":"32 1","pages":"245 - 256"},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2020-12-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/1044207320964396","citationCount":"6","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Differences in Self-Determination Across Disability Categories: Findings From National Longitudinal Transition Study 2012\",\"authors\":\"X. Qian, K. Shogren, Omolola A. Odejimi, T. Little\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/1044207320964396\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Researchers have established variability in self-determination scores across disability groups, but most nationally representative research has used data collected over a decade ago from the National Longitudinal Transition Study 2 (NLTS2). To provide an updated analysis of differences in characteristics of self-determination (i.e., autonomy, psychological empowerment, self-realization) across disability groups, this study analyzed data from the recently completed National Longitudinal Transition Study 2012 (NLTS2012). The authors tested measurement equivalence across seven disability groups: high-incidence disabilities (learning disabilities, emotional disturbances, speech or language impairments, and other health impairments), sensory disabilities (visual and hearing impairment), multiple disabilities (multiple disabilities and deaf-blindness), intellectual disability, traumatic brain injury, orthopedic impairments, and autism spectrum disorder (ASD). Students in the multiple disabilities, intellectual disability, and ASD groups showed lower self-determination scores compared with other disability groups. Greater variability was also found in scores among these groups. Implications for assessment research practice, and policy are highlighted.\",\"PeriodicalId\":46868,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Disability Policy Studies\",\"volume\":\"32 1\",\"pages\":\"245 - 256\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-12-16\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/1044207320964396\",\"citationCount\":\"6\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Disability Policy Studies\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/1044207320964396\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"REHABILITATION\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Disability Policy Studies","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/1044207320964396","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"REHABILITATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
Differences in Self-Determination Across Disability Categories: Findings From National Longitudinal Transition Study 2012
Researchers have established variability in self-determination scores across disability groups, but most nationally representative research has used data collected over a decade ago from the National Longitudinal Transition Study 2 (NLTS2). To provide an updated analysis of differences in characteristics of self-determination (i.e., autonomy, psychological empowerment, self-realization) across disability groups, this study analyzed data from the recently completed National Longitudinal Transition Study 2012 (NLTS2012). The authors tested measurement equivalence across seven disability groups: high-incidence disabilities (learning disabilities, emotional disturbances, speech or language impairments, and other health impairments), sensory disabilities (visual and hearing impairment), multiple disabilities (multiple disabilities and deaf-blindness), intellectual disability, traumatic brain injury, orthopedic impairments, and autism spectrum disorder (ASD). Students in the multiple disabilities, intellectual disability, and ASD groups showed lower self-determination scores compared with other disability groups. Greater variability was also found in scores among these groups. Implications for assessment research practice, and policy are highlighted.
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Disability Policy Studies addresses compelling, variable issues in ethics, policy, and law related to individuals with disabilities. A major focus is quantitative and qualitative policy research. Articles have implications in fields such as education, law, sociology, public health, family studies, medicine, social work, and public administration. Occasional special series discuss current problems or areas needing more in-depth research, for example, disability and aging, policy concerning families of children with disabilities, oppression and disability, school violence policies and interventions, and systems change in supporting individuals with disabilities.