Questionnaire for Adolescents to Evaluate Their Attitudes towards Disability

sustainability Article Questionnaire for Adolescents to Evaluate Their Attitudes towards Disability Juli á n Á lvarez-Delgado *, Benito Le ó n-del-Barco * , Mar í a-Isabel Polo-del-R í o and Santiago Mendo-L á zaro Department of Psychology, Faculty of Teacher Training College, University of Extremadura, 10071 Caceres, Spain; mabelpdrio@unex.es (M.-I.P.-d.-R.); smendo@unex.es (S.M.-L.) * Correspondence: jad@unex.es (J Á .-D.); bleon@unex.es (B.L.-d.-B.) Received: 30 September 2020; Accepted: 27 October 2020; Published: 29 October 2020 Abstract: The purpose of this article is to create and validate a brief instrument to evaluate attitudes towards persons with disabilities among the adolescent population between 12 and 16 years of age. Disability is currently understood from a contextual perspective (ecological model of disability), as the interaction of a person with her / his surroundings. As part of this interaction, the negative attitudes and expectations towards those with disabilities is still a reason for analysis, as it constitutes one of the main barriers to their inclusion in society. The evaluation of these attitudes in di ff erent age groups, using new analytical tools and instruments, is essential for the subsequent design and implementation of intervention measures in order to reverse the said attitudes and improve the collective’s place in society. In this study, there were 1282 participants, students between 12 and 16 years of age. A random selection was carried out, choosing fourteen educational centers in order to analyze the students’ attitudes towards persons with disabilities. The final result was the creation of the CBAD-12 A questionnaire, made up of 12 Likert-type items, grouped into three factors: acceptance / rejection, competence / limitation, and equal opportunities. It has been demonstrated that the questionnaire possesses adequate psychometric characteristics, providing research with a new instrument to measure attitudes towards disability. The said questionnaire is useful as a diagnostic and / or predictive measure, allowing us to discover and generate interventions aimed at improving the attitudes of the adolescent population towards those with a disability Keywords: evaluation; attitudes; disability; adolescent 1. Introduction The World Report on Disability published by the WHO (2011) states that more than one billion people in the world live with some form of disability and that of these, almost 200 million experience considerable di ffi culties in their daily life In Spain, the Survey on Disability, Personal Autonomy, and Dependence [ 1 ] estimated that there are 4.12 million people with a disability, which is approximately 9% of Spain’s resident population, according to the Olivenza Report [ 2 ]. Throughout the twentieth century and the beginning of this century, the disability construct has been a complex area of knowledge that includes a great variety of terms related to, among other fields, medicine, psychology, and education [ 3 ]. At the present time, disability is understood from a contextual perspective as the interaction between persons and their environment [ 4 ]. If the relationship between persons with a disability and their surroundings is vital, the attitudes understood as social constructs of those around them play a fundamental role in their development and their future path. This is because the said attitudes are one of the fundamental elements towards facilitating or hindering the process of the collective’s inclusion in society [ 5 , 6 ]. Sustainability 2020 , 12 , 9007; doi:10.3390 / su 12219007 www.mdpi.com / journal / sustainability

Sustainability 2020 , 12 , 9007 2 of 11 The term attitude has undergone an evolution in meaning since its definition, “a mental and neural state of readiness, organized through experience, exerting a directive or dynamic influence upon an individual’s response to all objects and situations with which it is related” [ 7 ]. It is now defined as “an idea charged with emotion that predisposes one to a certain class of actions when faced with a particular stimulus” [ 8 ] and as “a learnt predisposition to consistently respond either favorably or unfavorably to objects, persons, or groups of people and situations” [ 9 ]. On the other hand, there are numerous models that, over the years, have tried to explain the dimensions of attitudes. Worth noting is the three-dimensional model of attitude, which contemplates a cognitive component, stereotype, a belief concerning the attributes of a social group, an a ff ective component (prejudices), and social constructs that generate exclusion in groups of persons, thus limiting their ability for self-a ffi rmation as human beings [ 10 ]; as well as a behavioral component that involves a tendency to express negative, discriminatory behavior patterns that marginalize members of minority groups [ 11 ]. Negative behavior and attitudes towards persons with a disability generate equally negative consequences for those people, such as a low self-esteem, isolation, and less participation in their surroundings, creating barriers to the accomplishment of their goals [ 12 – 14 ]. In the opinion of certain authors, it is society itself that “disables” those with a disability, as it imposes material obstacles and cultural stereotypes that encourage