In this study, I used to use a variety of accommodative techniques to conduct oral interviews with young adult participants who presented with unique social language needs. Their needs highlighted and allowed critique of the research methods that I have learned, bringing up important ethical and pedagogical issues regarding difference and (dis)ability in research and research populations. I asked them what they thought about and wanted from their social experiences and learned that they perceive themselves as being perpetually misunderstood. I analyzed the data for potential misunderstandings and uncovered alternate readings of communication that are naturally not considered when typical assumptions of communication prevail. Avoiding misunderstandings can be as easy as changing one’s assumptions about communication. With small changes in assumptions, meanings change, and outcomes improve. The project revealed themes that speak to larger cultural conversations about ability and young adulthood. These millennials are not using social media; they think differently about the “high-functioning vs. low-functioning” autism dialectic; and they critique adult programs and services. Suggested tips for cross-cultural communication are provided.

As a result of a complex range of cultural, economic and social factors, contributions by learning disabled people to the production of knowledge have been at best marginalised and at worst rendered silent. This study seeks to break that silence by engaging learning disabled people as co-producers of disability and media research discourses. It does this in two main ways: by addressing the manner in which they are positioned in the research process, and by identifying the ways in which they are (mis)represented or not in newspapers. This research not only investigates but it also presents new ways of giving learning disabled people a say in the knowledge production process. y the adoption of a mixed method approach in which learning disabled people are placed at the centre of the research process, this study aims to identify and critically analyse the significance and meanings of representations of learning disabled adults by the contemporary, print version of English national newspapers. Drawing from both quantitative and qualitative research methodologies, it uniquely incorporates distinct but interrelated data collection stages, including a research advisory group and two focus groups with learning disabled people and their supporters, alongside a content analysis of five hundred and forty six learning disability news stories. This study offers new insights into the application and development of inclusive research principles, highlighting the contributions of supporters to the research process and the roles of a nondisabled inclusive researcher. It reveals the predominant ways by which learning disabled adults are represented by newspapers and how they are not generally engaged as sources of these news stories, while presenting the views of focus group members, throughout these discussions of the content analysis. This thesis concludes with a consideration of the implications of the findings for the future direction of inclusive research practices and media discourses that engage learning disabled people as co-producers of knowledge.

People with intellectual/developmental disabilities experience exclusion from social spaces. In this dissertation, I address social inclusion in: a) research and b) peer relationships in the context of mental health services. To address inclusion in research, we conducted key informant interviews with academic researchers (n = 8) and co-researchers with intellectual disability (n = 6) who have expertise in inclusive research (study 1). Using principles of grounded theory we analyzed the data and developed a conceptual model describing the contextual factors and team-level factors that coalesce to foster and maintain inclusive research collaborations. We found that team members’ values and characteristics influence inclusive research collaborations and drive a commitment to accessibility. Additionally, perceived personal and societal benefits contribute to co-researcher involvement. Contextual factors, including funding and partnership duration, influence teams’ processes and structures. These processes and structures influence the extent to which co-researchers perceive the inclusive research team to be co-facilitated or academic-facilitated. This model describes how contextual and team-level factors and processes may be optimized to support co-researcher engagement in inclusive research. To address peer relationships in the context of mental health services, I used a stakeholder-driven approach to develop a peer mentoring intervention for young adults with intellectual/developmental disabilities and co-occurring mental health conditions (study 2). This approach included partnership with 3 young adults with intellectual/developmental disabilities and co-occurring mental health conditions and a 7 member advisory board composed of self-advocates and professionals. In addition, I conducted focus groups with mental health clinicians (n = 10), peer support specialists (n = 9), and transition specialists (n = 20) to identify the desired peer mentoring outcome and intervention components and content that may facilitate these outcomes. The focus group participants identified several relationship-driven and outcome-driven actions peer mentors may use to support outcome achievement. Stakeholders also identified five components relevant to the intervention: safety considerations, mentor matching, degree of intervention structure, mentor training and support, and collaboration with mentees’ support teams. These findings draw attention to the importance of social relationships and individualization of both mentoring and supports for mentors. Together, these two studies highlight the importance of valuing the unique strengths of people with disabilities and the need for task and environmental adaptations to foster social inclusion of people with intellectual/developmental disabilities. / 2021-06-18T00:00:00Z

Yes / We present a scene-setting viewpoint that critically examines various diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) blind spots within the field of international business (IB). These include issues such as social justice, intersectionality, de-colonization, the co-creation of inclusive research practices in indigenous spaces, social dialogue, and the gap between DEI rhetoric and reality. We also contextualize our discussion in terms of the six papers which make up the first part of our two-part special issue on DEI in IB. We build on existing DEI overview works and comment on specific DEI blind spots. We also discuss the role of positionality as critical reflexive scholarship practice, which we see as an essential step in problematizing structural inequalities. We then discuss six specific areas where DEI blindspots persist within the IB literature and link our discussion to the six papers included in the first part of our DEI special issue. Addressing the contradictions between the business and social justice cases for DEI requires addressing the ontological contradictions between the two perspectives through problematizing structural inequalities. A key contribution of the paper is also the discussion around positionality in DEI research and the relevance of positionality statements as part of critical reflexive scholarship in support of a socially just DEI research agenda. We discuss the role DEI research plays and can play within the evolution of the IB discipline. We apply a critical management studies perspective to pervasive DEI issues, as well as engage with the topics in the special issue through a unique critical reflexive epistemology which includes our own positionality statements as guest editors and researchers. Our critical discussion and recommendations for future research serve as a kind of whetstone to sharpen IB’s DEI research tools and in turn for IB to help sharpen DEI research’s tools, supporting it to become more socially just. / The full text will be available when the article is published by Emerald