• TABLE OF CONTENTS
HIDE
 Title Page
 Dedication
 Acknowledgement
 Table of Contents
 Abstract
 Introduction
 Review of related literature
 Methodology
 Results
 Discussion, implications and...
 Appendices
 Bibliography
 Biographical sketch






Title: Assertiveness and acceptance of disability among rehabilitation counseling clients /
CITATION PDF VIEWER THUMBNAILS PAGE IMAGE ZOOMABLE
Full Citation
STANDARD VIEW MARC VIEW
Permanent Link: http://ufdc.ufl.edu/UF00099086/00001
 Material Information
Title: Assertiveness and acceptance of disability among rehabilitation counseling clients /
Physical Description: viii, 73 leaves : ; 28 cm.
Language: English
Creator: Lovett, Paula, 1950-
Publisher: University of Florida
Publication Date: 1982
Copyright Date: 1982
 Subjects
Subject: Rehabilitation counseling   ( lcsh )
People with disabilities -- Services for   ( lcsh )
Assertiveness training   ( lcsh )
Counselor Education thesis Ph. D
Dissertations, Academic -- Counselor Education -- UF
Genre: bibliography   ( marcgt )
non-fiction   ( marcgt )
 Notes
Thesis: Thesis (Ph. D.)--University of Florida, 1982.
Bibliography: Bibliography: leaves 67-72.
General Note: Typescript.
General Note: Vita.
Statement of Responsibility: by Paula Lovett.
 Record Information
Bibliographic ID: UF00099086
Volume ID: VID00001
Source Institution: University of Florida
Holding Location: University of Florida
Rights Management: All rights reserved by the source institution and holding location.
Resource Identifier: alephbibnum - 000319108
oclc - 09298806
notis - ABU5958

Downloads

This item has the following downloads:

PDF ( 2 MBs ) ( PDF )


Table of Contents
    Title Page
        Page i
        Page ii
    Dedication
        Page iii
    Acknowledgement
        Page iv
    Table of Contents
        Page v
        Page vi
    Abstract
        Page vii
        Page viii
    Introduction
        Page 1
        Page 2
        Page 3
        Page 4
        Page 5
        Page 6
        Page 7
        Page 8
        Page 9
        Page 10
    Review of related literature
        Page 11
        Page 12
        Page 13
        Page 14
        Page 15
        Page 16
        Page 17
        Page 18
        Page 19
        Page 20
        Page 21
        Page 22
        Page 23
        Page 24
    Methodology
        Page 25
        Page 26
        Page 27
        Page 28
        Page 29
        Page 30
        Page 31
        Page 32
        Page 33
        Page 34
        Page 35
        Page 36
    Results
        Page 37
        Page 38
        Page 39
        Page 40
        Page 41
        Page 42
        Page 43
        Page 44
        Page 45
        Page 46
        Page 47
        Page 48
        Page 49
    Discussion, implications and conclusions
        Page 50
        Page 51
        Page 52
        Page 53
        Page 54
        Page 55
        Page 56
        Page 57
    Appendices
        Page 58
        Page 59
        Page 60
        Page 61
        Page 62
        Page 63
        Page 64
        Page 65
        Page 66
    Bibliography
        Page 67
        Page 68
        Page 69
        Page 70
        Page 71
        Page 72
    Biographical sketch
        Page 73
        Page 74
        Page 75
Full Text










ASSERTIVENESS AND ACCEPTANCE OF DISABILITY AMONG
REHABILITATION COUNSELING CLIENTS














BY

PAULA LOVETT


A DISSERTATION PRESENTED TO THE GRADUATE COUNCIL OF THE
UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE
REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF
DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY

UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA


1982
































Copyright 1982

by

Paula Lovett













Dedicated lovingly to

My Parents
Paul and Josie Lovett

for life, love and laughter














ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS


This dissertation was accomplished through personal

interest and endurance supported by many fine individuals.

My colleagues, friends and family have all played special

parts in this project and my love and thanks are with you.


-iv-














TABLE OF CONTENTS


CHAPTER PAGE

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS . . . . . . ... iv

ABSTRACT . . . . . . .... . . vii

ONE INTRODUCTION . . . . . ... . .. 1

Statement of the Problem . . . . . 1
Need for the Study . . . . . . 3
Purpose of the Study . . . . . . 4
Rationale . . . . . . . . 5
Hypotheses . . . . . .. . . .. 7
Definition of Terms . . . . . . 7
Organization of the Study . . . .. 10

TWO REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE . . . .. 11

Introduction . . . . . . . . 11
Positive Acceptance of Disability in
the Rehabilitation Counseling
Process . . . . . . . . . 11
Assertive Behavior and Assertive Behavior
in the Rehabilitation Counseling
Process . . . . . . . .. 16
The Relationship of Assertive Behavior and
Acceptance of Disability with Disabled
Persons . . . . . . . ... 22
Summary . . . . . . . .. 24

THREE METHODOLOGY . . . . . . . ... 25

Population . . . . . . . ... 25
Sampling Procedures . . . . ... 26
Sample . . . . . . . . ... 29
Instruments . . . . . . ... 29
Data Collection Procedure . . . ... 34
Analyses of Data . . . . . ... 34
Limitations . . . . . . ... 35

FOUR RESULTS . . . . . . . . ... 37

Hypothesis 1 . . . . . . ... 37
Hypothesis 2 . . . . . . ... 38
Hypothesis 3 . . . . . . ... 41
Hypothesis 4 . . . . . . ... 42










Hypothesis 5 . . . . . . .. 44
Additional Analyses of the Data . . .. 46

FIVE DISCUSSION, IMPLICATIONS AND CONCLUSIONS . 50

Discussion . . . . . . . ... 50
Implications . . . . . . .. 55
Conclusions . . . . . . ... 56

APPENDICES

A DESCRIPTIVE DATA FORM . . . . . .. 58
B REHABILITATION SERVICE AGENCIES . . .. 59
C INSTRUCTIONS TO REHABILITATION
PRACTITIONER . . . . . . .. 60
D INFORMED CONSENT FORM . . . . . .. 62
E TABLES . . . . . . . ... . 63

BIBLIOGRAPHY . . . . . . . . ... .. . 67

BIOGRAPHICAL DATA . . . . . . . . .. 73













Abstract of Dissertation Presented to the Graduate Council
of the University of Florida in Partial Fulfillment of the
Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy



ASSERTIVENESS AND ACCEPTANCE OF DISABILITY AMONG
REHABILITATION COUNSELING CLIENTS


By

Paula Lovett

May, 1982


Chairman: Dr. Paul Fitzgerald

Major Department: Counselor Education

The purpose of this study was to investigate the relation-

ship between assertion and acceptance of disability in reha-

bilitation counseling. The study also determined if there

were differences in the degrees of assertive behavior and

acceptance of disability among disabled persons based on age,

sex, race, education, marital status, metropolitan or non-

metropolitan residence, type of disability and length of time

disabled. The Adult Self Expression (ASES), the Acceptance

of Disability Scale (AD), and a descriptive data form were

administered to 160 disabled adults in North Florida who were

receiving rehabilitation counseling services.

The results of Pearson product moment correlation, analysis

of variance (ANOVA) and regression analysis indicated a posi-

tive relationship between assertive behavior and acceptance of

disability.

vii








Results of t-tests determined that there are no differences

in assertion among disabled persons on the bases of sex, race,

and residence. ANOVA found no differences in marital status

and assertion. No correlation was found between age and as-

sertion. A positive relationship was found between assertion

and education.

ANOVA indicated that there are differences in assertion

and acceptance of disability on the basis of disability type.

No correlation was found between assertion or acceptance of

disability and length of time disabled.

Results of t-tests determined that no differences existed

between AD scores and sex or residence. Results of ANOVA found

a difference between AD and race and marital status. Positive

correlations were found between AD and age and education.

Predictor variables for assertiveness and acceptance of

disability were determined by multiple regression analyses.

Predictor variables for ASES were AD, length of time disabled

and education. Predictor variables for AD were ASES, age and

education level.

Results of t-tests indicated a difference between the

sample and the non-disabled ASES norm group, and no difference

between the study sample and the AD norm group.

Based on the results of this study there is a need for

assertion and acceptance of disability training with certain

groups of disabled individuals. Since a positive relationship

exists between assertion and acceptance of disability, provid-

ing one of those services may increase both levels and decrease

duplication of services.


-viii-













CHAPTER ONE
INTRODUCTION


One in every six persons in the United States is pre-

sently disabled (Health Systems Plan, 1980). Historically,

Americans' willingness to attend to the needs of the disabled

has been greatly determined by prevailing economic conditions.

When the economy is stable, the needs of minority groups such

as the disabled are more likely to be met than when economic

conditions are unstable.

Currently a conservative political atmosphere is de-

veloping in response to an unstable economy and promises to

impact government interventions, regulations, and funds for

groups like the disabled. With this political atmosphere

there is increased emphasis on rehabilitation services

rather than human maintenance services. Rehabilitation coun-

selors and disabled persons must be aware of this political

shift and be prepared to facilitate expedient rehabilitation

through provision of relevant services.


Statement of the Problem

The positive acceptance of disabilities by disabled per-

sons is a crucial variable in the rehabilitation process

because it enables these persons to accept the realities of

their disabilities, reorder their values and priorities and

continue productive lives (Dembo, Leviton & Wright, 1956;









Wright, 1960). The goal of the rehabilitation counseling

process is the facilitation of the adjustment and successful

re-entry of disabled persons into society at a functioning

level as close as possible to their previous functioning

level (Levine, 1959; Smith-Hanen, 1976).

Disability onset is a traumatic and stressful time for

people according to Rubin and Roessler (1978) and it can

affect the degrees of individuals' personal adjustments and

rehabilitations. Although individuals differ in their re-

sponses to losses of abilities, many people experience (to

varying degrees) feelings of denial, mourning, depression,

and anger before reaching acceptance of their disabilities

(Dembo, Leviton & Wright, 1956). One function of rehabili-

tation counselors is identifying disabled individuals having

difficulty accepting their disabilities, and then providing

counseling to facilitate their eventual acceptance.

Recently, there has been an increased emphasis on the

importance of assertiveness in adjustment and rehabilitation.

Assertive behaviors may be perceived as interpersonal re-

sponses involving direct, honest and appropriate verbal and

nonverbal expressions of thoughts, feelings, and beliefs in

ways that do not violate other persons' rights (Lange &

Jakubowski, 1976). A number of variables appear to be re-

lated to assertion. These variables include locus of control,

self confidence, personal adjustment, anxiety, appropriate

expression of anger, and acceptance of disability.








Research by Percell, Berwick and Beigel (1974) indicates

that as individuals become more assertive, manifest anxiety

decreases, while self confidence (Gay, Hollandsworth &

Galassi, 1975), personal adjustment (Galassi & Galassi, 1974),

appropriate expression of anger (Doyle & Biaggio, 1981), and

acceptance of disability (Morgan & Leung, 1980) increase.

During periods of adjustment, disabled persons, along

with having difficulties accepting losses of abilities, may

experience losses of self confidence along with increased

anger and anxiety. These problems may result in reactive or

passive stances toward their disabilities and rehabilitation,

and therefore impede the adjustment process (Cull & Hardy,

1972; Siller, 1969). In addition, disabled persons may need

higher levels of assertion to facilitate their successful

re-entry into competitive society. Identifying individuals

using reactive or passive behaviors and facilitating more

constructive assertive, coping behaviors are therefore other

challenges for rehabilitation personnel.


Need for the Study

The theoretical needs for acceptance of disability coun-

seling and assertive behavior training for disabled persons

have been assumed by counselors providing those services to

their rehabilitation clients. There is, however, limited

empirical research indicating that disabled persons have dif-

ficulties accepting their disabilities. Research conducted

to investigate the need for acceptance of disability counseling

has only explored some of the demographic variables that may be








related to low levels of acceptance of disability (Safilios-

Rothschild, 1970). Safilios-Rothschild (1970) and Thomas,

Davis, and Hochman (1976), therefore, express the need for

research to identify demographic factors significantly related

to acceptance of disability levels.

