Page 84 - Social networks of people with mild intellectual disabilities: characteristics and interventions
P. 84
Chapter 4
the participant), Table 2 also shows differences on all variables except for acquaintances. Compared to the REF group, participants with ASD had a smaller number of network members (p = .046), informal network members (p = .022) and family members (p = .013) on the MSNA. Participants with ID had more professionals on their MSNA than participants with ASD (p < .001) and the REF group (p < .001). In consequence, the proportion of acquaintances in the network of people with ID was lower than in the network of the REF group, p = .020, while the proportion of professionals was higher than in the REF group and the ASD group, p < .001.
Table 2 Size of the social network (Mean, SD) of the ID, ASD and REF groups compared
ID
ASD
REF
F
p
Mean
SD
Mean
SD
Mean
SD
Ecograma 9.42
6.1 11.27 7.1
17.86 11.7 15.00 6.6 14.33 6.7
7.55 3.9 6.79 3.8 0.67 1.1
9.184 .000 3.182 .046 4.340 .016 4.574 .013 2.158 .121
32.750 .000
All members on MSNAb Informal network on MSNAb Family on MSNAb Acquaintances on MSNAb Professionals on MSNAb
14.21 6.5 11.21 6.3 6.00 3.4 5.21 4.2 3.00 1.5
11.27 5.7 10.30 5.2 5.20 2.5 5.10 3.9 0.97 1.3
a An ecogram is a visualization of the social network excluding family; b Not all network members of the genogram and ecogram are listed in the MSNA, only the people the participant considered to be important enough to list them on the MSNA.
Frequency of contact
Table 3 presents detailed information on face-to-face contact, contact by telephone and contact by internet in times per year. Only face-to-face contact with acquaintances and internet contact with acquaintances and professionals differed significantly for the three groups. Post hoc comparisons showed participants with ID having more face-to-face contact with their acquaintances compared to both participants with ASD (p = .042) and to the REF group (p = .003). Moreover, participants with ID had less frequent internet contact with their professionals than the REF group (p = .025).
82