the dynamics of exclusion and marginalization [ 15 ]. In short, these said attitudes are a determining contextual, environmental, and relational factor that makes life more di ffi cult for those with a disability in all its aspects, shaping prejudices and stereotypes that stigmatize and exclude them, undermining their full integration with society [ 16 , 17 ]. The persons with a disability and the organizations that defend their rights are currently promoting a change in the way the collective should be seen, highlighting the need to increase the e ff orts being made to bring about changes in society in general [ 18 ]. The Present Study Negative attitudes and expectations towards people with disabilities are still in need of analysis and study, even today [ 19 ]. The evaluation of such attitudes in works of research began around the 1930 s to 1950 s with the first attempts to analyze the influence of the social constructs (attitudes) on the lives of persons with a disability [ 20 ], and with the creation of instruments to measure the said constructs towards disability, initially highlighting the contribution of certain works of research that focused on describing the beliefs of people without a disability towards several behavioral characteristics of the disabled collective in general [ 21 – 23 ]. In the 1960 s and 1970 s, the subject of study widened to include the evaluation of other types of disability such as deafness and mental illness. There were several pioneering works of research in this field [ 24 ]; while scales such as the “Attitude Toward Persons with a Disability Scale” (ATDP) were published and widely used, studied, and contrasted [ 25 ]. Certain works of research disagreed with the one-dimensional conception, constructing multi-dimensional instruments: worth a particular mention among these, we have the Disability Factor Scales (DFS), which measure attitudes towards individuals with specific disabilities and health conditions [ 26 ], and the Disability Social Distance Scale (DSDS), based on the premise that attitudes are di ff erent depending on the type of disability a person has [ 27 ]. In the 1980 s, interest rose in analyzing the two most commonly used scales at that time, the ATDP [ 25 ] and the DFS [ 26 ]. The said analysis focused on validating the factorial structures in other contexts. Other instruments were created to analyze factors related to attitudes towards disability such as social-contact willingness or prejudices [ 28 ]. Studies were also carried out to measure the attitudes towards persons with a disability as a general group through the SADP, the Scale of Attitudes Toward Persons with a Disability [ 29 ]. On the other hand, some studies examined the e ff ect that contact with disabled people would have on attitudes, in the sense of generating more positive attitudes towards persons with a disability [ 30 ]. On the basis of Allport’s Contact Theory [ 7 ], numerous authors have

Sustainability 2020 , 12 , 9007 3 of 11 pointed out the influence of strategies based on social contact and education when generating positive attitudes and reducing the stigmatization of persons with a disability [ 31 ]. In the 1990 s, the IDP (Interaction with Persons with a Disability Scale) is worth mentioning This instrument measures the degree of comfort / discomfort a person feels in certain situations with people who have di ff erent disabilities [ 32 ]. In Spain, the EADP (Escala de Actitudes hacia las Personas con Discapacidad) was built up, one of the most commonly used on both a national and international level due to its high validity and reliability indices [ 33 ]. This scale is preferably aimed at professionals who are in more or less frequent contact with persons with a disability Later, such instruments as the Medical Condition Regard Scale (MCRS) [ 34 ] and the Multidimensional Attitudes Scale for Persons with a Disability (MAS) were developed, concerning the a ff ective, cognitive, and behavioral components of attitudes [ 35 ]. More recently, such instruments as the “Chedoke-McMaster Attitudes Towards Children with Handicaps Scale” (CATCH) [ 36 ] have been designed. These analyze the attitudes of school children to their companions with a disability In recent years, some research works have considered the lack of any updated and validated instruments with representative Spanish samples developed using high standards of scientific quality [ 37 ]. On this basis, the need arises to create scales that allow a greater understanding of the attitudes shown towards persons with a disability; scales that can help to identify the factors that encourage a positive or negative attitude in the social context in which this collective is immersed The educational sphere is considered to be a privileged space to initiate this change in attitudes, essential to breaking down the stereotypes (cognitive component) and prejudices (a ff ective component) that hinder their inclusion (behavioral component) and which would be the first step on the road to promoting positive attitudes towards persons with a disability [ 38 , 39 ]. Furthermore, adolescence is considered to be a crucial stage in human development; a time when attitudes and behavior patterns are changing and are continuously being shaped [ 40 ]. Some research works focusing on the evaluation of adolescent students’ attitudes towards their peers with a disability