Silverstein Robert, Julnes George, Nolan Renee
Center for the Study and Advancement of Disability Policy.
Behav Sci Law. 2005;23(3):399-448. doi: 10.1002/bsl.632.
Enabling persons with disabilities to prepare for and engage in gainful employment has become a priority concern in U.S. society. As a result, federal and state policymakers are adopting employment-related initiatives designed to enhance the employment rate of persons with disabilities. Policymakers need credible evidence in order to assess and reform these initiatives. This recognized need, however, begs the question of what constitutes 'credible evidence.' Of particular concern in the disability policy arena is the debate over the types of conclusion about employment rates that can and cannot be drawn from analyses of national survey data sets. This article connects standard research methodology concepts with the complexities of evaluating disability policy to help stakeholders appreciate the issues involved in this debate. This appreciation can help policymakers (1) recognize unwarranted cause-and-effect conclusions based solely on existing national survey data and (2) demand better data and stronger research designs to complement the potential over-reliance on correlational studies using problematic survey data to estimate policy impacts. To this end, the article concludes with a practical framework with a checklist for assessing the adequacy of research regarding the employment rate of persons with disabilities.
使残疾人能够为有收益的就业做好准备并参与其中,已成为美国社会的一个优先关注事项。因此,联邦和州政策制定者正在采取与就业相关的举措,旨在提高残疾人的就业率。政策制定者需要可靠的证据来评估和改革这些举措。然而,这种已被认可的需求引发了一个问题,即什么构成“可靠的证据”。在残疾政策领域,特别令人关注的是关于从国家调查数据集分析中可以和不可以得出的就业率结论类型的辩论。本文将标准研究方法概念与评估残疾政策的复杂性联系起来,以帮助利益相关者理解这场辩论中所涉及的问题。这种理解有助于政策制定者:(1)识别仅基于现有国家调查数据得出的无根据的因果结论;(2)要求获得更好的数据和更强有力的研究设计,以补充可能过度依赖使用有问题的调查数据进行相关研究来估计政策影响的情况。为此,本文最后给出了一个实用框架,其中包含一份用于评估有关残疾人就业率研究充分性的清单。