Khemka I, Hickson L, Casella M, Accetturi N, Rooney M E
Center for Opportunities and Outcomes for People with Disabilities, Teachers College, Columbia University, NewYork, USA.
J Intellect Disabil Res. 2009 Apr;53(4):353-62. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2788.2009.01152.x.
High rates of victimization have raised concerns about the ability of adolescents with intellectual disabilities (ID) to avoid and escape from harmful situations and to make decisions in their own best interest. The present study was designed to assess the impact of specific coercive tactics on the decision-making of adolescents with ID.
Forty-eight adolescents with ID participated in the study. They were asked to respond to a series of brief vignettes depicting equal numbers of situations involving coercion with a lure, coercion with a threat, and no specific coercive tactic. Performance was assessed in terms of independent, prevention-focused decisions, reporting decisions and responses to fact and inference comprehension questions.
Overall, participants suggested independent, prevention-focused decisions only about half the time. They were more likely to suggest independent, prevention-focused decisions in situations with no specific coercive tactic or coercion with a lure than in situations involving a threat. However, reporting decisions were more likely in situations involving coercion with a threat than in the other two conditions and both fact and inference comprehension were best in situations involving coercion with a threat.
Results indicated that adolescents with ID are not well-prepared to handle situations on their own that involve coercion, especially coercion with a threat. Because comprehension did not appear to be a key source of the decision-making difficulty in this study, further research is needed to examine all aspects of the decision-making process as a basis for the design of effective interventions.
高受害率引发了人们对智障青少年避免和逃离有害情境以及做出符合自身最佳利益决策能力的担忧。本研究旨在评估特定强制策略对智障青少年决策的影响。
48名智障青少年参与了该研究。他们被要求对一系列简短的情景描述做出回应,这些情景描述中涉及诱惑性强制、威胁性强制和无特定强制策略的情况数量相等。通过独立的、以预防为重点的决策、报告决策以及对事实和推理理解问题的回答来评估表现。
总体而言,参与者仅在大约一半的时间里做出独立的、以预防为重点的决策。与涉及威胁的情况相比,他们在无特定强制策略或诱惑性强制的情况下更有可能做出独立的、以预防为重点的决策。然而,在涉及威胁性强制的情况下,报告决策的可能性高于其他两种情况,并且在涉及威胁性强制的情况下,事实和推理理解能力最佳。
结果表明,智障青少年没有做好独自应对涉及强制情况的准备,尤其是威胁性强制。由于在本研究中理解似乎不是决策困难的关键因素,因此需要进一步研究决策过程的各个方面,作为设计有效干预措施的基础。