Assertive behavior training has been provided by counse-

lors in the rehabilitation process of disabled persons with

little support of empirical research to substantiate the need

for this service. Joiner, Lovett, and Hague (1981) found evi-

dence to support the contention that disabled persons are less

assertive than nondisabled persons but the sample for this

study was small. Joiner et al. (1981) also identified demo-

graphic factors of disabled individuals that may be related

to their assertive behavior levels and stated the need for

more empirical research to identify potentially low assertive

groups.

Research suggests that a positive relationship may exist

between acceptance of disability level and level of assertive

behavior (Morgan & Leung, 1980). The limited amount of empiri-

cal research, however, indicates a need for further study to

clarify the relationship between level of acceptance of dis-

ability and assertive behavior.


Purpose of the Study

The purpose of this study was to investigate the relation-

ship between assertive behavior levels and acceptance of





-5-


disability in the rehabilitation counseling process of dis-

abled persons. The study also determined if there were dif-

ferences in the degrees of assertive behavior and acceptance

of disability among disabled persons based on age, sex, race,

educational level, marital status, metropolitan or nonmetro-

politan residence, type of disability and length of time dis-

abled. The Adult Self Expression Scale (ASES) (Gay, 1974),

the scale of Acceptance of Disability (AD) (Linkowski, 1974),

and a descriptive data form were administered to a sample of

disabled adults in the North Florida area who were receiving

rehabilitation counseling services.


Rationale

This study focused on a sample of disabled individuals.

In the review of literature, it will be shown that little

empirical research in this area has been done. In order to

determine the assertive behavior levels, the ASES (Gay, 1974)

was chosen because of its use with adults and its reliability

and validity. The AD Scale (Linkowski, 1974) was chosen as it

is the only scale available to measure acceptance of disability

with disabled adults. Demographic variables were collected

due to the lack of information in this area. Questionnaires

were utilized (instead of case studies or interviews) as they

could be administered using identical instructions by rehabili-

tation personnel and thereby reduce personnel and time and

increase sample size.








This study provided data on the level of acceptance of

disability and assertive behavior of disabled persons. Se-

lected demographic factors were also investigated to provide

information to assist rehabilitation counselors in identify-

ing disabled persons in need of acceptance of disability coun-

seling or assertive behavior training. This information may

be helpful for the provision of relevant services in the re-

habilitation counseling process with disabled clients and

also increase efficiency by focusing on areas in which clients

need assistance. In addition, rehabilitation counselors may

be encouraged to assess service needs with their own clients

using similar methods.

Clarifying the relationship between acceptance of dis-

ability and assertive behavior may be useful to the rehabili-

tation counselor in providing services for disabled individuals.

Since a positive relationship does exist between disabled per-

sons' acceptance of disabilities and assertive behavior levels,

it may be possible to increase persons' acceptance of dis-

abilities through assertive behavior training. Likewise, fa-

cilitating persons' acceptance of disabilities may enhance

their assertive behavior levels. Rehabilitation counselors

trained in teaching assertion skills and facilitating accep-

tance of disability may be able to decrease duplication of

services by providing only one of those counseling techniques

instead of both, and therefore increase the economy of the

rehabilitation counseling process.









Hypotheses

This study tested the following null hypotheses:

1. There is no relationship between degree of assertive be-

havior and degree of acceptance of disability among dis-

abled persons.

2. There are no differences in degrees of assertive behavior

among disabled persons on the bases of sex, race, metro-

politan/nonmetropolitan residence, marital status, age and

educational level.

3. There are no differences in degrees of assertive behavior

among disabled persons on the bases of type of disability

and length of time disabled.

4. There are no differences in the acceptance of disability

among disabled persons on the bases of sex, race, metro-

politan/nonmetropolitan residence, marital status, age and

educational level.

5. There are no differences in the acceptance of disability

among disabled persons on the bases of type of disability

and length of time disabled.


Definition of Terms

The following rehabilitation terms were used in this study:

Acceptance of Disability-a perceptual process based on Dembo,

Leviton and Wright's (1956) concept of acceptance of loss where-

by individuals undergo a series of value changes including (a)

enlargement of scope of values, (b) subordination of physique,

(c) containment of disability effects, and (d) transformation

from comparative to asset values (Wright, 1960; Linkowski, 1971,

p. 236).









Adjustment of Disability-matching current abilities to the

demands of everyday living (Grasha & Kirshenbaum, 1980, p. 50).

Assertive Behavior-assertion is the direct and appropriate

communication of persons' needs, wants, and opinions without

punishing, threatening, or putting down others and doing this

without fear during the process (Galassi & Galassi, 1977, p. 3).

Disability-a condition of impairment, physical or mental,

having an objective aspect that can be medically described

(Hamilton, 1950, p. 17).

Types of Disability

Cardiovascular-disability due to heart disease or dys-

function. The disease or dysfunction is usually caused

by birth defect (congenital abnormality), inflammation

and subsequent scarring (rheumatic fever), high blood

pressure (hypertension), or hardening of the arteries

(athrosclerosis) (Cobb, 1973, p. 8-63).

Hearing Impairment-disease or dysfunction of the outer,

middle or inner ear usually caused by birth defect, in-

juries, infection, lack of development, tumors, or de-

generation (Cobb, 1973, p. 297).

Mental Retardation (mild or borderline)--mild retarda-

tion is characterized by an I.Q. measure between 51

and 65 (Educable). Borderline retardation is charac-

terized by an I.Q. measure between 66 and 80 (Suran &

Rizzo, 1979, p. 249).

Neurologic-disability as a result of disease or dys-

function of the nervous system, i.e., seizure disorder

(Cobb, 1973, p. 258).









Orthopedic-disability related to disease or dysfunction

of the bones or joints, i.e., arthritis.

Spinal Cord Injury-resultant paralysis due to disease

or trauma to the spinal cord.

Substance Abuse-loss of ability as a result of habitual

overuse of drugs or alcohol.

Visual Impairment--disease or dysfunction of the eye

usually caused by birth defect, injury, cloudy lens

(cataract), elevated pressure of fluid in the eye (glau-

coma), inappropriate lens focus (far-sightedness, near-

sightedness, and astigmatism) (Cobb, 1973, p. 329-347).

Handicap--the cumulative result of the obstacles which dis-

ability interposes between individuals and their maximum

functional level. The handicap is the measure of the loss of

individuals' capacities wherever evident (Hamilton, 1950, p.

17).

Rehabilitation-a process of restoring disabled individuals

to the fullest physical, mental, social, vocational and eco-

nomic usefulness of which they are capable (McGowan & Porter,

1967, p. 4).

Rehabilitation Process-a four phased process in order of

implementation: the evaluation of the client, planning with

the client a course of action, implementing the planned treat-

ment and termination after successful completion of all phases

(Rubin & Roessler, 1978, p. 123).





-10-


Rehabilitation Service-the coordinated provision of assistance

to disabled persons to facilitate their physical, personal-

social or work adjustment (Rubin & Roessler, 1978, p. 250).

Self Advocacy-exhibiting intense and emotional commitment to

furthering the rights and interests of oneself and other dis-

abled individuals and taking action when these rights and in-

terests are not being met (Kurtz, 1975, p. 7).

Stigma-human depreciation and devaluation of the disabled

(English, 1977, p. 19).


Organization of the Study

The remainder of this dissertation is organized into

four chapters. Chapter Two includes a review of related lit-

erature on positive acceptance of disability by disabled in-

dividuals in the rehabilitation counseling process, assertive

behavior and assertion training in the rehabilitation counsel-

ing process, and the relationship of assertive behavior and

acceptance of disability with disabled persons. Literature

pertaining to practical application and factors related to

disabled persons' assertive behavior levels and acceptance of

disability levels is also reviewed. The population, sampling

procedures, sample instruments, data collection procedures,

and analyses of the data are described in Chapter Three. The

results are presented in Chapter Four. Chapter Five contains

discussion of the results, implications and conclusions.














CHAPTER TWO
REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE


Introduction

In order to explore the research on the levels of accep-

tance of disability and assertive behavior among disabled per-

sons, an in-depth literature review has been conducted in these

two areas. Each area reviewed has been defined with its rele-

vance to the rehabilitation counseling process. Practical ap-

plications in the rehabilitation process of each area are

delineated and the impact of variables in each area is dis-

cussed. Finally, research on the relationship between the

levels of acceptance of disability and assertive behavior is

investigated.


Positive Acceptance of Disability in the
Rehabilitation Counseling Process


Definition

The positive acceptance of disabilities in rehabilitation

is characterized by senses of certainty about the individuals'

selves and the world defined by realistic goals. These senses

of certainty require learning adaptive ways to cope with per-

sonal, sexual, vocational, and family role demands (Levine,

1959; Smith-Hanen, 1976). Acceptance of disabilities is per-

ceived as a tolerance of disabling conditions that realizes

the inevitable pain and suffering that goes with chronic


-11-








disability, but, at the same time stresses the intrinsic value

and ability of individuals (Thorenson & Kerr, 1978). The ac-

ceptance of disability by persons according to Rubin and

Roessler (1978) provides a new self-perception that gives in-

dividuals with disabilities the strength to take a more active

role in their rehabilitation process.

The concept of acceptance of disability (Linkowski, 1971)

was based on the concept of acceptance of loss (Dembo, Leviton

& Wright, 1956). The literature on loss in general embodies

several orientations. Philosophic and poetic interpretations

appear throughout history. Early this century psychoanalytic

theory addressed the topic of loss and in particular, the pro-

cess of mourning (Freud, 1957). Since then, literature on loss

has been generated by the psychophysiologic (Selye, 1956), cog-

nitive (Lazarus, 1966) and behavioral (Wolpe, 1974) traditions.

Emotions and behaviors related to a loss process have been

delineated by people examining the experience with different

groups. Bowley (1973) based his model of loss on observations

of infants; Engel (1971) on the chronically ill; Parkes (1972)

on widows and Lindemann (1944) on survivors of catastrophe.

Kubler-Ross (1969) depicted the distinguishing characteristics

between mourning the loss and acceptance of loss in the dying

process. The stages of denial, anger, bargaining depression

and acceptance were conceptualized by her to depict this flex-

ible process.

The concept of loss in rehabilitation emerged with Dembo,

Leviton and Wright's (1956) theory of acceptance of loss and





-13-

evolved into a concept of acceptance of disability with im-

paired clients. Although several theories of acceptance of

disability have been delineated (Blank, 1961; Grayson, 1950),

Dembo, Leviton and Wright's (1956) concept of acceptance of

loss was used by Linkowski (1971) to develop a scale to measure

acceptance of disability. Consistent with other concepts of

acceptance is the emphasis Dembo, Leviton and Wright (1956)

placed on the subjective meaning of the disability to the im-

paired individual and the associated emotions and values.

Wright (1960) summarized the process of acceptance of loss in

rehabilitation as a series of value changes. The nature of

these shifts characteristic of individuals with physical dis-

abilities who have come to accept their loss is

1. Enlargement of Scope of Values: The extent to which

persons are able to see values other than those that

are in direct conflict with their disabilities.

2. Subordination of Physique: The extent to which per-

sons are able to de-emphasize aspects of physical abil-

ity and appearance that contradict their disabled

situation.

3. Containment of Disability Effects: The extent to

which persons do not spread their handicaps beyond

their actual physical impairment to other aspects of

their functioning selves.

4. Transformation from Comparative Values to Asset

Values: The extent to which persons do not compare

themselves to others in terms of the areas of limita-

tions and abilities, but rather emphasize their own

assets and abilities (p. 134).





-14-


Practical Application in Rehabilitation

Rehabilitation counselors facilitate acceptance of dis-

ability with rehabilitation clients in a number of ways.

Levine (1959) suggests that skilled rehabilitation personnel'

early contact with individuals following the onset of disability

is vital. He indicates the importance of counselors permitting

the persons to express the concerns which they have and assist-

ing the disabled persons in planning and implementing their

treatment, training and entry into employment. These rehabili-

tation activities serve as catalysts for individuals' acceptance

of disabilities.

