RESUMEN
Individuals with disabilities comprise one of the largest marginalized groups in the United States and experience systemic barriers in health care. In Westernized communities, disability has historically been conceptualized via the medical model, which considers disability an individual-level deficit in need of correction. Although other models of disability (e.g., social model) have been developed to address the medical model's ableist shortcomings, these fail to consistently acknowledge intersectionality. Specifically, these models fail to consider that (a) a disabled individual may hold other marginalized or oppressed identities and (b) these intersecting oppressions may exacerbate health inequities. Intersectionality, which originates from Black feminist literature, describes the ways that systems of power and oppression (e.g., racism, sexism) interact to form an individual's unique experience. To date, the intersection of disability and other marginalized identities has been neglected in psychology and related fields, leaving little guidance for how scholars, clinicians, and other stakeholders can address disability via an intersectional lens. The present article discusses how a disability-affirmative, intersectional approach can serve as a strategy for challenging and reforming oppressive systems across the field of psychology. We assert that, ultimately, this approach has the potential to optimize and expand access to equitable, inclusive mental health care, and we propose actionable steps psychologists can take in research, practice, training, and policy in pursuit of this aim. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).
Asunto(s)
Personas con Discapacidad , Racismo , Humanos , Estados Unidos , Marco Interseccional , Racismo/psicología , Personas con Discapacidad/psicologíaRESUMEN
Caregivers of children with autism spectrum disorder (ASD) experience greater stress, expressed emotion (EE), and affiliate stigma than caregivers of children without ASD. Siblings of children with ASD often experience greater negative functioning than siblings of individuals without ASD. The current study found significant interrelations among symptom severity and externalizing behavior in children with ASD; parental stress, affiliate stigma, and EE; and TD sibling internalizing behavior. In addition, certain subcomponents of affiliate stigma predicted unique variance in EE and TD sibling internalizing behavior. Findings may increase understanding of psychosocial functioning in families with children with ASD and allow clinicians to improve outcomes for all family members. Limitations of the study included self-report data, limited sample diversity, and a cross-sectional design.
Asunto(s)
Trastorno del Espectro Autista , Hermanos , Humanos , Niño , Hermanos/psicología , Trastorno del Espectro Autista/psicología , Emoción Expresada , Estudios Transversales , PadresRESUMEN
Young children develop causal knowledge through everyday family conversations and activities. Children's museums are an informative setting for studying the social context of causal learning because family members engage together in everyday scientific thinking as they play in museums. In this multisite collaborative project, we investigate children's developing causal thinking in the context of family interaction at museum exhibits. We focus on explaining and exploring as two fundamental collaborative processes in parent-child interaction, investigating how families explain and explore in open-ended collaboration at gear exhibits in three children's museums in Providence, RI, San Jose, CA, and Austin, TX. Our main research questions examined (a) how open-ended family exploration and explanation relate to one another to form a dynamic for children's learning; (b) how that dynamic differs for families using different interaction styles, and relates to contextual factors such as families' science background, and (c) how that dynamic predicts children's independent causal thinking when given more structured tasks. We summarize findings on exploring, explaining, and parent-child interaction (PCI) styles. We then present findings on how these measures related to one another, and finally how that dynamic predicts children's causal thinking. In studying children's exploring we described two types of behaviors of importance for causal thinking: (a) Systematic Exploration: Connecting gears to form a gear machine followed by spinning the gear machine. (b) Resolute Behavior: Problem-solving behaviors, in which children attempted to connect or spin a particular set of gears, hit an obstacle, and then persisted to succeed (as opposed to moving on to another behavior). Older children engaged in both behaviors more than younger children, and the proportion of these behaviors were correlated with one another. Parents and children talked to each other while interacting with the exhibits. We coded causal language, as well as other types of utterances. Parents' causal language predicted children's causal language, independent of age. The proportion of parents' causal language also predicted the proportion of children's systematic exploration. Resolute behavior on the part of children did not correlate with parents' causal language, but did correlate with children's own talk about actions and the exhibit. We next considered who set goals for the play in a more holistic measure of parent-child interaction style, identifying dyads as parent-directed, child-directed, or jointly-directed in their interaction with one another. Children in different parent-child interaction styles engaged in different amounts of systematic exploration and had parents who engaged in different amounts of causal language. Resolute behavior and the language related to children engaging in such troubleshooting, seemed more consistent across the three parent-child interaction styles. Using general linear mixed modeling, we considered relations within sequences of action and talk. We found that the timing of parents' causal language was crucial to whether children engaged in systematic exploration. Parents' causal talk was a predictor of children's systematic exploration only if it occurred prior to the act of spinning the gears (while children were building gear machines). We did not observe an effect of causal language when it occurred concurrently with or after children's spinning. Similarly, children's talk about their actions and the exhibit predicted their resolute behavior, but only when the talk occurred while the child was encountering the problem. No effects were found for models where the talk happened concurrently or after resolving the problem. Finally, we considered how explaining and exploring related to children's causal thinking. We analyzed measures of children's causal thinking about gears and a free play measure with a novel set of gears. Principal component analysis revealed a latent factor of causal thinking in these measures. Structural equation modeling examined how parents' background in science related to children's systematic exploration, parents' causal language, and parent-child interaction style, and then how those factors predicted children's causal thinking. In a full model, with children's age and gender included, children's systematic exploration related to children's causal thinking. Overall, these data demonstrate that children's systematic exploration and parents' causal explanation are best studied in relation to one another, because both contributed to children's learning while playing at a museum exhibit. Children engaged in systematic exploration, which supported their causal thinking. Parents' causal talk supported children's exploration when it was presented at certain times during the interaction. In contrast, children's persistence in problem solving was less sensitive to parents' talk or interaction style, and more related to children's own language, which may act as a form of self-explanation. We discuss the findings in light of ongoing approaches to promote the benefit of parent-child interaction during play for children's learning and problem solving. We also examine the implications of these findings for formal and informal learning settings, and for theoretical integration of constructivist and sociocultural approaches in the study of children's causal thinking.