The Professional Counselor | Volume 13, Issue 4 407 Data Collection Demographic Questionnaire We used a self-report demographic questionnaire to collect information about age, sex, gender identity, sexual orientation, racial/ethnic identity, religion/spiritual identity, education, employment status, and source of income (see Table 1). In light of the diversity within the disability community and to allow for within-group comparisons, we asked for type of disability (i.e., physical, sensory, psychiatric, and neurodevelopmental) and visibility of disability (i.e., visible/apparent, invisible/ hidden, or both). Participants reported their highest level of education and their job responsibilities as they apply to their training, education, and skills. Because income level is subjective in terms of individual needs and geographic U.S. region, and PWD often have more than one income source, we asked participants to name their sources of income instead of a dollar amount. Ableist Microaggressions Scale The AMS (Conover et al., 2017b) is a 20-item self-report measure of PWD’s lifetime experiences with disability-related microaggressions. The AMS has four subscales: Helplessness, Minimization, Denial of Personhood, and Otherization. Item examples include: “People offer me unsolicited, unwanted, or unneeded help because I have a disability” (Helplessness); “People are unwilling to accept I have a disability because I appear able-bodied” (Minimization); “People don’t see me as a whole person because I have a disability” (Denial of Personhood); and “People suggest that living with a disability would not be a worthwhile existence” (Otherization). Participants were instructed to think only about their personal ableist microaggression experiences when responding to the AMS items. Responses were rated on a 6-point Likert-type scale, ranging from 1 (never) to 6 (very frequently), and three items included a not applicable response option, as these items may not be relevant for individuals with invisible/hidden disabilities. Possible total scores range from 17 to 120, with higher scores indicating greater levels of lifetime experiences with ableist microaggressions. The overall internal consistency reliability was .92 (Conover et al., 2017a) and .95 (Conover & Israel, 2019), and the internal consistency reliability scores for the AMS subscales were .85 for Helplessness, .65 for Minimization, .90 for Denial of Personhood, and .84 for Otherization (Conover et al., 2017a). Cronbach’s alpha for the AMS in this sample was .90. Data Analysis All statistical analyses were performed using IBM SPSS Statistics Standard V27. To answer Research Question 1, we ran descriptive statistics for all measured variables of AMS scales and subscales (see Table 2). For Research Question 2, we conducted factorial analysis of variance (ANOVA) and multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA) to understand whether the AMS scores and subscale scores differed based on the type of disability and the visibility of the disability as independent factors. To answer Research Question 3, we utilized multiple regression analyses to investigate the predictive variables of participants’ sociocultural identities and AMS scores and subscale scores.
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy NDU5MTM1