Research has shown that those who respond better to reha-

bilitation have the capacity to develop new realistic life

goals (Kemp & Vash, 1971). Boone, Roessler and Cooper (1978)

described the importance of rehabilitation counselors helping

clients accept their disabilities by moderating levels of hope

and anxiety through setting realistic goals which give meaning

and direction to the future, desensitization with relaxation

training, role playing and vicarious learning techniques. Alexy

(1980) describes the importance of the counselor helping the

disabled identify substantive issues and isolate and order

their "themes" so that they range in intensity from most dis-

turbing to least disturbing. When these concerns or "themes"

are ranked, the counselor and client set a goal to attend to

only the subsequent principal theme to facilitate acceptance of

loss and eventual acceptance of his disabilities (p. 67).









Related Variables

The effects of demographic factors on acceptance of dis-

ability have been explored to a limited degree. Results of a

study by Thomas, Davis and Hochman (1976) reveal that accep-

tance of disability was unrelated to amputees' age, age at

disability onset, years of work experience, annual income

before disability, current annual income, type of amputation,

presence of secondary disability, race, marital status, current

employment status, referral source, source of support before

disability or incidence of specialized training. Positive

correlation was found between the amputees' Acceptance of

Disability scores (Linkowski, 1971) and their years of educa-

tion which provides support for Safilios-Rothschild's (1970)

hypothesis that the more resources (including education) people

have at their disposal, the less threatened they are by the

functional limitations of a disability. Another notable re-

sult of the study with amputees by Thomas, Davis and Hochman

(1976) was the difference in acceptance between persons with

different religious backgrounds. Catholics were found to be

most accepting, followed by Protestants and persons reporting

no religious preference.

Severity of disability has not been found to be related

to acceptance of disability. Rather, the extent of the psy-

chological impact experienced by each individual seems more

related to the significance the disability possesses for the

person (Larson & Spreitzer, 1970; Levine, 1959; Starr &

Heiserman, 1977). People are dependent on their bodies as









sources of self esteem, self confidence, pride and pleasure.

Different parts of the body are valued to different degrees

by each individual. The higher the emotional investment the

greater the reaction to the loss of that part (Schoenbert,

Carr, Peretz & Kutscher, 1970).

Comer and Piliavin (1975) found that length of time dis-

abled may not be related to self acceptance or acceptance of

disability. Although time does heal many physical and psy-

chological wounds, the passage of time does not necessarily

create the conditions to insure persons' acceptance of their

disabilities.

The relationship of other demographic factors and accep-

tance of disability have not been explored. Especially lacking

is research in the area of level of individuals' acceptance of

disabilities with different types of disabilities.


Assertive Behavior and Assertive Behavior Training in
the Rehabilitation Counseling Process


Definition

Assertive behavior may be perceived as any interpersonal

response involving the direct honest and appropriate verbal

and nonverbal expression of one's feelings,.beliefs, and per-

sonal rights without violating the rights of others (Rimm, Hill,

Brown, & Stewart, 1974).

Assertiveness is further defined as

1. The ability to express all manner of emotions both

pleasant and unpleasant in an open, direct and honest

way.





-17-


2. The capacity to exercise rights without denying the

rights of others.

3. The confidence to stand up for oneself without undue

anxiety.

4. The freedom to be able to make a choice as to whether

assertive behavior is appropriate (Shelton, 1977, p.

465).

"Assertive individuals are expressive, spontaneous, well

defined, confident and able to influence and lead others while

non-assertive persons more often feel inadequate and inferior,

have marked tendencies to be over solicitous of emotional sup-

port from others and exhibit excessive interpersonal anxiety"

(Galassi, DeLo, Galassi, & Bastien, 1974, p. 1965).


Practical Application in Rehabilitation

Recently there has been an increased emphasis on the use

of assertiveness in rehabilitation settings (Luck & Lassiter,

1978). The use of assertion training in rehabilitation is an

outgrowth of the traditional rehabilitation process of adjust-

ment counseling which emphasizes sociocultural factors such as

the development of interpersonal relationships. The literature

suggests that physically disabled persons need to receive

training in social and interaction skills to prepare for social,

vocational and emotional adjustment (Siller, 1970; Wright,

1960).

Research indicates that personal adjustment is related

to assertiveness. Galassi and Galassi (1974) found that

students who sought personal adjustment counseling were





-18-


significantly less assertive than both non-counselees and

students who sought only vocational counseling. Gay,

Hollandsworth and Galassi (1975) supported this when their

assertiveness inventory for adults showed that individuals

seeking personal adjustment counseling scored significantly

lower on the ASES than adults in general. One method of

developing interpersonal skills and increasing personal ad-

justment is through human relations training. A recent popu-

lar alternative to human relations training in rehabilitation

counseling is assertion training (Grimes, 1980).

Assertion training is a generic behavioral counseling

procedure involving a number of specific techniques such as

behavioral rehearsal (McFall & Marstan, 1970) or various forms

of modeling (Eisler, Hersen & Miller, 1973; Kazdin, 1974;

Serber, 1972) all directed toward enabling individuals to

engage in appropriate behavior. Assertion training promotes

socially appropriate expression of personal rights and feelings

(McFall & Marstan, 1970; Wolpe, 1969). In rehabilitation

settings, assertive behavior counseling is usually applied

during the vocational evaluation and training phases though

future research may explore the use of assertion training in

other phases of the rehabilitation process; e.g. counseling,

job placement, and post employment service (Grimes, 1980).

Assertive behavior training has been used to increase

assertive behavior with disabled rehabilitation clients.

Mishel (1978) found, in his study of 14 disabled persons, that

assertion training was helpful in increasing assertiveness and





-19-


lessening anxiety in his sample. A study by Grimes (1980)

used assertion training with severely disabled persons. His

results indicated that assertion training increased the asser-

tive behavior levels of his subjects. Page, Holland, Rand,

Gartin and Dowling (1981) observed increased assertion in a

group of 8 disabled persons who had received assertive behavior

training. In another study, Morgan and Leung (1980) found that

assertion training seems to increase self concepts and enhance

social interaction skills of disabled university students.

Assertion training has been used by rehabilitation coun-

selors to increase assertive behavior in mentally retarded

clients. Zisfein and Rosen (1973) briefly described the in-

corporation of assertiveness training into personal adjustment

training programs for the mentally retarded. In addition,

Granat (1978) proposed an outline for the use of assertive

behavior training in the rehabilitation of mentally retarded

clients. Straker (1978) used a similar assertion training out-

line and found evidence to support the use of assertive beha-

vior training with educably retarded clients.

Assertion training has been reported to be a therapeutic

modality in substance abusing clients. Martorano (1974) sug-

gests the use of assertive behavior training to increase

social skills of substance abusers. More recently, Lindquist,

Lindsay and White (1979) found that substance abusing subjects

were less assertive, less socially assertive and more socially

anxious than non-substance abusing subjects in a sample of 114

adults.





-20-


Related Variables

A number of variables have been investigated and seem to

be related to assertion. These variables include locus of

control, self confidence, personal adjustment, anxiety and the

appropriate expression of anger. Percell et al. (1974) found

that there was significant negative correlation between mea-

sures of assertiveness and anxiety. Their findings were sup-

ported by Orenstein, Orenstein and Carr (1975), in a study

using 450 college students. Gay, Hollandsworth and Galassi

(1975), using 464 subjects ranging in age from 18 to 60 years,

administered the ASES (Gay, 1974) and the Taylor Manifest

Anxiety Scale as one of the validation studies for the ASES.

They found that the measure of anxiety clearly differentiated

low from high assertiveness as identified by the ASES.

Gay, Hollandsworth and Galassi (1975) found that the sub-

jects scoring high on the ASES described themselves as more

confident than low scorers. Correlation data for the ASES

with the Adjective Check List needs scales indicated that high

scorers are more achievement oriented, more often seek leader-

ship roles in groups and individual relationships, more inde-

pendent, less likely to express feelings of inferiority through

self-depreciation, and are less deferential in relationships.

Bates and Zimmerman (1971) used the Rotter I-E Scale, a

measure of generalized expectancy for internal versus external

locus of control, to test the idea that non-assertive subjects

are more likely than assertive subjects to perceive reinforce-

ments as externally controlled. Their results confirmed this






-21-


idea and were significant. Appelbaum, Luma, and Johnson

(1975) also found that internals are significantly more asser-

tive than externals. Rimm, Hill, Brown and Stewart (1974) and

Gay, Hollandsworth and Galassi (1975) found no significant

differences in locus of control and assertiveness level.

Doyle and Biaggio (1981) examined the differences between

asserters and non-asserters on anger expression. Asserters

were found to express significantly more verbal anger than

non-asserters. High asserters did not, however, score higher

on physical expression of anger than non-asserters. Results

also supported the contention that non-asserters experience

more anger than do high asserters.

Joiner et al. (1981) considered demographic factors that

may be related to assertive behavior level in disabled adults.

In the study, 91 disabled clients were given the ASES (Gay,

1974) and a demographic data sheet requesting age, sex, race,

marital status, metropolitan/non-metropolitan residence, edu-

cation level, disability and length of time disabled. Signifi-

cant differences were found between male and female assertive

behavior scores and between residence of metropolitan and non-

metropolitan areas. No significant differences were found be-

tween scores on the ASES and other demographic variables. Al-

though no statistically significant differences were found to

exist between ASES scores and other demographic variables, cer-

tain trends were apparent. High and low mean assertive behavior

levels were observed among specific disability groups, age

groups, level of education groups and marital status groups.





-22-


The Relationship of Assertive Behavior and Acceptance
of Disability with Disabled Persons

Research suggests that nearly all disabled persons are

confronted with negative societal attitudes (Gellman, 1974;

Safilios-Rothschild, 1970; Siller, 1976; Smith-Hanen, 1976;

Yuker, Block & Younng, 1966). Stigmatizing attitudes exist

which can influence persons' acceptance of their disabilities

and create further limiting factors in vocational, personal,

and social adjustment. Smith-Hanen (1976) notes that most so-

cieties view disability as a deviation from the norm that leads

to negative attitudes, labeling, and stigmatizing on the part

of the non-disabled. In addition, society presents other sig-

nificant barriers to adjustment to disability in the form of

inaccessible buildings and public modes of transportation

(Rubin & Roessler, 1978). Research indicates that acceptance

of disability and assertive behavior may strengthen persons'

self concepts and encourage forthright and determined stances

toward these sociological barriers toward the disabled.

(Linkowski & Dunn, 1974; Morgan & Leung, 1980; Starr &

Heiserman, 1977).

As a result of negative attitudes toward the disabled

Safilios-Rothschild (1970) noted that interpersonal relations

between non-disabled and disabled follow a superior-inferior

model of social interaction or ten to be nonexistent (English,

1977; Stewart & Rossier, 1978; Ziller & Smith, 1977). Wright

(1960) cites accounts by numerous disabled persons who have

remarked that non-disabled persons treat them as if they were

disabled in every way.





-23-


Results of research by Kleck, Onan and Hastorf (1966)

support the contention that non-disabled persons tend to be

more emotionally incongruent with disabled persons than with

non-disabled persons. They discovered that non-disabled per-

sons demonstrated stereotyped inhibited and over controlled

behavior with the disabled. Kleck (1968) found that non-

disabled persons interacting with a confederate playing an

amputee showed less spontaneous movement by the non-disabled

person, an overly positive attitude toward the disabled and

over emphasized agreement with the person acting disabled.

Disabled persons and rehabilitation professionals are

seeking to positively change attitudes toward the disabled

through education and increased positive interaction between

disabled and non-disabled in society. Disabled persons are

increasingly taking self advocating stances on improving com-

munication with non-disabled and asserting themselves to gain

recognition for their needs and interests. The disabled and

rehabilitation counselors are finding that assertive behavior

on the part of the disabled can be an effective way to in-

crease acceptance of disability, promote self advocacy and

improve the quality of interaction between disabled and non-

disabled. Enhanced quality of communication between disabled

and non-disabled may insure that the needs and interests of

the disabled are considered by society (Granat, 1978; Grimes,

1980; Mishel, 1978; Morgan & Leung, 1980).

The results of a study by Morgan and Leung (1980) to test

the relationship between assertive behavior and acceptance of





-24-


disability and the effects of assertion training on acceptance

of disability with physically disabled university students

indicated that a positive relationship may exist between as-

sertive behavior and acceptance of disability. Results also

indicated that assertion training may be effective in increas-

ing acceptance of disability with disabled university students.

