Cross-Cultural Study of Quality of Life Indicators

Abstract

The concept of quality of life is increasingly being used internationally in the field of intellectual disabilities. We surveyed three respondent groups representing five geographical groupings on the importance and use of the 24 core quality of life indicators most commonly reported in the international quality of life literature. Results suggest (a) similar profiles on importance and use across respondent and geographical groups, but differences in the frequency per response category; (b) significant differences in mean quality of life importance and use scores for both respondent and geographic groupings; and (c) factors on importance and use generally grouped into eight core quality of life domains. Results are discussed in reference to the etic (universal) and emic (culture-bound) properties of the quality of life concept.

Using Self-Determination of Senior College Students with Disabilities to Predict Their Quality of Life One Year after Graduation

“…The above results supported the definition of quality of life connotation put forward by Schalock (1996), stating that possession of self-determination skills is a reflection of quality of life a certain kind. Schalock et al (2005) also proposed that quality of life can be defined by certain self-determination indicators including autonomy, goals and personal values, and choices. In addition, it should be noted that because Self-Regulation skill is not a factor that can predict quality of life, the correlation between these two variables should be further investigated.…”

Factors predicting quality of life for people with intellectual disability: Results from the ANFFAS study in Italy

“…The process incorporates the individual's dreams, personal preferences, and interests (Thompson et al, 2009) and operationalizes this information to achieve the personal subjective QoL (Schalock et al, 2005).…”

“…A model has been developed that considers QoL as a multidimensional phenomenon, composed of central domains and indicators influenced by personal characteristics and environmental and contextual variables (Schalock et al, 2005). The domains and specific indicators have been identified and critically assessed (Brown, Schalock, & Brown, 2009) fulfilling the requirement of cross-cultural validation (Jenaro et al, 2005) showing emic and ethic characteristics, with features common to everyone, and other characteristics that are culturally sensitive and specific to the individual (Lyons, 2005;Schalock et al, 2005). In particular, the eight domains model, developed by Shalock and Verdugo (2002), has been widely used, consisting of emotional physical, and material wellbeing; personal development; social inclusion; interpersonal relationships; self-determination; rights; and incorporating three major factors of independence, social participation and wellbeing.…”

Untitled

“…The skills related to self-determination described above not only help students with disabilities improve academic performance (Konrad, Fowler, Walker, Test, & Wood, 2007;Ruban, McCoach, McGuire, & Reis, 2003) but also yield better results when they transition to a career (Moore, & McNaught, 2014;Wehmeyer, Palmer, Soukup, Garner, & Lawrence, 2007). Even more importantly, selfdetermination is an essential factor affecting the quality of life of students with disabilities (Schalock, 1994;Schalock, 1996;Schalock et al, 2005;Wehmeyer & Palmer, 2003;Wehmeyer & Schalock, 2001). Regarding the relationship between self-determination and quality of life, Wehmeyer (1996) made a very apt observation when defining selfdetermination as "acting as the primary causal agent in one's life and making choices and decisions regarding one's quality of life free from undue external influence or interference" (p. 22).…”