confirm that, at this stage, the negative attitudes are still present, as they were clearly defined at ages prior to adolescence [ 41 ]; even that they could become progressively worse upon entering adolescence Such attitudes, in the passage from adolescence to adulthood, may well become irreversible [ 42 – 44 ]. This paper describes the process used to construct a brief instrument aimed at evaluating the attitudes of students in secondary education (12 to 16 years of age) towards persons with a disability in general, unlike other instruments in a reduced version that evaluate attitudes towards their companions with a disability [ 45 ]. We have opted for creating a reduced but versatile instrument that can be applied in Educational Centers, one which does not involve a great cost in time, and which is understandable for adolescent students. The scale is multidimensional, following the proposal of research works that recommend studying and using scales whose responses focus on the person with a disability, and not on the disability itself [ 12 ]; one whose methodology is direct, i.e., the subjects of the study know they are being evaluated with respect to their attitudes towards disability 2. Materials and Methods 2.1. Participants The number of participants was determined by the number of students registered in obligatory secondary education (ESO) in state and direct grant schools of the region of Extremadura (Spain) during the 2017–2018 academic year, considering a sampling error of 3% and confidence interval of 95.5% The sample consists of a total of 1282 students between 12 and 16 years of age. The average age of the sample is 13.25 years, (ST = 1.354), while 50.9% are female (653 cases) and 49.1% are male (629 cases). The sample selection was carried out by means of a multistage sampling by clusters and random class selection in the centers with various groups from the first to the fourth year of secondary school. The cluster sampling was carried out by randomly selecting fourteen Public Compulsory Secondary Education centers in the Autonomous Region of Extremadura from a total of 120 centers.

Sustainability 2020 , 12 , 9007 4 of 11 The process consisted in assigning numbers to all the centers and selecting 14 though random numbers generated by a computer. The same process was used to select in each center four classes, one class from among all classes of first course, one class from all the second course, one class from all the third course, and one class from all the fourth course 2.2. Instruments Brief Questionnaire for Adolescents on Attitudes towards Persons with a Disability (CBAD-12 A) For the design of the questionnaire, we first created work groups made up of persons with a disability who had previously led workshops concerning information and awareness of disability in the adolescent population. Starting from the stereotypes, prejudices, and attitudes that the monitors detected in the said population, a series of items was designed which was then set down in a document that was later evaluated by a group of experts in disability. Following the planning of the questionnaire, we selected 12 items referring to the most representative attitudes towards persons with a disability. These items were presented to a pilot group between 12 and 16 years of age, to confirm that there were no di ffi culties in understanding The CBAD-12 A evaluates the attitudes of adolescents between 12 and 16 years of age towards persons with a disability in general. The format for responses is a Likert-type scale with five options where 1 is “totally disagree” and 5 is “totally agree” The questionnaire consists of 12 items grouped into three factors of four items each. A first factor, called “acceptance / rejection”, evaluates the components of the attitude related to prejudice and the behavioral response derived from them. The behavior patterns related to the adolescent student’s predisposition to social interaction with persons with a disability are analyzed, as well as their possible attitudes of rejection and discrimination towards persons with a disability, with respect to the degree of influence of the social constructs on the collective (prejudice). A second factor, called “competence / limitation”, mainly analyzes the stereotypical component of the attitude, which is related to social constructs based on generalizations derived from erroneous or incomplete information and which curtail the possibilities for development of persons with a disability and their knowledge concerning their own capabilities. A third factor, called “equal opportunities”, analyzes the attitudes understood as rights and the stereotypes (beliefs) that exercise an influence on whether or not persons with a disability achieve these rights Items 9 and 10 should be interpreted in the opposite sense, as a higher score indicates more positive attitudes. Thus, higher scores in the three factors will indicate more negative attitudes towards persons with a disability, i.e., attitudes that are more heavily loaded with stereotypes, prejudice, and discriminatory behavior towards persons with a disability In addition, in order to analyze the nomological validity of the instrument, a “yes” / “no” question was asked concerning habitual contact (at least once a week) with persons with a disability, and without establishing any di ff erences with respect to the diverse types of disability 2.3. Procedure For the construction and analysis of the psychometric characteristics of the CBAD-12 A, we sent the directors of the di ff erent educational centers information concerning the aims of the study, documentation about the research, the methodology, and procedure to carry it out together with the informed consent application. Voluntariness in participation, anonymity, and confidentiality were ensured for all participants. This study was approved by the Bioethics and Biosafety Committee of the University of Extremadura 2.4. Data Analysis Initially, the normality, randomization, and homoscedasticity premises were contrasted, with p > 0.05 being found in both cases. To construct and analyze the psychometric characteristics of