No studies have tested the effect of assertion training on

acceptance of disability with other groups of disabled indi-

viduals.


Summary

The review of the literature supports the contention that

acceptance of disability and assertive behavior are important

factors in the rehabilitation process. It also supports the

effective use of acceptance of disability counseling and

assertive behavior training with disabled clients. Although

these methods are being used in rehabilitation counseling,

there are few empirical studies identifying demographic fac-

tors to support the need for the use of these techniques

with different groups of disabled persons. Further, limited

research suggests that there may be a positive relationship

between acceptance of disability and assertive behavior.














CHAPTER THREE
METHODOLOGY


The purpose of this study was to investigate the rela-

tionship between assertive behavior levels and acceptance of

disability in the rehabilitation counseling process of dis-

abled persons. The study also determined if there were dif-

ferences in degrees of assertive behavior and acceptance of

disability among disabled groups based on age, sex, race,

educational level, marital status, metropolitan or non-metro-

politan residence, type of disability and length of time

disabled. The ASES (Gay, 1974), the AD Scale (Linkowski,

1971), and a descriptive data form were administered to a

sample of disabled adults in the North Florida area who were

receiving rehabilitation counseling services. The population,

sampling procedures, sample, instruments, data collection pro-

cedures, and analysis of data are described in this chapter.


Population

Approximately one in every six persons in the United

States is disabled. According to the 1974 National Health

Interview Survey about 20 percent of those persons at age 45

to 64 experience some limitation of activity due to chronic

conditions. Although all people are possible victims of dis-

abling conditions and older persons are affected severely and

at higher rates, the largest number is under 65 years of age.

The Florida Office of Vocational Rehabilitation estimated





-26-


Florida's disabled population between the ages of 18 and 64 in

1976 as 13 percent of the total in that age group (Health Sys-

tems Plan, 1980). Florida's population according to the 1980

census is 9,739,922. There are approximately 6,300,800 persons

in Florida between 18 and 64. Thirteen percent of this age

group or 826,904 are estimated to be disabled (Florida Statis-

tical Abstracts, 1980).

The Commission of Chronic Illness in the Health Systems

Plan (1980, p. G-l) defines a chronic condition as, "an im-

pairment or deviation from normal which has one or more of the

following characteristics: permanency of residual disability;

a requirement of special client training for rehabilitation;

and a long period of medical supervision, observation or care."

As this definition implies, chronic disabilities and disabling

conditions are associated with a wide range of factors:trauma,

heredity, the aging process, metabolic disorders, diseases,

allergies, environmental conditions, psychological conditions

and personal habits.

Categories for disability include medical, sensory, men-

tal and psychological. Major groupings for disabling conditions

include those related to cardiovascular disease, spinal cord

injury, orthopedic conditions, neurologic conditions, visual

and hearing impairments, mental retardation, psychological dis-

ability and substance abuse.


Sampling Procedures

Rehabilitation service agencies in the North Florida area

were selected for the study according to the following criteria:





-27-


1. Provided rehabilitation services

2. Clients served were between the ages of 18 to 64

3. Agency clients were representative of the disability

categories of neurologic, cardiovascular, spinal cord

injured, orthopedic, visually impaired, hearing im-

paired, borderline and educable mentally retarded and

substance abusers

4. State and private agencies

5. Accessible to researcher

6. Were located in one of the North Florida counties of

Alachua, Bradford, Citrus, Columbia, Dixie, Gilchrist,

Hamilton, Hernando, Lafayette, Lake, Levy, Marion,

Putnam, Sumter, Suwanee, Union, Baker, Clay, Duval,

Flagler, Nassau, St. Johns, or Volusia

The agencies were contacted by phone call and/or personal

visit. A list of the agencies that were contacted may be found

in Appendix B. The agencies were asked if they would grant

permission to use their clients in the study. Letters of in-

tended participation were solicited from each of the agencies.

In addition, a rehabilitation practitioner was identified in

each agency and he was requested to administer the Informed

Consent Forms (Appendix D) and the instruments.

The University of Florida Human Subjects Committee was

contacted to seek permission to conduct the study. This was

done to insure that the University of Florida Human Subjects

Committee approved of the project and its goals and was aware

of its existence.





-28-

Instructions to rehabilitation practitioners (Appendix C)

were developed for personnel administering the instruments.

It was important that each person in the study received iden-

tical instructions as there were many agencies and rehabilita-

tion practitioners involved. The researcher met and instructed

all participating rehabilitation practitioners in the proce-

dures for administering the instruments. They were advised to

1. Use only voluntary participants and obtain Informed

Consent Forms from all subjects

2. Read or sign the instructions verbatim to the sub-

jects from Appendix C

After permission was granted by the various agencies and

the University of Florida Human Subjects Committee, the In-

formed Consent Forms, the data forms and instruments were

taken to each of the agencies. At the time of delivery of the

instruments, the rehabilitation practitioners were asked to

obtain Informed Consent Forms for all participants. In addi-

tion, they were instructed in the administration procedures.

The rehabilitation practitioners were asked to use cassette

recordings of the instruments for the administration of the

instruments to all but the deaf subjects. The practitioners

administering the instruments to the blind subjects agreed to

this procedure; all others refused to use the tapes. They re-

ported that it took too long to administer the instruments

using the tapes. Therefore, the tapes were not used for any

subjects except the blind. The researcher read the questions

from the instruments to the mentally retarded individuals and

they responded as they thought appropriate. Other subjects

were read identical instructions and left to respond to the

questionnaires.







-29-


Sample

The sample for this study consisted of 160 disabled adults

in the North Florida area receiving rehabilitation counseling

services. The subjects for the sample were chosen from the

North Florida area because of their availability and represen-

tativeness.

In a study conducted to assess the assertive behavior

levels of disabled adults, twenty-two disability categories

were investigated for differences in assertive behavior levels

(Joiner et al., 1981). Differences in levels of assertive-

ness were found to exist between the disabilities. However,

there were too few individuals represented within each dis-

ability category to produce statistically meaningful results.

Therefore, the sample for this study was selected from eight

primary disability categories: cardiovascular, spinal cord

injured, neurologic, orthopedic, visually impaired, hearing

impaired, borderline and educably mentally retarded and sub-

stance abusers.

Each participant chosen on the bases of disability type

was selected on a voluntary basis. Persons were selected for

the sample until there were 20 persons in each of the eight

primary disability categories.


Instruments

The three instruments that were used in this study are

the Adult Self Expression Scale (ASES) (Gay, 1974), the scale

of Acceptance of Disability (AD) (Linkowski, 1971), and a

descriptive data form. The ASES was used to measure level of








assertive behavior and the AD was used to determine level of

acceptance of disability by the disabled adult. The descrip-

tive data form was used to procure demographic information

about participants.

The ASES (Gay, 1974) is a 48 item, self report measure of

assertiveness designed to be used with adults. It is based on

a two-dimensional model of assertiveness. One dimension speci-

fies interpersonal situations in which assertive behavior might

occur, such as interactions with family, public or friends.

The second dimension specifies the assertive behaviors that may

occur in these situations, such as expressing feelings or ask-

ing favors.

The ASES uses a five-point Likert format (0-4). Respon-

dents are asked to answer the questions by indicating how they

generally express themselves in a variety of situations. The

choices for responses are (0) "Almost Always" or "Always," (1)

"Usually," (2) "Sometimes," (3) "Seldom," or (4) "Never" or

"Rarely." The respondents are told their answers should not

reflect how they feel they ought to act or how they would like

to act but rather how they generally do act. It takes approxi-

mately 15 minutes to complete the ASES (Gay, 1974).

Scores for the ASES range from 0 to 192. The mean ASES

score obtained from 640 adults between the ages of 18 to 60

was 115, with a standard deviation of approximately 20. ASES

scores falling about 135 or higher are considered as high

scores and scores falling below 95 are considered to be low

(Gay, 1974).





-31-


Subjects for reliability and validity studies were

selected from a large community college. Test-retest reli-

abilities over two week and five week intervals conducted with

two samples of subjects resulted in high reliability coeffi-

cients. A Pearson product moment correlation computed after

two week and five week intervals produced reliability coeffi-

cients of .88 and .91 respectively. Internal consistency was

determined by correlating the odd-even scores for 464 subjects.

A Pearson product moment correlation resulted in a .79 reli-

ability coefficients (Gay, 1974; Gay, Hollandsworth & Galassi,

1975).

Several validity studies have been conducted for the ASES

(Gay, 1974; Hollandsworth, Galassi & Gay, 1977). Construct

validity was established by correlating the total scores of

individuals taking the ASES with their scores on the 24 scales

of the Adjective Check List (ACL). The ASES was found to cor-

relate positively and significantly (p<.001) with the Number

of Adjectives Checked, and the Self-Confidence, Lability,

Achievement, Dominance, Affiliation, Heterosexuality, Exhibi-

tion, Autonomy, Aggression and Change Scales. A negative cor-

relation was found (p<.001) with ASES and the Succorance,

Abasement, and Deference Scales of the ACL.

The method of contrasting groups was used to establish

construct validity for the ASES. Thirty-two clients seeking

personal adjustment counseling scored significantly (p<.05)

lower (x=101.81) on the ASES than did subjects who were not

counseled (x=114.20). Discriminant validity was established





-32-


for the ASES by examining the relationship between assertive-

ness and anxiety, self confidence and locus of control. Anx-

iety was measured by the Taylor Manifest Anxiety Scale. Self

confidence was measured by the Self Confidence Scale of the

Adjective Check List. Locus of control was measured by

Rotter's I-E which is a measure of generalized expectancy for

internal versus external control of reinforcement. A discri-

minant analysis resulted in a significant F value (F(3,54))=

9.56, p<.001). The variate tests for the three variables re-

vealed that anxiety (F(1,56)=17.86, p<.291) did not discrimi-

nate between low and high assertive groups (Hollandsworth,

Galassi & Gay, 1977).

Convergent and discriminant validity was established by

the Campbell-Fiske multitrait-multimethod procedures. Conver-

gent validity was established in terms of ASES' relationship

with the constructs of dominance and abasement as measured by

a self-report method. Discriminant validity via different

assessment methods is only moderate in strength. The incon-

sistency of discriminant validity findings may be due to the

fact that the ASES assesses assertiveness responses in terms

of frequency of response instead of verbal content of the sit-

uation (Hollandsworth, Galassi & Gay, 1977).

The Acceptance of Disability (Linkowski, 1971) is a 50

item self-report measure of acceptance to disability. It is

based on the process of acceptance of loss as a series of

value changes. Disabled persons who are able to accept their

loss are those who 1) enlarge their scope of values, i.e.,

the ability to feel self worth in activities, 2) subordinate





-33-


their physique, i.e., the extent the person is able to de-

emphasize the aspects of physical ability and appearance,

3) containment of disability effects, i.e., the extent that

the person does not spread his/her disability beyond its

actual physical impairment and 4) transformation from compara-

tive values to asset values, i.e., the ability to not compare

her/himself to others, but emphasizes own assets and abilities.

The AD uses a six-point format (1-6). Respondents are

asked to answer the items by indicating how much they agree or

disagree with the statements. The choices for responses range

from "I disagree very much" to "I agree very much." Some items

are stated positively and others negatively in order to prevent

the operation of a possible response set. It takes approxi-

mately 15 minutes to complete the AD (Linkowski, 1971).

The scores for the AD range from 50 to 300. The mean AD

score obtained from rehabilitation clients was 217, with a

standard deviation of approximately 37. AD scores falling

about 254 or higher are considered high scores and scores be-

low 180 are considered to be low (Linkowski, 1971).

The validity and reliability for the AD have been inves-

tigated. Content validity was determined by expert opinion.

Individuals with doctorates in rehabilitation counseling as-

sisted in the process. Split-half reliability for the AD was

established by using the odd-even method of correlation from

a sample of 46 disabled individuals. Internal consistency

reliability was computed to be r=.86 and the application of

the Spearman-Brown prophesy formula estimated the full scale

reliability to be .93 (Linkowski, 1971).





-34-


The AD and the Attitudes Toward Disabled Persons Scale

(ATDP) were administered to a sample of 101 disabled persons.

