Table 1
Keywords.
| PEOPLE WITH DISABILITY | ATTITUDES | INTERVENTIONS |
|---|---|---|
| Disabl* or Disabilit* | Attitude* | Intervention* |
| Handicap* | Knowledge | Program* |
| Impair* | Recognition | Scheme* |
| Deaf or deafness or ((Hearing or Acoustic or Ear*) adj5 (loss* or impair* or deficienc*)) | Belief*; | Evaluat* |
| Blind or blindness or ((Visual* or Vision or Eye*) adj5 (loss* or impair* or deficienc*) | Lay belief* | Initiative* |
| Cripp* | Stigma | Policy or policies |
| Special need* | Discrimination | Strateg* |
| Prejudice | Pilot* | |
| Awareness | Law or laws or legislation | |
| Disablism | Regulat* | |
| Ablism | Campaign* |
Table 2
Identification of studies via databases.
Note. *Number of references retrieved from individual databases: 1) APAFT: Australian Public Affairs (Australian journal articles from published material on the social sciences: three different combinations of keywords returned 147, 55, and 56 references respectively; 2) Proquest Databases: 1,652 references; 3) Social science research network (SSRN): 18 references; 4) Scopus: 898 references.
Table 3
Definitions of types of interventions.
| TYPES OF INTERVENTION | EXAMPLES |
|---|---|
| Education | Education interventions aimed to increase knowledge about disability. Examples were traditional educational tools such as written material, videos, workshops, but also contact-based activities, imagined contact activities and simulation activities. |
| Training | Training interventions aimed to improve skills relevant to reduce negative attitudes toward people with disability (individual and organisational levels). Examples were disability-specific sensitisation or awareness training programs, and behavioural or skill-building interventions. |
| Modelling | Modelling interventions aimed to promote peer learning and leadership. Examples were interventions where teachers could model peers’ positive attitudes or students acted as models for each other. |
| Persuasion | Persuasion interventions aimed to promote a cognitive or emotional response rather than the provision of facts and information. Examples were teachers giving feedback on students’ attitudes, and bias feedback where participants are informed about their implicit attitudes/bias found through psychological testing. |
| Environmental restructuring | Environmental interventions aimed to promote positive attitudes by reshaping the structures of an organisation, institution or government. An example was the state-wide implementation of the anti-bullying prevention framework ‘School-Wide Positive Behaviour Intervention and Supports’ (SWPBIS) in Georgia, USA. |
| Enablement | Enablement interventions aimed to provide support or removing barriers for people with disability, their family and carers. An example was the adoption of the social relational model of disability to challenge teachers’ implicit beliefs about students’ capabilities and provide access to education where it was previously limited or denied. |
| Restriction | Restriction interventions promoted positive attitudes by establishing rules or regulations that would reduce the opportunity to engage in competing behaviours. An example was the implementation of the World Health Organization Quality Rights toolkit. |
| Coercion | Coercion interventions promoted positive attitudes by introducing forms of penalty, primarily through criminal law mechanisms. An example was the comparison of anti-bullying policies in 39 comparable universities in the UK and Australia. |
| Incentivisation | Incentivisation interventions aimed to promote positive attitudes by incentivising attitudes or behaviours. An example was receiving a Merit Badge (as an incentive) upon completion of a course aimed at promoting disability awareness. |
[i] Source: Idle et al. (2022: 81–82).
Table 4
Definitions of policy types.
| TYPES OF POLICY | EXAMPLES |
|---|---|
| Legislation | Legislation or policies. Examples were national legislation to implement the CRPD or organisation-based anti-bullying policies. |
| Service provision | Delivering a service in the wider sense of the expression, including, courses, training, and workshops. |
| Communication/marketing | Using print, electronic, telephonic or broadcast media |
| Guidelines | Frameworks and protocols that recommended or mandated practice. Examples were the UN Quality Rights toolkit and school-wide and systematic approaches to inclusive education. |
| Regulation | Agreements that established rules or principles of behaviour or practice. An example was a research and knowledge exchange initiative involving a higher education institution and a management body for post-primary schools in Ireland to develop integrated, school-wide, systematic and collaborative approaches to inclusive education. |
| Fiscal | Using the tax system to reduce or increase the financial cost |
| Environmental/social planning | Designing or controlling the physical, social environment |
[i] Source: Adapted by the authors from Michie et al. (2011).
