Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Quality of Life Measurement in the Field of Intellectual Disabilities: Eight Principles for Assessing Quality of Life-Related Personal Outcomes

  • Published:
Social Indicators Research Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

As the concept of quality of life (QOL) has evolved from a theoretical concept to both a measurable construct and an action-oriented change agent in the field of intellectual disabilities, there has emerged a corresponding need to develop, implement, and use a systematic approach to the assessment of domain-referenced quality of life outcomes. The purpose of this article is to suggest eight principles based on published literature and the authors’ experiences that should underlie the assessment of QOL-related personal outcomes in the field of intellectual disabilities. Data from the development of the personal outcomes scale are used to exemplify each principle. The article’s premise is that model development and test construction should work in tandem, and that a ‘quality of life assessment instrument’ should be based on an empirically derived QOL conceptual and measurement framework/model.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. Training interviewing degrees: Level 1: trained interviewer; Level 2: trainer interviewer (degree to train level 1-interviewer); Level 3: master trainer (degree to train level 2 interviewer).

References

  • Anastasi, A. (1961). Psychological testing. New York: The Macmillan Company.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bonham, G. S., Basehart, S., Schalock, R. L., Marchand, C. B., Kirchner, N., & Rumenap, J. M. (2004). Consumer-based quality of life assessment: The maryland ask me! project. Mental Retardation, 42, 338–355.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brown, I., Keith, K. D., & Schalock, R. L. (2004). Quality of life conceptualization, measurement, and application: Validation of the SIRG-QOL consensus principles. Journal of Intellectual Disabilities Research, 48(4 and 5), 451.

    Google Scholar 

  • Campbell, A., Converse, P. E., & Rodgers, W. L. (1976). The quality of American life. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.

    Google Scholar 

  • Campo, S. F., Sharpton, W. R., Thompson, B., & Sexton, D. (1997). Correlates of the quality of life of adults with severe or profound mental retardation. Mental Retardation, 35(5), 329–337.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carr, A. J., & Higginson, I. J. (2001). Measuring quality of life: Are quality of life measures patient centred? British Medical Journal, 322, 1357–1360.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cicchetti, D. (1994). Guidelines, criteria and rules of thumb for evaluating normed and standardized assessment instruments in psychology. Psychological Assessment, 6, 284–290.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cicchetti, D. V., & Sparrow, S. S. (1981). Developing criteria for establishing interrater reliability of specific items: Applications to assessment of adaptive behavior. American Journal of Mental Deficiency, 86, 127–137.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cronbach, L. J., & Meehl, P. E. (1955). Construct validity in psychological tests. Psychological Bulletin, 52, 281–302.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cummins, R. A. (1997). Assessing quality of life. In R. I. Brown (Ed.), Assessing quality of life for people with disabilities: Models, research, and practice (pp. 116–150). London: Stanley Thornes.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cummins, R. A. (2004). Instruments for assessing quality of life. In J. H. Hogg & A. Langa (Eds.), Approaches to the assessment of adults with intellectual disabilities: A service providers guide (pp. 130–152). London: Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cummins, R. A. (2005). Moving from the QOL concept to a theory. Journal of Intellectual Disability Research, 49(10), 699–706.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goode, D., & Hogg, J. (1994). Towards an understanding of holistic quality of life in people with profound intellectual and multiple disabilities. In D. Goode (Ed.), Quality of life for persons wih disabilities—international perspectives and issues (pp. 197–207). Cambridge, MA: Brookline Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hughes, C., Hwang, B., Kim, J., Eisenman, L., & Killian, D. (1995). Quality of life in applied research: A review and analysis of empirical measures. American Journal on Mental Retardation, 99, 623–641.