The ATDP, when administered to disabled persons, purportedly

measures the attitudes that disabled persons have toward them-

selves. The correlation coefficient was .81 and was signifi-

cant at the p<.001 level (Linkowski, 1971).

A descriptive data form was devised for the purposes of

this study (Appendix A). Demographic variables of age, sex,

race, marital status, residence, educational level, primary

disability, length of time having primary disability, multiple

disabilities and total time disabled were ascertained from

this form.

Data Collection Procedure

After the collection of data, by the rehabilitation per-

sonnel in the agencies, the researcher contacted each agency

once a week to determine how many individuals in each dis-

ability category had been tested. When a minimum of 160 par-

ticipants, 20 in each disability category, was reached, the

researcher advised each agency to stop the collection of data.

The researcher then retrieved all data for analysis.


Analyses of Data

Parametric statistics were used to analyze the data for

this study. A sample of disabled individuals was selected

from the population of disabled individuals receiving rehabili-

tation services from agencies in the North Florida area. Dis-

crete data variables were sex, race, marital status, residence,

type of primary disability and multiple disabilities.








Continuous data variables were age, educational level, length

of primary disability, total length of time disabled, AS score

and ASES score.

In this study t-tests were used to determine if signifi-

cant differences existed among the mean ASES scores of disabled

persons due to sex, race, and residence. Analysis of variance

was used to determine if significant differences existed among

ASES score due to marital status and type of disability. Ad-

ditional t-tests were used to determine if significant differ-

ences existed among the mean AD score of disabled persons due

to sex, race, and residence. Analysis of variance was used to

determine significance between AD score due to marital status

and type of disability.

Pearson product moment correlations and regression analy-

sis were used to determine significance of relationships be-

tween the ASES scores and the AD scores for disabled persons.

Age, educational level, and total time disabled and their re-

lationship and significance to the ASES and AD were analyzed

by Pearson product moment correlations and multiple regression

analysis. A Pearson product moment correlation and regression

analysis were chosen because of their ability to measure the

relationship between two variables using continuous data. A

.05 level of significance will be used for all data analysis

in this study.


Limitations

Limitations are apparent in the procedures for this study.

The selection of subjects was not random. Rather, the sample






-36-


was based on subjects availability and willingness to partici-

pate in this research. In addition, the instruments used in

this study are self-report measures. Self reported responses

may be enhanced when compared to in vivo responses. One must

use caution in generalizing from self-report to natural beha-

vior (Gorecki, Dickson, Anderson, & Jones, 1981). Finally,

there are limitations in the administration of the instruments.

Rehabilitation personnel administered the instruments to indi-

viduals with different types of disabilities. Cassette tapes

were made of the instruments and rehabilitation personnel pro-

ficient in sign language were used to accommodate the visually

and hearing impaired subjects. The instruments were read by

the researcher to all mentally retarded subjects. These modi-

fications in the administration of the instruments may have

influenced subjects' responses.














CHAPTER FOUR
RESULTS


The purpose of this study was to investigate the rela-

tionship between assertive behavior levels and acceptance of

disability within the rehabilitation counseling process of

disabled persons. The study also examined for differences in

the degree of assertive behavior and acceptance of disability

among disabled persons based on age, sex, race, educational

level, marital status, metropolitan or nonmetropolitan resi-

dence, type of disability and length of time disabled. The

Adult Self Expression Scale (ASES) (Gay, 1974), the scale of

Acceptance of Disability (AD) (Linkowski, 1974), and a descrip-

tive data form were administered to a sample of 160 disabled

adults in the North Florida area who were receiving rehabili-

tation counseling services. The results of the study are re-

ported in the chapter. The results of each hypothesis tested

are observed first; additional analyses relating to the hypo-

theses are discussed in the end of the chapter.


Hypothesis 1

The first hypothesis tested was that there is no relation-

ship between degree of assertive behavior and degree of accep-

tance of disability among disabled persons. Computation of

Pearson product moment correlations, analyses of variance and

regression analyses were used to determine significance of


-37-






-38-


relationships between the ASES scores and the AD scores for

disabled persons. The Pearson product moment correlation

(Table 1) indicates that there was a significant positive re-

lationship between degree of assertive behavior and degree of

acceptance of disability. Table 2 presents the results of the

regression analysis which indicated that there was a signifi-

cant relationship between ASES and AD scores. Acceptance of

disability is a significant predictor of assertiveness and

conversely, assertiveness level is a predictor of acceptance

of disability. Therefore the first hypothesis was rejected.


Hypothesis 2

The second hypothesis tested was that there are no dif-

ferences in degree of assertive behavior among disabled per-

sons on the bases of sex, race, metropolitan/nonmetropolitan

residence, marital status, age and educational level. To de-

termine if significant differences existed in ASES scores of

disabled persons due to sex, race and metropolitan/nonmetro-

politan residence, t-tests were used. Analysis of variance

was used to determine if significant differences existed in

ASES scores on the bases of marital status. Pearson product

moment correlation was used to determine significance of rela-

tionships between the ASES scores and age and educational

level. Results in Tables 1, 3 and 4 indicate that there are

no differences in degrees of assertive behavior among disabled

persons on the bases of sex, race, metropolitan/nonmetropolitan

residence, marital status or age. However, a significant posi-

tive relationship does exist between ASES and educational level.

Although one of the analyses suggests a difference, most of the






-39-

analyses suggest no differences. Therefore, the second hypo-

thesis was not rejected.



Table 1
Pearson Product Moment Correlation Coefficients



Length of
Education Primary Total Time
ASES AD Age Level Disability Disabled
ASES 1.00000 0.48155* 0.09694 0.19120 0.14427 0.07893 -Pearson
0.0000 0.0001 0.2227 0.0151 0.0687 0.3211 'Probability
(.481)2 R'
AD 0.48155 1.00000 0.22196 0.22732* 0.02140 -0.02945
0.0001 0.0000 0.0048 0.0038 0.7882 0.7116
(.227)2

Age 0.09694 0.22196* 1.00000 -0.19978* 0.11234 0.07891
0.2227 0.0048 0.0000 0.0113 0.1199 0.3212
(.221)2 (.199)2
Education 0.19120* 0.22732* -0.19978 1.00000 -0.18651 -0.17373
Level 0.0154 0.0038 0.0113 0.0000 0.0182 0.0280
(.191) (.227)2 (.199)2
Length of 0.14427 0.02140 0.12345 -0.18651* 1.00000 0.91468
Primary 0.0687 0.7882 0.1199 0.0182 0.0000 0.0001
Disability (.186)2

Total Time 0.07893 -0.02945 0.07891 -0.17373* 0.91468* 1.00000
Disabled 0.3211 0.7116 0.3213 0.0280 0.0001 0.0000
*P<.05 (.173)2 (.914)2
R2 is included for significant correlations





-40-


Table 2
Regression Analysis and ANOVA Summary


Dependent Variable: ASES
Source of Variation SS df MS F

AD 60911.09 158 385.51 47.70*

Dependent Variable: AD
Source of Variation SS df MS F

ASES 148947.42 158 942.7 47.70*

*P<.05


Table 3
Means, Standard Deviations and t-values for Sex, Race, and
Residence on ASES Scores


Dependent Variable: ASES

Variable Group N Mean S.D. t-value

Sex Males 82 112.81 22.32
Females 78 110.43 22.41

Race White 121 112.42 22.71
Black 38 109.28 21.22

Residence Metropolitan 103 112.92 22.08 96
Non-Metropolitan 57 109.36 22.78



Table 4
Marital Status and Assertiveness Analysis of
Variance Summary


Dependent Variable: ASES
Source of Variation SS df MS F

Marital Status 76547.25 154 497.06 1.33





-41-


Hypothesis 3

The third hypothesis tested was that there are no differ-

ences in degrees of assertive behavior among disabled persons

on the bases of type of disability and length of time disabled.

Analysis of variance was used to determine if there were dif-

ferences in assertive behavior among disabled persons on the

basis of type of disability. The results shown in Table 5 in-

dicate that there are significant differences on the basis of

disability type. Results of Duncan's Multiple Range test

(Table 6) indicate that the group of blind individuals in the

sample were significantly more assertive than the rest of the

sample. In addition, the results (Table 6) indicate that the

individuals with neurologic disabilities in the sample were

significantly less assertive than the substance abusers as

well as the blind persons in the sample. There were no differ-

ences in degrees of assertive behavior among the other dis-

ability groups.

The results in Table 1 indicate that length of disability

is not a significant factor in degree of assertive behavior.

However, without the data from the mentally retarded group,

all of whom had been disabled for life, length of primary dis-

ability and total time disabled were significant factors (See

Table E-l in Appendix E). Since there were differences in de-

grees of assertiveness among disabled persons on the basis of

type of disability, hypothesis three was rejected.








Table 5
ASES by Disability Group


Dependent Variable: ASES
Source of Variation SS df MS F

Disability 61762.95 152 406.33 6.17*

*P<.05


Table 6
Duncan's Multiple Range Test for Variable ASES and
Disability Groups


Means with the same letter are not significantly different

Grouping Mean N Disability

A 135.80 20 Blind

B 114.80 20 Substance Abuse

C B 114.05 20 Deaf

C B 111.45 20 Spinal Cord Injury

C B 108.90 20 Cardiac Disability

C B 107.35 20 Orthopedic Disability

C B 101.15 20 Mentally Retarded

C 99.75 20 Neurologic Disability

*P<.05


Hypothesis 4

The fourth hypothesis tested was that there are no differ-

ences in the acceptance of disability among disabled persons on

the basis of sex, race, metropolitan residence, marital status,

age, and educational level. In this study t-tests were used to

determine if significant differences existed among the AD scores

of disabled persons due to sex, race, and metropolitan/nonmetro-

politan residence. Analysis of variance was used to determine






-43-


if significant differences existed in AD scores on the basis

of marital status. Pearson product moment correlations were

used to determine if there were significant relationships be-

tween AD scores and age and educational level. Results in

Tables 1 and 7 indicate that there are no significant differ-

ences in the acceptance of disability among disabled persons

on the bases of sex or residence. However, results in Tables

1, 7, 8 and 9 do indicate significant differences between AD

scores and race, marital status, age and educational levels.

White persons are more accepting of their disabilities than

Black persons. Disabled divorced persons are significantly

more accepting of their disabilities than single, married,

separated or widowed disabled persons. As a person's educa-

tional level increases, their acceptance of disability also in-

creases. Therefore hypothesis four was rejected.


Table 7
Means, Standard Deviations, and t-values for Sex, Race
and Residence on AD Scores


Dependent Variable: AD

Variable Group N Mean SD t-value

Sex Males 82 205.87 31.87
-0.80
Females 78 210.34 37.94

Race White 121 211.30 34.52
Black 39 197.97 34.66

Residence Metropolitan 103 207.88 35.05
-0.08
Nonmetropolitan 57 208.36 34.98

*P<.05






-44-


Table 8
Marital Status and Acceptance of Disability


Dependent Variable: AD
Source of Variation SS df MS F

Marital Status 177238.81 154 1150.90 3.60*

*P<.05


Table 9
Duncan's Multiple Range Test for Variable AD and
Marital Status Groups


Means with the same letter are not significantly different

Grouping Mean N Marital Status

A 137.53 15 Divorced

B 208.85 62 Married

B 208.00 2 Widowed

B 202.74 75 Single

B 191.40 5 Separated



Hypothesis 5

The fifth hypothesis tested was that there are no differ-

ences in the acceptance of disability among disabled persons on

the bases of type of disability and length of time disabled.

Analysis of variance was used to determine differences in ac-

ceptance of disability among disabled persons on the basis of

disability type.

The results in Table 10 indicate that there are significant

differences in degrees of acceptance of disability on the basis

of disability type. The results of Duncan's Multiple Range test

(Table 11) indicates that the deaf and blind group of people in






-45-


the sample had significantly higher levels of acceptance of

their disability than those people in the sample with cardiac,

substance abuse, or orthopedic disability and the sample group

of mentally retarded individuals. The spinal cord injured

group was significantly more accepting of their disability

than the orthopedic disability group and the mentally retarded

group. In addition, the neurologic, cardiac disability and the

substance abuser groups were significantly more accepting of

their disabilities than the mentally retarded group.


