Page 66 - Social networks of people with mild intellectual disabilities: characteristics and interventions

Chapter 3
with, for example, video diaries is a possibility. Video diaries can be a rich source of information and insight and provide another means for the participants to express their views (Jahoda, Wilson, Stalker, & Cairney, 2010; Stalker, Jahoda, Wilson, & Cairney, 2011). An approach using multiple sources of information is considered to provide the most accurate and comprehensive picture of social inclusion (Amado, Stancliffe, McCarron, & McCallion, 2013).
Moreover, the self-report measures used in this study may be prone to a social desirability bias. Socially desirable responding is the tendency for participants to present a favourable image of themselves, either because the participants believe the information or because the participants ‘fake good’ to conform to socially acceptable values and avoid criticism (van de Mortel, 2008). We tried to reduce this bias by emphasising at the beginning of each interview: ‘There are no good or bad answers, honest answers are always right’. Moreover, the interviewers were instructed to avoid value judgements and suggestive questions. The reliability of self-reports of people with ID can be affected by their limited cognitive capacities as well as limited verbal comprehension (Taylor, 2002). We tried to reduce this by adapting certain measures, by simplifying the questions and by using visualization. Although we tried to ensure the questions were not too difficult, with respect to the satisfaction and wishes no answer was noted for respectively seven and nine participants. Of the participants who did answer the question on wishes one-third of them reported having no specific wishes. This might be an indication that, for some participants, these questions on satisfaction and wishes were too complicated to answer. Furthermore, the answers of those who did respond should be taken with some caution. Nota et al. (2006) stated that persons with mild ID can be satisfied, regardless of the negative conditions they experience. Thus, satisfaction measures may not reflect the person’s actual circumstances and may mask the fact that the person has a limited social network. Just because someone reports being satisfied does not mean that they are socially connected. In this study reported informal networks varied from two to 24 members (M = 11.21). We recommend that future studies compare the characteristics of social networks, satisfaction with the social networks and remaining wishes with regard to their networks for people with and without ID. Comparative information should improve interpretation of the data. In addition, we recommend measuring not only satisfaction in future studies, but also making other types of assessment of the opinions of the subjects regarding their connectedness with others,
64