    Google Scholar 

  • Inoguchi, T., & Shin, D. C. (2009). The quality of life in confucian Asia: From physical welfare to subjective well-being. Social Indicators Research, 92(2), 183–190.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jenaro, C., Verdugo, M. A., Caballo, C., Balboni, G., Lachappele, Y., Otbrebski, W., et al. (2005). Cross-cultural study of person-centered quality of life domains and indicators: A replication. Journal of Intellectual Disability Research, 49(10), 734–739.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lau, A. L. D., Cummins, R. A., & McPherson, W. (2005). An investigation into the cross-cultural equivalence of a personal well-being index. Social Indicators Research, 72, 403–430.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moon, P., Budts, W., & De Geest, S. (2006). Critique on the conceptualisation of quality of life: A review and evaluation of different conceptual approaches. International Journal of Nursing Studies, 43, 891–901.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Murphy, K. R., & Davidshofer, C. O. (1998). Psychological testing; principles and applications. New Jersey: Prentice Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Naidoo, P. (2006). Potential contributions to disability theorizing and research from positive psychology. Disability and Rehabilitation, 28(9), 595–602.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Perry, J., & Felce, D. (2002). Subjective and objective quality of life assessment: Responsiveness, response bias, and resident: Proxy concordance. Mental Retardation, 40(6), 445–456.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Prescott-Allen, R. (2001). The well-being of nations. Washington, DC: Island Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Santelli, B., Singer, G. H. S., DiVinere, N., Ginsberg, C., & Powers, L. (1998). Participatory action research: Reflections on critical incidents in a participatory action research project. Journal of the Association for Persons with Severe Handicaps, 23, 211–222.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schalock, R. L., Bonham, G. S., & Verdugo, M. A. (2008a). The conceptualization and measurement of quality of life: Implications for program planning and evaluation in the field of intellectual disabilities. Evaluation and Program Planning, 31(2), 181–190.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schalock, R. L., Brown, I., Brown, R., Cummins, R. A., Felce, D., Matikka, L., et al. (2002). Conceptualization, measurement and application of quality of life for persons with intellectual disabilities: Report of an international panel of experts. Mental Retardation, 6, 457–470.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schalock, R. L., Gardner, J. F., & Bradley, V. J. (2007). Quality of life for persons with intellectual and other developmental disabilities: Applications across individuals, organizations, communities, and systems. Washington, DC: American Association on Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schalock, R. L., Keith, K. D., Verdugo, M. A., & Gomez, L. E. (2009). Quality of life model development and use in the field of intellectual disability. In R. Kober (Ed.), Enhancing the quality of life of people with intellectual disabilities: From theory to practice. New York: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schalock, R. L., & Verdugo, M. A. (2002). Handbook on quality of life for human service practitioners. Washington, DC: American Association on Mental Retardation.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schalock, R. L., Verdugo, M. A., Bonham, G. S., Fantova, F., & van Loon, J. (2008b). Enhancing personal outcomes: Organizational strategies, guidelines, and examples. Journal of Policy and Practice in Intellectual Disabilities, 5(1), 18–28.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schalock, R. L., Verdugo, M. A., Jenaro, C., Wang, M., Wehmeyer, M., Xu, J., et al. (2005). A cross-cultural study of quality of life indicators. American Journal on Mental Retardation, 110, 298–311.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Taillefer, M. C., Dupuis, G., Roberge, M. A., et al. (2003). Health-related quality of life models: Systematic review of the literature. Social Indicators Research, 64(2), 293–323.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thompson, J. R., Hughes, C., Schalock, R. L., Silverman, W., Tassé, M. J., Bryant, B., et al. (2002). Integrating supports in assessment and planning. Mental Retardation, 40, 390–405.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tsatsanis, K. D., Dartnall, N., Cicchetti, D., Sparrow, S. S., Klin, A., & Volkmar, F. R. (2003). Concurrent validity and classification accuracy of the Leiter and Leiter-R in low-functioning children with autism. Journal of Autism & Developmental Disorders, 33, 23–30.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • van Loon, J., Van Hove, G., Schalock, R., & Claes, C. (2008). POS. Persoonlijke Ondersteuningsuitkomsten Schaal. Individuele kwaliteit van bestaan scoreboek. Antwerpen, Apeldoorn: Garant.

    Google Scholar 

  • Verdugo, M. A., Arias, B., Gomez, L. E., & Schalock, R. L. (2008). The GENCAT scale of quality of life: Standardization manual. Barcelona: Department of Social Action and Citizenship, Generalitat of Catalonia (Available from Laura E. Gomez: lauraelisabet@usal.es).

  • Verdugo, M. A., Schalock, M. A., Keith, K. D., & Stancliffe, R. J. (2005). Quality of life and its measurement: Important principles and guidelines. Journal of Intellectual Disability Research, 49(10), 707–717.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wang, M., Schalock, R. L., Verdugo, M. A., & Jenaro, C. (2009). Examining the factor structure and hierarchical nature of the quality of life construct. American Journal on Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities (in press).

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Ghent University/University College, Ghent, Belgium

    Claudia Claes & Stijn Vandevelde

  2. Ghent University, Ghent, Belgium

    Geert Van Hove & Jos van Loon

  3. Arduin Foundation, Middelburg, The Netherlands

    Jos van Loon

  4. Hastings College, Hastings, NE, USA

    Robert L. Schalock

Authors
  1. Claudia Claes
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Geert Van Hove
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Jos van Loon
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Stijn Vandevelde
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Robert L. Schalock
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Claudia Claes.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Claes, C., Van Hove, G., van Loon, J. et al. Quality of Life Measurement in the Field of Intellectual Disabilities: Eight Principles for Assessing Quality of Life-Related Personal Outcomes. Soc Indic Res 98, 61–72 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11205-009-9517-7

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11205-009-9517-7

Keywords

Search

Navigation