Table 10
AD by Disability Group


Dependent Variable: AD
Source of Variation SS df MS F

Disability 150837.15 152 992.34 620*

*P<.05


Table 11
Duncan's Multiple Range Test for Variable AD


Means with the same letter are not significantly different

Grouping Mean N Disability

A 229.50 20 Deaf

A 228.00 20 Blind

B A 217.90 20 Spinal Cord Injury

B A C 209.40 20 Neurologic Disability

B C 206.60 20 Cardiac Disability

B C 200.95 20 Substance Abuse

D C 195.60 20 Orthopedic Disability

D 176.60 20 Mentally Retarded

*P<.05





-46-


Results from Table 1 indicate that neither length of pri-

mary disability nor total time disabled is a significant factor

in degree of acceptance of disability. Without the data from

the mentally retarded group, all of whom had had their dis-

ability for life, length of primary disability and total time

disabled became significant factors in acceptance of disability

(See Table E-l in Appendix E). Because there were differences

in degrees of acceptance of disability among disabled persons

on the basis of type of disability, hypothesis five was rejected.


Additional Analyses of the Data

The results of the Pearson product moment correlation co-

efficient in Table 1 indicate positive relationships between

ASES and AD, ASES and educational level, AD and age, and AD and

educational level. Negative correlations were found between

age and educational level, length of primary disability and

educational level, and total time disabled and educational

level. The results of correlations on all disability types

except the mentally retarded (Table E-l, Appendix E) indicate

the same positive correlations as above plus positive correla-

tions with both ASES and AD and length of primary disability

and total time disabled. No significant negative correlations

were observed.

A multiple regression analysis was performed to determine

the best set of predictor variables from among AD, age, educa-

tional level, length of primary disability and total time dis-

abled for those disabled individuals in need of assertiveness








counseling. The best set of predictor variables for the de-

pendent variable of assertiveness is level of acceptance of

disability, length of time with primary disability and educa-

tional level. With information from the coefficients of de-

termination in Table 1 it can be determined that these vari-

ables account for, respectively, 23%, 2% and 3% of the varia-

tion in the ASES score. These three variables together there-

fore explain approximately 25% of the variation in the ASES

score. The results in Table 12 present the R-square values

and the summary table for these significant predictor vari-

ables.

A multiple regression analysis was performed to determine

the best set of predictor variables for assertiveness for all

disability groups sampled except the mentally retarded. The

mentally retarded group, unlike all other disability groups,

had had their disability for life. Results in Table E-2, Appen-

dix E indicate that total time disabled becomes a significant

predictor of ASES for all other disability groups sampled.


Table 12
Multiple Regression Analysis to Determine the Best Predictor
Variables for the ASES


Dependent Variable: ASES R Square = 0.2624

Predictor Variables Sum of Squares F*

AD 15256.84 40.70

Length of Time with Primary
Disability 1868.10 4.98

Educational Level 1003.04 2.68

*P<.05






-48-


A multiple regression analysis was performed for the vari-

ables of ASES, age, educational level, length of primary dis-

ability and total time disabled to determine the best set of

predictor variables for those individuals in need of acceptance

of disability counseling. The bset set is level of assertive

behavior, age, and educational level. With information from

the coefficients of determination, it can be determined that

these variables account for, respectively, 23%, 4% and 5% of

the variation of AD scores. These variables therefore explain

29% of the variation in the AD score. The results in Table 13

present the R-square values and the ANOVA summary table for

these significant variables.

A multiple regression analysis was performed to determine

the best set of predictor variables for acceptance of disabili-

ty for all disability groups sampled except mentally retarded.

The mentally retarded group, unlike all other disability groups,

had had their disability for life. Results in Table E-3, Appen-

dix E, indicate that length of primary disability and total

time disabled became significant predictors of AD for all other

disability groups sampled.

A t-test for independent samples was used to determine if

there was a significant difference in the level of assertive

behavior between this disabled sample and the non-disabled

norm group for the ASES. Results in Table 14 indicate a sig-

nificant difference between the disabled sample group and the

norm group for the ASES.






-49-


A t-test for independent samples was also used to deter-

mine if there was a significant difference between disabled

rehabilitation counseling clients and the disabled AD norm

group. The results in Table 14 indicate that there is no dif-

ference between disabled rehabilitation counseling clients and

the AD norm group.


Table
Multiple Regression Analysis to
Variables


13
Determine the Best Predictor
for AD


Dependent Variable: AD R Square = 0.2959

Predictor Variables Sum of Squares F*

ASES 32926.65 37.62

Age 8737.44 9.98

Educational Level 6404.85 7.32

*P<.05


Table 14
Norm Group Comparison for ASES and AD Scales


ASES N Mean S.D. t-value

Sample 160 111 22.33
Norm Group 640 115 20

AD

Sample 160 208.05 34.92
1.402
Norm Group 46 217.00 37.97

*P<.05














CHAPTER FIVE
DISCUSSION, IMPLICATIONS AND CONCLUSIONS


Discussion

The results of this study indicate that there is a posi-

tive relationship between assertive behavior and degree of

acceptance of disability among disabled persons. These results

therefore also support the findings of Morgan and Leung (1980)

who reported that a positive relationship exists between asser-

tive behavior and acceptance of disability. Persons whose

thoughts and feelings are more assertively expressed may move

through the rehabilitation counseling process quicker and

achieve positive acceptance of their disabilities.

There were no differences found in degrees of assertive

behavior among disabled persons on the bases of sex, race,

metropolitan/nonmetropolitan residence, marital status, age or

educational level. These results support some, and contradict

other, findings of Joiner et al. (1981). In their research,

Joiner et al. (1981) found significant differences between male

and female assertive behavior scores and between metropolitan

and nonmetropolitan residents. This study contradicts those

findings. The sample size for this study was larger than the

sample in the study by Joiner et al. (1981). In addition, both

state and private rehabilitation clients were used in this

study while only state clients were used in the other study.


-50-






-51-


Further, Joiner et al. (1981) found no significant differ-

ences between assertive behavior and age, race, marital status

or educational level. Those findings are supported by the re-

sults of this study. Assertive behavior levels are lower for

disabled persons than for nondisabled persons according to the

results of this study but are no affected by these variables.

This study also investigated the differences in acceptance

of disability on the bases of sex, race, metropolitan/nonmetro-

politan residence, marital status, age and educational level.

No significant differences were found in the acceptance of dis-

ability level among disabled persons on the bases of sex, resi-

dence or age. Significant differences were found between AD

scores and race, marital status and educational level. These

results support some of the findings by Thomas et al. (1976)

who also found no relationship between disabled persons' ac-

ceptance of their disability and their age. Significant dif-

ferences between education level and acceptance of disability

found in this study support similar contentions by Thomas et al.

(1976) and Safilios-Rothschild (1970). However, this study

also found significant differences between AD and race and

marital status which contradicts the findings of Thomas et al.

(1976). They found no significant differences between accep-

tance of disability and these variables. The results indicate

that White persons are more positively accepting of their dis-

abilities than Black persons. White persons with disabilities

may be able to identify more community support systems and op-

portunities for readjustment into society than Black persons.

In addition, disabled divorced persons are significantly more






-52-


positively accepting of their disabilities than single, married,

separated or widowed disabled persons. Divorced persons may

have more experience with the realities of personal acceptance

and adjustment after personal trauma.

Type of disability was found to be a significant predictor

of assertiveness. These results seem to clarify contentions

made by Joiner et al. (1981) who found no significant differ-

ences in ASES scores among disability groups. However, they

noted high and low scores between the disability groups and

suggested that more research was needed to clarify the rela-

tionship of disability type and assertive behavior. The blind

group of individuals were found to be significantly more as-

sertive than the other disability groups: substance abuse,

deaf, spinal cord injury, cardiac disability, orthopedic dis-

ability, mentally retarded, and neurologic disability. Blind

persons and others have advocated for legislation and resul-

tant money for the benefit of blind persons. The educational

opportunities and assistance provided by programs for blind

persons may enhance blind persons assertion levels. Persons

with neurologic disabilities were found to be significantly

less assertive than the rest of the sample. Persons with neu-

rologic disabilities may have complicating lesions in the brain

which may effect mood and behavior.

Type of disability was also found to be a significant pre-

dictor of acceptance of disability. The deaf group and the

blind group of people in the sample were significantly more

accepting of their disabilities than the people in the cardiac,

substance abuse, orthopedic or mentally retarded groups.





-53-


Educational and support systems exist for blind persons and

for deaf persons and may contribute to their positive accep-

tance of their disabilities. The spinal cord injured group

was significantly more accepting of their disability than the

orthopedic disability group and the mentally retarded group.

Legislation, and resultant economic support, is currently

focused on the rehabilitation of the spinal cord injured. The

programs provided with this economic support may be facilitat-

ing the positive acceptance of disability among this group.

In addition, the neurologic, the cardiac disability groups and

the substance abuser group were significantly more accepting

of their disability than the mentally retarded group. The men-

tally retarded group of individuals in this study were classi-

fied mild or borderline and had relatively high I.Q. levels.

These persons expressed frustration with their condition and

were aware but unsatisfied with their limitations. This aware-

ness and frustration may contribute to their relatively low

level of positive acceptance of their disability.

Length of time disabled was not found to be a significant

variable for assertiveness or acceptance of disability in this

study. These results support similar findings by Joiner et al.

(1981) who found that the length of time that a person was

disabled was not a significant factor in their assertiveness

level. Likewise, these results support Comer and Piliavin

(1975) whose study suggest that length of time disabled may

not be related to acceptance of disability.





-54-


The best predictor variables for assertiveness and for

acceptance of disability were determined by multiple regres-

sion analyses. The best predictor variables for assertiveness

were acceptance of disability, length of time with primary

disability and educational level. The best predictor variables

for acceptance of disability were assertiveness, age and edu-

cational level. These results agree with the findings of sig-

nificant positive correlations between the ASES and AD, the

ASES and level of education, the AD and level of education and

the AD and age.

There were negative correlations found between age and

educational level, length of primary disability and educational

level, and total time disabled and educational level. As age,

length of primary disability and total time disabled increased,

educational level decreased.

In order to compare the study with the ASES and AD with

the norm groups for each instrument, t-tests were performed.

The results indicated that there was a significant difference

between the study sample of disabled individuals and the ASES

norm group of non-disabled persons. This result supports the

findings of Joiner et al. (1981) that disabled persons are

less assertive than non-disabled persons. Disabled persons

may be less confident of themselves and less able to assert

their thoughts and feelings. They may also have communication

skills that may hinder their assertion levels. In addition,

society may restrict the opportunities of the disabled to as-

sert themselves through social and vocational barriers.





-55-


Further, the study sample of disabled individuals was not

significantly different from the AD norm group of disabled

persons. This result lends support to the representativeness

of this sample for the disabled persons in the rehabilitation

counseling process.


Implications

One implication of this study is that there is an empiri-

cally identified need for assertive behavior training and ac-

ceptance of disability counseling with certain groups of dis-

abled individuals. In addition, there are demographic factors

that may be helpful to rehabilitation counselors and program

administrators for predicting low assertive and low accepting

groups. These groups of people may be targeted for assertion

training thus increasing relevant services to clients. Fur-

ther, rehabilitation counselors and program administrators may

be encouraged to periodically assess service needs of their

clients with the instruments used in this study or similar in-

struments, to ensure relevant service provision.

Another implication of this study is that since a positive

relationship appears to exist between disabled persons' accep-

tance of disabilities and assertive behavior levels, it may be

possible to increase persons acceptance of disabilities through

assertive behavior training. Likewise, facilitating persons'

acceptance of disability may enhance their assertive behavior

levels. Rehabilitation counselors trained in teaching asser-

tion skills and facilitating acceptance of disability may be





-56-


able to decrease duplication of services by providing only one

of those counseling techniques and therefore increase the

economy and efficiency of services.

Implications for further research include rehabilitation

counselors and program administrators conducting studies to

clarify the effects of assertion training on acceptance of

disability level. Likewise, the effects of acceptance of dis-

ability counseling on assertion levels could be investigated.

