Department of Social Work and Social Policy, La Trobe University, Melbourne, Australia.
J Appl Res Intellect Disabil. 2014 Jan;27(1):3-12. doi: 10.1111/jar.12083. Epub 2013 Dec 4.
The inclusion of people with intellectual disability in research is a common requirement of research funding. Little conceptual clarity is available to guide the conduct of inclusive research or judge its fidelity, there is minimal evidence of its impact, and questions remain about its feasibility and rigour.
A comprehensive review of the peer reviewed literature and key texts was undertaken to more clearly conceptualize inclusive research and identify the issues associated with ways of approaching it.
Three approaches to inclusive research were identified: advisory, leading and controlling, and collaborative group. Using the literature and the authors' own experience, each approach is illustrated and discussed.
A clearer conceptual framework is developed to guide researchers and administrators as they consider inclusive research and its feasibility to particular research questions. A strong self-advocacy movement is identified as one of the conditions necessary for inclusive research to flourish.
Organisations including government that fund research about people with an intellectual disability in the UK and Australia say it is important that people with an intellectual disability are involved in planning and doing research that is about them; this is called inclusive research. Some people have written about what they have done but not enough has been written and shared about the different ways of doing inclusive research.
The people who wrote this paper looked at all the literature about ways of doing inclusive research and reflected on the way they had worked with a group of self advocates in writing about their history.
There are three main ways of doing inclusive research; (i) Where people with an intellectual disability give advice about what to do; (ii) Where people with an intellectual disability lead and control research (iii) Where people with and without intellectual disability work together as a group with different jobs based on their different interests and skills.
In the past there has been an idea that there is only one way to do inclusive research. This paper talks about the advantages and disadvantages of different ways of doing inclusive research, and when you might choose one way rather than another.
将智障人士纳入研究是研究资助的常见要求。目前几乎没有概念上的清晰性来指导包容性研究的进行或判断其保真度,几乎没有证据表明其影响,并且对于其可行性和严谨性仍存在疑问。
对同行评议文献和关键文本进行了全面审查,以更清楚地概念化包容性研究,并确定与研究方法相关的问题。
确定了三种包容性研究方法:咨询、主导和控制以及协作小组。使用文献和作者自己的经验,对每种方法进行了说明和讨论。
开发了一个更清晰的概念框架,以指导研究人员和管理人员在考虑包容性研究及其对特定研究问题的可行性时使用。确定了一个强大的自我倡导运动是包容性研究蓬勃发展的必要条件之一。
在英国和澳大利亚,包括政府在内的资助智障人士研究的组织表示,让智障人士参与规划和进行与他们有关的研究非常重要;这被称为包容性研究。有些人已经写过他们所做的事情,但关于进行包容性研究的不同方式并没有足够的写作和分享。
撰写本文的人研究了所有关于进行包容性研究的文献,并反思了他们与一群自我倡导者合作撰写他们历史的方式。
有三种主要的包容性研究方法;(一)智障人士就如何做提供建议;(二)智障人士主导和控制研究;(三)智障人士和非智障人士作为一个小组一起工作,根据他们不同的兴趣和技能承担不同的工作。
过去有一种观点认为,只有一种方法可以进行包容性研究。本文讨论了进行包容性研究的不同方法的优缺点,以及何时可能选择一种方法而不是另一种方法。