Mixed method approaches in open-ended, qualitative, exploratory research involving people with intellectual disabilities

Author:

Ottmann Goetz1,Crosbie Jenny2

Affiliation:

1. Deakin University/Uniting Care Community Options, Australia

2. Deakin University, Australia

Abstract

People with intellectual disabilities and their families are increasingly being asked to provide input into the services they receive. Under the aegis of the United Nation Convention of the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, support plans crucially depend on a participant’s articulation of his or her preferences and life goals. Yet, research highlighting the strengths and weaknesses of different methodological approaches has not been published. This study compared the results of a suite of qualitative methods (questionnaire, focus group, semi-structured interview, “case in point” ethnographic observation, photographic images, and carer proxy response) by identifying the advantages and disadvantages of each method employed. It also foregrounds an effective mix of methods that is likely to produce an adequate representation of the views of people with disabilities within the context of open-ended exploratory questions.

Publisher

SAGE Publications

Subject

Psychiatry and Mental health,Health Professions (miscellaneous)

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3