Additional studies could clarify the role and function of

assertive behavior and acceptance of disability on the suc-

cessful rehabilitation of disabled persons. Finally, the need,

role and function of other rehabilitation counseling techni-

ques could be assessed to increase accountability for rehabili-

tation counseling program funding. The results of these stud-

ies could be shared with other rehabilitation counselors

through staff meetings, workshops, professional journals and

the regional and national conventions for rehabilitation

counselors.


Conclusions

Assertion training and acceptance of disability facili-

tation are two counseling techniques used in rehabilitation

counseling. The purpose of this study was to investigate the

relationship between assertive behavior levels and acceptance

of disability in the rehabilitation counseling process of dis-

abled persons. The study also determined if there were dif-

ferences in the degrees of assertive behavior and acceptance

of disability among disabled persons based on age, sex, race,





-57-


educational level, marital status, metropolitan/nonmetropolitan

residence, type of disability and length of time disabled.

The results indicate that there is a positive relation-

ship between assertion and acceptance of disability and that

there is a need for assertion training and acceptance of dis-

ability counseling with disabled persons. In addition, there

are identifying variables that can assist rehabilitation coun-

selors in targeting groups for one of these counseling ser-

vices.

These counseling services have been used effectively to

facilitate disabled persons' rehabilitation counseling pro-

cesses and contribute to their successful re-entry into

society. Assertive behavior training is a short term beha-

viorally oriented counseling technique that may be the most

expedient way to increase levels of assertion and acceptance

of disability. During these times of economic shortage the

importance of relevant rehabilitation services and lack of

duplication is even more in focus. The support of successful

rehabilitation, rather than maintenance, of disabled indivi-

duals to productive lives is sound social and economic policy.














APPENDIX A


DESCRIPTIVE DATA FORM


1. Age

2. Sex

3. Race

4. Highest grade completed in school

5. Marital Status:

a) single

b) married

c) separated

d) divorced

e) widowed

6. What is your primary disability?

7. How long have you had this disability? Years

Months.

8. Have you had other disabilities? Yes No.

Answer number 9 if you answered yes to number 8.

9. Considering your primary disability and all other how

long have you been disabled? Years

Months.

10. What city do you live in?

or do you live outside the city?


-58-














APPENDIX B


REHABILITATION SERVICE AGENCIES


Department of Vocational Rehabilitation, Florida Districts
II and IV*

Developmental Services, Florida Districts II and IV*

Blind Services, Gainesville and Jacksonville, Florida

Corner Drug Store, Gainesville, Florida

Disability Awareness Now, Gainesville, Florida

American Association of Retarded Citizens, Gainesville, Starke,
Orange Park and Jacksonville, Florida

Rehabilitation Counseling Resource and Research Center,
Gainesville, Florida

Epilepsy Services, Gainesville, Florida

Shands Teaching Hospital, Gainesville, Florida

St. John's Hospital, Jacksonville, Florida

Rehabilitation Consultants, Gainesville, Florida



*District II counties are Alachua, Bradford, Citrus, Columbia,
Dixie, Gilchrist, Hamilton, Hernando, Lafayette, Lake, Levy,
Marion, Putnam, Sumter, Suwanee and Union. District IV
counties are Baker, Clay, Duval, Flagler, Nassau, St. Johns
and Volusia.


-59-













APPENDIX C


INSTRUCTIONS TO REHABILITATION PRACTITIONER


I. (to be read or signed for hearing impaired by counselor

to client after obtaining signatures on Informed Con-

sent Forms)

This information is for research purposes only. Your

participation is entirely voluntary. All information

that you give is strictly confidential. The entire

process will take about 45 minutes. Your participation

is greatly appreciated.

II. A. Give client Adult Self Expression Scale and answer

sheet.

B. Read (or sign for hearing impaired) instructions:

"The following inventory is designed to provide infor-

mation about the way you express yourself. Please answer the

questions by blackening the appropriate box from 0 to 4 on the

answer sheet. Your answer should indicate how you generally

express yourself in a variety of situations. If a particular

situation does not apply to you, answer as you think you would

respond in that situation. Your answer should not reflect how

you feel you ought to act or how you would like to act. Do

not deliberate over any individual question. Please work

quickly. Your first response is probably your most accurate

one" (Gay, 1974).


-60-





-61-


C. Play tape of instrument for visually impaired.

D. When client completes ASES, collect instrument.

III. A. Give client Acceptance to Disability Scale.

B. Read (or sign for hearing impaired) instructions:

"The following instrument is designed to provide in-

formation about your feelings toward your disability. Please

read each statement and mark the appropriate response to the

statement."

C. Play tape of instrument for visually impaired.

D. When client completes AD, collect materials.

IV. A. Give client descriptive data form and ask client to

complete it in full.

B. Please read descriptive data form to visually im-

paired clients and ask them to write down their

responses on a piece of paper.

C. When client finishes, collect all materials from

client.

D. Thank the client for his/her time and cooperation.

E. PLEASE WRITE CLIENT'S TYPE OF PRIMARY DISABILITY ON

THE TOP OF THE DESCRIPTIVE DATA SHEET.

F. Staple or clip all materials for one client together.

Please include Informed Consent Form.


THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME AND PARTICIPATION.














APPENDIX D


INFORMED CONSENT FORM


This information is for research peuposes only. Your parti-

cipation is entirely voluntary. All information that you give

is strictly confidential. The entire process will take about

45 minutes. Thank you for participating.

You will be given three (3) questionnaires to fill out. The

orange questionnaire is designed to provide information about

the way you express yourself. The yellow one is designed to

provide information about your feelings toward your disability.

The blue sheet asks for information about you to be used for

this research project.

There will be no monetary compensation.

Please read the following statement and sign at the bottom.

I have read and I understand the procedure described

above. I agree to participate in the procedure and

I have received a copy of this description.


Witness Date


740 N.W. 23rd Ave., Gainesville
Address City

Florida
State Date


Subject Date


Paula Lovett
Principal Investigator













APPENDIX E


TABLES


In order to investigate fully the relationship between

length of time disabled and assertiveness and acceptance of

disability a Pearson product moment correlation coefficient

was analyzed on all disability groups except the mentally re-

tarded. All of the twenty subjects in the mentally retarded

disability group, unlike any other disability group sampled,

had been disabled for life. Results in Table 1 indicate

positive correlations for assertiveness and acceptance of dis-

ability were found with length of primary disability and total

time disabled when the data from the mentally retarded group

was not included. All other positive correlations remained

the same; ASES and AD, ASES and educational level, AD and age,

and AD and educational level. However, the negative correla-

tions reported in Chapter Four; age and educational level,

length of primary disability and educational level, and total

time disabled and education were not significant when the data

from the mentally retarded group were not included (See Table

E-l, Appendix E).

Without the data from the mentally retarded group, al-

though the correlation is negative, the educational level does

not significantly decrease as age increases. In addition, edu-

cational level does not significantly decrease as length of





-64-


Primary disability and total time disabled increase. Further,

the results of multiple regression analyses in Table E-2 and

E-3 support the relationship of length of primary disability

and total time disabled with assertiveness and acceptance of

disability with all disability groups except the mentally re-

tarded. The other predictor variables remain the same for as-

sertiveness and acceptance of disability as reported in Chapter

Four.







-65-


>4


CO-
I-I
r+





0 0
-H c
a)

HH H NO H 00 00 00
) E-i mrl 4 r -l 0o al oo 0- oo oo
SHO- HO m1 n 0r V oo oo
H-o N N O a) o0 *0
o d Cn *o0 *0 *0 0o -o -*
I 4P-H 0 0 0 0 0 H
u 0 Q

>1
4-1

H 41
-H >-1 co'n HC m N in oo NH
a ro-Hl mm om om no o0 0o
l *-0 oC C) L mNo C0 mc
4 -HI N N 0 0 0 C *
o 1r W *O *O .C *O <0 *O
A-H o 0 0 0 Ho 0o

r-1
10

44 cO mm ON r- OO nO mL frl
4o *Hlrl mO Nm Lml 00o NOC 0 mmo
-H 4W1 O mo oo mo mH
0 0 D> NO O0 ON 00 iCN m Oa
( O N N H 0 *o 0 o0
4r0 l *O *O *O *O *O *O
O a 04 0 0o r o 0

*H -H

4-W

0 u-Wcm oIC oO mc oC oo
O>i ) oo i co o on em
HUH a oN 00 0 ON .' N.
3 H 4 0 N O r O 0
[O0ID *o *o *o *c 0 *O
H 040 0 0 0 0



0) WH 00 H ON Ha m
C0 o aq m m m
Cn c 0o > r-0 0% c o to m l 'n-a
-w0 mc cc mH No NH NO
O) 0 Inc oC co ro oo Or
UX o V C o- N N N Nm -
C- *o -o *o o0 *o .o
0 H 0 0 0 0

0

0 0
u oo Om ino m H
oI o Oc cm No mc mr
U >M CO OlO aN NcO 9- HO
) 0- o 0 N N N.
04 -O .0 -o o *- .o
o Hr o o o o o



o a 0 -H P4I
4 0 a C0)
ID ID 41. 4 fl c


00 0> 0- HC *10 v


U Q OP 'W I- -H O-H 0l
< < < .-) fi- Q HOQ -






-66-


Table E-2
Multiple Regression Analysis to Determine the Best Predictor
Variables for ASES Including all Disability Groups Except
Mentally Retarded


Dependent Variable: ASES R Square = 0.2738

Predictor Variables Sum of Squares F*

AD 10572.40 27.98

Length of Time with Primary
Disability 2850.52 7.54

Educational Level 614.64 1.63

Total Time Disabled 2126.44 5.63

*P<.05


Table E-3
Multiple Regression Analysis to Determine the Best Predictor
Variables for AD Including all Disability Groups Except
Mentally Retarded


Dependent Variables: AD

Predictor Variables

ASES

Age

Length of Primary Disability

Educational Level

Total Time Disabled

*P<.05


R Square = 0.2932

Sum of Squares F*

21755.65 25.96

5573.04 6.65

2749.29 3.28

4958.84 5.92

3691.04 4.40













BIBLIOGRAPHY


Alexy, W. D. Coping with loss: The principal theme postulate.
Rehabilitation Literature, March-April, 1980, 4(3-4),
66-71.

Appelbaum, A. S., Luma, J. M., & Johnson, J. H. Internal-
external control and assertiveness of subjects high and
low in social desirability. Psychological Reports, 1975,
37, 319-322.

Bates, H. D., & Zimmerman, S. F. Toward the development of a
screening scale for assertive training. Psychological
Reports, 1971, 28, 99-107.

Blank, H. R. Helping the client accept his disability. In
A. Jacobs, J. P. Jorden, & S. C. DiMichael, Counseling
in the rehabilitation process. New York: Columbus
University, Bureau of Publications, 1961.

Boone, S. E., Roessler, R. T., & Cooper, P. G. Hope and mani-
fest anxiety: Motivational dynamics of acceptance of
disability. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 1978, 25
(6), 551-556.

Bowley, J. Attachment and loss: Separation. New York: Basic
Books, 1973.

Bureau of Economic and Business Research, College of Business.
Florida Statistical Abstracts. Gainesville, Florida:
University Press, 1980.

Cobb, A. B. Medical and psychological aspects of disability.
Springfield, Illinois: Charles C. Thomas, 1973.

Comer, R. C., & Piliavan, J. A. As others see us: Attitudes
of physically handicapped and normals toward own and
other groups. Rehabilitation Literature, July 1975, 36
(7), 206-225.

Cull, J. G., & Hardy, R. E. Vocational rehabilitation: Pro-
fession and process. Springfield, Illinois: Charles C.
Thomas, 1972.

Dembo, T., Leviton, G. L., & Wright, B. A. Adjustment to mis-
fortune: A problem of social-psychological rehabilita-
tion. Artificial Limbs, autumn, 1956, 3(2), 4-6. Re-
printed in Rehabilitation Psychology, 1975, 22(1), 1-100.






-68-


Doyle, M. A., & Biaggio, M. K. Expression of anger as a func-
tion of assertiveness and sex. Journal of Clinical Psy-
chology, 1981, 37(1), 154-157.

Eisler, R. M., Hersen, M., & Miller, P. M. Effects of modeling
on components of assertive behavior. Journal of Behavior
Therapy and Experimental Psychiatry, 1973, 4, 1-6.

