Applying an intersectional ecological framework to understand ableism and racism in employment among youth and young adults with disabilities
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: Youth with disabilities often face many barriers in finding employment. A knowledge gap exists surrounding the experiences of racially minoritized youth with disabilities who arguably encounter multiple and complex forms of discrimination. The purpose of this study was to understand the experiences of ableism and racism in employment among racially minoritized youth and young adults with non-apparent disabilities. METHODS: Individual semi-structured interviews were conducted with 19 racially minoritized participants aged 17-30 with non-apparent disabilities. Data were analyzed using a deductive thematic analysis approach informed by an intersectional ecological framework. RESULTS: Themes that affected racially minoritized youth's employment included: (1) microsystems (i.e., individual barriers and facilitators to employment); (2) mesosystems (i.e., peers, family, disability, race/ethnicity, and work); (3) exosystems (i.e., workplace policies, healthcare system, educational institutions, community organizations); (4) macrosystems (i.e., ableism, racism, gendered discrimination and intersectional forms of discrimination); (5) the chronosystem (i.e., timing of obtaining employment, diagnosis and discrimination); and (6) ecological niche, which involved the extent to which work environments were safe and inclusive. CONCLUSION: Applying an intersectional ecological framework facilitates our understanding of ableism and racism in employment among youth and young adults with disabilities. Further attention is urgently needed to minimize discrimination and enhance supportive, inclusive and psychologically safe, work environments for minoritized youth with disabilities.
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".