MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1534100032 · doi:10.1111/jir.12008

Public attitudes towards intellectual disability: a multidimensional perspective

2012· article· en· W1534100032 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Intellectual Disability Research · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicInclusion and Disability in Education and Sport
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityDouglas Mental Health University InstituteUniversité du Québec à Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologyCognitionPerspective (graphical)Intellectual disabilityPhonePublic serviceSocial psychologyPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Public attitudes towards persons with intellectual disabilities (IDs) have a significant effect on potential community integration. A better understanding of these can help target service provision and public awareness programmes. OBJECTIVE: The objective of the present study is threefold: (1) describe public attitudes towards persons with ID along affective, cognitive and behavioural dimensions; (2) compare and contrast attitudes according to sex, age, education and income, as well as frequency and quality of contacts with persons with ID; and (3) ascertain whether the level of functioning has an effect on attitudes. METHODS: The Attitudes Toward Intellectual Disability Questionnaire (ATTID) was administered by phone to 1605 randomly selected adult men and women, stratified by region in the province of Québec, Canada. The ATTID uses a multidimensional perspective of attitudes that reflect affective, cognitive and behavioural dimensions. RESULTS: The results showed that public attitudes were generally positive regarding all three attitudinal dimensions. Public attitudes towards persons with ID are presented in terms of the five factors measured through the ATTID: (1) discomfort; (2) sensibility or tenderness; (3) knowledge of causes; (4) knowledge of capacity and rights; and (5) interaction. Attitude factor scores vary as a function of participant characteristics (sex, age, education and income) and the degree of knowledge about ID, the number of persons with ID known to the participants, as well as the frequency and quality of their contacts with these persons. Men had greater negative attitudes than women as regards the discomfort factor, while women had more negative attitudes regarding the knowledge of capacity and rights factor. More positive attitudes were revealed among younger and more educated participants. Attitudes were generally not associated with income. Public attitudes tended to be more negative towards people with lower functioning ID. CONCLUSION: These results yield useful information to target public awareness and education.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.022
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.126
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Science and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesScience and technology studies
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.257
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0220.126
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.008
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0240.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.303
GPT teacher head0.501
Teacher spread0.198 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it