This Article Full Text (PDF) References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by Antaki, C. Search for Related Content PubMed Articles by Antaki, C. Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

Interviewing Persons with a Learning Disability: How Setting Lower Standards May Inflate Well-Being Scores

Department of Social Sciences at Loughborough University, Loughborough LE11 3TU, England

To be psychometrically valid, standard questions are meant to be delivered as they appear on the interview schedule—or by nonleading paraphrase—and the respondents’ answers exactly recorded. Yet, inspection of a set of transcripts of quality-of-life assessments of people with a learning disability (in North American terminology, mental retardation) shows massive deviation from this ideal. What is unsurprising is that interviewers frequently edit questions to address their interviewees’ limited cognitive competence. What is more pragmatically and interactionally interesting is that interviewers also redesign questions "sensitively" in ways that lower the social and personal criteria for a high score. Unofficially lowering the bar in this way might seem generous, but it constructs the respondent as impaired. It also means that respondents may end up getting high quality-of-life scores on unambitious questions one would not ask of people without a learning disability and that do not appear on the official questionnaire.

Qualitative Health Research, Vol. 9, No. 4, 437-454 (1999)
DOI: 10.1177/104973239900900402


CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?

This article has been cited by other articles:

				C. Antaki, W.M.L. Finlay, and C. Walton Conversational Shaping: Staff Members' Solicitation of Talk From People With an Intellectual Impairment Qual Health Res, December 1, 2007; 17(10): 1403 - 1414. [Abstract] [PDF]

				C. Antaki, C. Walton, and W.M.L. Finlay How proposing an activity to a person with an intellectual disability can imply a limited identity Discourse Society, July 1, 2007; 18(4): 393 - 410. [Abstract] [PDF]

				K. Roulston Close encounters of the 'CA' kind: a review of literature analysing talk in research interviews Qualitative Research, November 1, 2006; 6(4): 515 - 534. [Abstract] [PDF]

				C. Puchta, J. Potter, and S. Wolff Repeat receipts: a device for generating visible data in market research focus groups Qualitative Research, December 1, 2004; 4(3): 285 - 309. [Abstract] [PDF]

				J. Potter Discursive Psychology: Between Method and Paradigm Discourse Society, November 1, 2003; 14(6): 783 - 794. [Abstract] [PDF]

				J. Potter Review EssayStudying the Standardized Survey as Interaction Qualitative Research, August 1, 2003; 3(2): 269 - 278. [PDF]

				C. Antaki "D'You Like a Drink then Do You?": Dissembling Language and the Construction of an Impoverished Life Journal of Language and Social Psychology, March 1, 2001; 20(1-2): 196 - 213. [Abstract] [PDF]