Table 5
Definitions of the outcome areas in Australia’s Disability Strategy.
| OUTCOME | DEFINITION |
|---|---|
| Inclusive and accessible communities | People with disability live in accessible and well-designed communities with opportunity for full inclusion in social, economic, sporting and cultural life. |
| Economic security | People with disability, their families and carers have economic security and suitable living arrangements, enabling them to plan for the future and exercise choice and control over their lives. |
| Health and wellbeing | People with disability attain highest possible health and wellbeing outcomes throughout their lives. |
| Rights, protection, justice and legislation | People with disability feel safe and have their rights promoted, upheld and protected. |
| Learning and skills | People with disability achieve their full potential through their participation in an inclusive high-quality education system that is responsive to their needs. People with disability have opportunities to continue learning throughout their lives in both formal and informal settings. |
| Personal and community support | People with disability, their families and carers have access to a range of well-coordinated and effective services and supports that are appropriate for their needs. |
[i] Source: Idle et al. (2022: 69–70).
Table 6
Number of peer-reviewed references by outcome areas.
| OUTCOME AREA | N |
|---|---|
| Learning and skills | 261 |
| Inclusive and accessible communities | 122 |
| Health and wellbeing | 53 |
| Personal and community support | 24 |
| Economic security | 25 |
| Rights protection justice and legislation | 16 |
| Total | 48 |
[i] Source: Idle et al. (2022: 94). 1Studies as numbered in the supplementary file 1 (1, 5, 7, 9, 11, 15–18, 22–27, 29, 32–35, 37–38, 40, 42–43, 46); 2(2, 10, 13, 19–21, 28, 30–31, 39, 44, 47); 3(3, 8, 12, 14, 36); 4(41, 48); 5(4, 6); 6(45).
Table 7
Types of interventions by type of policy in the primary studies.
| TYPES OF INTERVENTIONS | SERVICE PROVISION | LEGISLATION | GUIDELINES | COMMUNICATION/MARKETING | REGULATION | TOTAL |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Education | 10 | 5 | 2 | 1 | – | 186 |
| Two or more | 8 | 1 | 3 | 2 | 1 | 157 |
| Training | 5 | – | – | 1 | – | 68 |
| Persuasion | 1 | – | – | – | – | 19 |
| Coercion | – | 1 | – | – | – | 110 |
| Enablement | – | 1 | – | – | – | 111 |
| Environmental/restructuring | 1 | – | – | – | – | 112 |
| Total | 251 | 82 | 53 | 44 | 15 | 43 |
[i] Note. This table reports the explicit or implicit type of policy that motivated the need for each intervention. Systematic reviews (n = 5) are excluded because they were not classified. 1Studies as numbered in the supplementary file 1 (1–3, 5, 7–8, 11–14, 17–18, 23–28, 30, 32–33, 35, 37, 40, 48); 2 (6, 38–39, 41–42, 45, 46–47); 3 (4, 16, 34, 36, 43); 4 (19, 21–22, 31); 5 (15), 6 (1, 3, 4, 8, 11, 17, 18, 21, 33–35, 37–42, 46), 7 (2, 5, 14–16, 19, 22–24, 26–27, 32, 36, 43, 47), 8 (7, 25, 28, 30, 31, 48), 9 (12), 10 (45),11 (6), 12 (13).
Table 8
Types of intervention by level of intervention.
| LEVEL OF INTERVENTION | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| TYPES OF INTERVENTION | ORGANISATIONAL/INSTITUTIONAL | COMMUNITY | INTRAPERSONAL | MULTIPLE | GOVERNMENTAL/STRUCTURAL | INTERPERSONAL | TOTAL |
| Education | 12 | 7 | 1 | 1 | – | – | 217 |
| Two or more | 8 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 1 | 1 | 168 |
| Training | 3 | 1 | 3 | – | – | 79 | |
| Environmental restructuring | – | 1 | – | – | – | – | 110 |
| Enablement | – | – | – | – | 1 | – | 111 |
| Coercion | 1 | – | – | – | – | – | 112 |
| Persuasion | 1 | – | – | – | – | – | 113 |
| Grand Total | 251 | 102 | 63 | 44 | 25 | 16 | 48 |
[i] Source: Idle et al. (2022: 116). 1Studies as numbered in the supplementary file 1 (1, 7, 9, 11–12, 14, 16–17, 23–24, 26–29, 32, 34–35, 37–38, 40–43, 45–46); 2(3–4, 8, 13, 19–21, 31, 33, 39); 3(18, 22, 25, 30, 47–48); 4(5, 10, 36, 44); 5(6, 15), 6(2) 7(1, 3, 4, 8–11, 17–18, 20–21, 33–35, 37–42, 46), 8(2, 5, 14–16, 19, 22–24, 26–27, 32, 36, 43–44, 47), 9(7, 25, 28–31, 48), 10(13), 11(6), 12(45), 13(12).