Engel, G. L. Sudden and rapid death during psychological
stress. Annals of Internal Medicine, 1971, 74, 771-782.

English, R. W. Correlates of stigma towards physically dis-
abled persons. Rehabilitation Research Practice Review,
Fall 1977, 2(4), 1-15.

Freud, S. Mourning and melancholia. Standard Edition, 14,
237-258. London: Hogarth Press, 1957.

Galassi, J. P., DeLo, J. S., Galassi, M. P., & Bastien, S. The
college self expression scale: A measure of assertiveness
Behavior Therapy, 1974, 5, 1965-1971.

Galassi, J. P., & Galassi, M. D. Validity of a measure of as-
sertiveness. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 1974, 21,
248-250.

Galassi, M. D., & Galassi, J. P. Assert yourself! New York:
Human Science Press, 1977.

Gay, M. L. The development of an assertiveness inventory for
adults in a community college setting. (Doctoral Disser-
tation, University of North Carolina, 1974), Dissertation
Abstracts International, 1974, 36, 128A. (University
Microfilms No. 75-15, 637).

Gay, M. L., Hollandsworth, J. G., & Galassi, J. P. An asser-
tiveness inventory for adults. Journal of Counseling
Psychology, 1975, 22, 340-344.

Gellman, W. Projections in the field of physical disability,
Rehabilitation Literature, 1974, 35, 2-9.

Gorecki, P. R., Dickson, A. L., Anderson, H. N., & Jones, G. E.
Relationship between contrived in vivo and roleplay as-
sertive behavior. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 1981,
37(1), 104-107.

Granat, J. P. Assertiveness training and the mentally retarded.
Rehabilitation Counseling Bulletin, December 1978, 22(2),
100-107.

Grasha, A. F., & Kirschenbaum, D. S. Psychology of adjustment
and competence: An applied approach. Cambridge,
Massachusetts: Winthrop, 1980.





-69-


Grayson, M. The concept of acceptance in physical rehabilita-
tion. Military Surgeon, 1950, 107, 221-226.

Grimes, J. W. The effects of assertion training on severely
disabled student/clients. The Journal of Applied Reha-
bilitation Counseling, Spring, 1980, 11(1), 36-39.

Hamilton, K. Counseling the handicapped in the rehabilitation
process. New York: Ronald Press, 1950.

Hollandsworth, J. G., Galassi, J. P., & Gay, M. L. The adult
self expression scale: Validation by the multitrait-
Multimethod procedure. Journal of Clinical Psychology,
1977, 33(2), 407-415.

Joiner, J. G., Lovett, P. S., & Hague, L. K. Evaluation of
assertiveness of disabled individuals in the rehabilita-
tion process. Manuscript submitted for publication, 1981.

Kazdin, A. E. Effects of covert modeling and model reinforce-
ment on assertive behavior. Journal of Abnormal Psycho-
logy, 1974, 83, 240-252.

Kemp, B. J., & Vash, C. L. A compairson between two placement
programs for hard-core unemployed persons. Journal of
Employment Counseling, September 1971, ,109-115.

Kleck, R. Physical stigma and nonverbal cues emitted in face
to face interaction. Human Relations, 1968, 21(11),
19-28.

Kleck, R., Onan, H., & Hastorf, A. N. The effects of physical
deviance upon face to face interaction. Human Relations,
1966, 19(4), 425-436.

Kubler-Ross, E. On death and dying. New York: Macmillan,
1969.

Kurtz, R. A. Advocacy for the mentally retarded: The develop-
ment of a new social role. In M. J. Begab & S. A.
Richardson, The mentally retarded and society: A social
science perspective. Baltimore, Maryland: University
Park Press, 1975.

Lange, A., & Jakubowski, P. Responsible assertive behavior,
Champagne, Illinois: Research Press, 1976.

Larson, D., & Spreitzer, M. The disabled role, affluence, and
the meaning of work. Journal of Rehabilitation, 1970,
36(4), 29-32.


Lazarus, R. S.
New York:


Psychological stress and the coping process.
McGraw-Hill, 1966.





-70-


Levine, L. The impact of disability. Journal of Rehabilita-
tion, 1959, 25(6), 10-12.

Lindemann, E. Symptomatology and the management of acute
grief. American Journal of Psychiatry, September, 1944,
101, 141-148.

Lindquist, C. U., Lindsay, J. S., & White, G. D. Assessment of
assertiveness in drug abusers. Journal of Clinical Psy-
chology, 1979, 35(3), 676-679.

Linkowski, D. C. A scale to measure acceptance of disability.
Rehabilitation Counseling Bulletin, 1971, 14(4), 236-244.

Linkowski, D. C., & Dunn, M. A. Self concept and acceptance
of disability. Rehabilitation Counseling Bulletin, 1974,
17(1), 28-32.

Luck, R. S., & Lassiter, R. Assertive behavior development for
rehabilitation personnel. The Journal of Applied Reha-
bilitation Counseling, 1978, 9(2), 6-9.

Martorano, R. D. Mood and social perception in four alcoholics:
Effects of drinking and assertion training. Quarterly
Journal of Studies on Alcohol, 1974, 35, 445-457.

McFall, R. M., & Marston, A. R. An experimental investigation
of behavioral rehearsal in assertive training. Journal of
Abnormal Psychiatry, 1970, 76, 295-303.

McGowan, J. P., & Porter, T. L. An introduction to the voca-
tional rehabilitation process. United States Department
of health, Education and Welfare, Vocational Rehabilita-
tion Administration, Washington, D. C., 1967.

Mishel, M. H. Assertion training with handicapped persons.
Journal of Counseling Psychology, 1978, 25(3), 238-241.

Morgan, B., & Leung, P. Effects of assertion training on ac-
ceptance of disability by physically disabled university
students. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 1980, 27(2),
209-212.

North Central Florida Health Planning Council, Inc. Health
Systems Plan. Newberry, Florida: New Image Printing,
1980.

Orenstein, H., Orenstein, E., & Carr, J. E. Assertiveness and
anxiety, a correlational study. Journal of Behavioral
Therapy and Experimental Psychiatry, 1975, 6, 203-207.

Page, R. C., Holland, B., Rand, M. E., Gartin, B. C., & Dowling,
D. A. Assertiveness training groups with the disabled, a
pilot study. Journal of Rehabilitation, 1981, 47(2),
52-55.








Parkes, C. M. Bereavement: Studies of grief in adult life.
New York: International Universities Press, 1972.

Percell, L. P., Berwick, P. T., & Beigel, A. The effects of
assertive training on self concept and anxiety. Archives
of General Psychiatry, 1974, 31, 502-504.

Rimm, D. C., Hill, G. A., Brown, N. N., & Stewart, J. E. Group
assertive training in treatment of expression of inappro-
priate anger. Psychological Reports, 1974, 34, 791-798.

Rubin, S. E., & Roessler, R. T. Foundations of the vocational
rehabilitation process. Baltimore: University Park Press,
1978.

Safilios-Rothschild, C. The sociology and social psychology of
disability and rehabilitation. New York: Random House,
1970.

Schoenbert, B., Carr, S. C., Peretz, D., & Kutscher, A. K.
Loss and grief: Psychological management in medical prac-
tice. New York: Columbia University Press, 1970.

Selye, H. The stress of life. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1956.

Serber, M. Teaching the non-verbal component of assertive
training. Journal of Behavior Therapy and Experimental
Psychiatry, 1972, 3, 179-183.

Shelton, R. L. Assertive training: Consumer-beware. Person-
nel and Guidance Journal, 1977, 55(8), 465-468.

Siller, J. The psychological situation of the disabled with
spinal cord injuries. Rehabilitation Literature, 1969,
30, 290-296.

Siller, J. The structure of attitudes toward the disabled
(U.S. Public Health Service Publication No. RD-707-1967).
Washington, D. C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1970.

Siller, J. Attitudes toward disabled. In H. Rusalem & D.
Malikin, Contemporary vocational rehabilitation. New
York: New York Press, 1976, 63-82.

Smith-Hanen, S. Socialization of the physically handicapped.
Journal of Rehabilitation Counseling, 1976, 7(3), 131-139.

Starr, P., & Heiserman, K. Acceptance of disability by teen-
agers with oral facial clefts. Rehabilitation Counseling
Bulletin, 1977, 20(3), 198-201.

Stewart, T. D., & Rossier, A. B. Psychological consideration
in the adjustment to spinal cord injury. Rehabilitation
Literature, 1978, 39(3), 75-80.





-72-


Straker, P. D. Effects of assertion training and social skills
training on self-esteem and self-assertion in educable and
trainable noninstitutionalized mentally retarded adults
(Doctoral Dissertation, Hofstra University, 1978). Dis-
sertation Abstracts International, 1979, 39, 6103B (Uni-
versity Microfilm No. 79-12, 471).

Suran, B. G., & Rizzo, J. V. Special children: An integrated
approach. Glenville, Illinois: Scott Foresman and Com-
pany, 1979.

Thomas, K. R., Davis, R. M., & Hochman, M. E. Correlates of
disability acceptance in amputee. Rehabilitation Coun-
seling Bulletin, 1976, 19(3), 508-511.

Thorenson, W. T., & Kerr, B. A. The stigmatizing aspects of
severe disability: Strategies for change. Journal of
Applied Rehabilitation Counseling, 1978, 9(2), 21-26.

Wolpe, J. The practice of behavior therapy. New York: Per-
gamon Press, 1969.

Wolpe, J. The practice of behavior therapy (second edition).
New York: Pergamon Press, 1974.

Wright, B. A. Physical disability--A psychological approach.
New York: Harper and Row, 1960.

Yuker, H. E., Block, J. R., & Younng, J. H. The measurement
of attitudes toward disabled persons. Albertson, New
York: Human Resources Center, 1966.

Ziller, R. C., & Smith, D. E. A phenomenological utilization
of photographs. Journal of phenomenological psychology,
Spring, 1977, 1(2), 172-183.

Zisfein, L., & Rosen, M. Personal adjustment training: A
group counseling program for institutionalized mentally
retarded persons. Mental Retardation, 1973, 4, 16-20.













BIOGRAPHICAL DATA


Paula Susan Lovett was born in Miami, Florida, on August

24, 1950. She lived in Miami for eighteen tropical years

where she graduated from Edison High School. She then at-

tended the University of Florida where she received her B. A.

in psychology in June, 1972, and her master's in rehabilitation

counseling in December, 1973. After graduation she began work-

ing as a counselor for the Florida Department of Corrections

at Florida Correctional Institute.

In May, 1975, Paula married Jack Derovanssian and they

moved to Mobile, Alabama, for one year for Jack to complete a

medical internship. At the end of that year, Paula and Jack

moved back to Florida where she worked as a counselor in

Clearwater, Florida.

Paula moved to Orange Park, Florida, with Jack and began

commuting to Gainesville to work on her specialist degree in

counselor education at the University of Florida. She became

a candidate for the Doctor of Philosophy program in 1980.

Paula has been the director of the Rehabilitation Counsel-

ing, Resource and Research Center in Gainesville, Florida, for

the past two years.









I certify that I have read this study and that in my
opinion it conforms to acceptable standards of scholarly
presentation and is fully adequate, in scope and quality,
as a dissertation for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy.



Paul Fitzgerald
Professor of Counselor
Education



I certify that I have read this study and that in my
opinion it conforms to acceptable standards of scholarly
presentation and is fully adequate, in scope and quality,
as a dissertation for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy.


a/l/ c
Larr f/Loesch
Profssor of Counselor
Education



I certify that I have read this study and that in my
opinion it conforms to acceptable standards of scholarly
presentation and is fully adequate, in scope and quality,
ad a dissertation for the degree Doctor of Philosophy.



James Joiner
Associate Prof6ssor of
Rehabilitation Counseling



This dissertation was submitted to the Graduate Faculty of the
Department of Counselor Education in the College of Education
and to the Graduate Council, and was accepted as partial ful-
fillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of
Philosophy.


May, 1982
F. G. Stehli
Dean for Graduate Studies and
Research




University of Florida Home Page
© 2004 - 2010 University of Florida George A. Smathers Libraries.
All rights reserved.

Acceptable Use, Copyright, and Disclaimer Statement
Last updated October 10, 2010 - - mvs