Sustainability 2020 , 12 , 9007 5 of 11 the CBAD-12 A, we first of all carried out an exploratory factorial analysis (EFA). We then confirmed the factorial structure found in the EFA by means of a confirmatory factorial analysis (CFA). The stability, or the factorial loads of the model, was established using the bootstrap method (this allows a great number of samples to be created replacing the same data and calculating the studied statistic for each one of them). In addition, to determine the invariance due to gender of the obtained model, we carried out a multi-group analysis. The reliability of the CBAD-12 A and of the three factors was calculated using Cronbach’s alpha, the composite reliability coe ffi cients, McDonald’s omega, and the mean extracted variance. Later, we carried out comparisons of the means (Student’s t -test) to establish the nomological validity. The analyses were performed on the SPSS-21 program 3. Results The original sample (n = 1282) was divided into two subsamples extracted at random (n 1 = 641 and n 2 = 641). The first (n 1) was used as a sample to carry out the exploratory factorial analysis (EFC) and the second (n 2) for validation in the confirmatory factorial analysis (CFA). The equivalence of both subsamples were contrasted with respect to gender, χ 2(1) = 0.096, p = 0.757 3.1. Exploratory Factorial Analysis and Reliability of the CBAD-12 A The Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin measure of the sample’s adequacy showed a value of 0.806. Bartlett’s sphericity test was significant ( χ 2 = 1647,772; p < 0.001). Both values, KMO and Bartlett, were adequate, indicating that it made sense to carry out the factorial analysis. A solution to the three factors was obtained using the extraction model of maximum likelihood factors with Oblim í n rotation, which together explain 51% of the variance. Table 1 includes the saturations of the items in each factor. The first factor, “acceptance / rejection”, explains 24.5% of the variance; the second factor, “competence / limitation”, explains 14.5%; while the third factor, “equal opportunities”, explains 12% The three factors present an acceptable Cronbach’s alpha Table 1. Factorial analysis of the “Questionnaire to Evaluate Attitudes towards Disability” (CBAD-12 A) Analysis of principal components, Oblim í n rotation Items F 1 F 2 F 3 1 I feel uncomfortable when I am beside a person with a disability 0.738 0.122 0.150 2 I would not go to a place where they knew me with a person with a disability 0.707 0.028 0.231 3 If I had a close family member with a disability, I would avoid mentioning it to other people 0.604 0.049 0.227 4 When I am with a person with a disability, I do not know how to treat them 0.559 0.292 − 0.133 5 Disabled people function like children in many aspects 0.132 0.708 − 0.097 6 The most appropriate job for a person with a disability is a simple, repetitive one 0.065 0.632 0.129 7 Persons with a disability should study in Special Educational Centers − 0.001 0.606 0.166 8 Persons with a disability have a more closed circle of friends 0.285 0.450 − 0.017 9 Disabled people should have the same opportunities as everyone else 0.105 − 0.001 0.692 10 Disabled people can practice both individual and team sports 0.119 − 0.026 0.666

Sustainability 2020 , 12 , 9007 6 of 11 Table 1. Cont Items F 1 F 2 F 3 11 Disabled people should live with others who have the same problem 0.146 0.336 0.488 12 An unemployed person with no disability should be hired before another unemployed person with a disability 0.118 0.432 0.459 F 1 = acceptance / rejection (own value: 2945; Cronbach’s alpha = 0.79); F 2 = competence (own value: 1290; Cronbach’s alpha = 0.73); F 3 = opportunity (own value: 1.094; Cronbach’s alpha = 0.70) 3.2. Confirmatory Factorial Analysis of the CBAD-12 A Table 2 shows the statistics for the goodness of fit for the CFA considering three models: one of a single factor, another of three independent factors, and the last of three related factors. The three models present a significant value of χ 2 ( p < 0.01), the model of three related factors being the one that presents a good fit. The other two models are discarded since the goodness of fit indicators CFI and TLI are not close to the desirable values ≥ 0.90 Table 2. Indices for the goodness of fit for the models proposed for the confirmatory factorial analysis Models χ 2 p CMIN / gl CFI TLI RMSEA SRMR 1 single factor 399.300 0.000 6.402 0.820 0.776 0.067 0.052 3 independent factors 563.568 0.000 10.633 0.679 0.600 0.089 0.125 3 related factors 163.125 0.000 3.262 0.929 0.906 0.043 0.037 Note: CMIN = chi-square over degrees of freedom; CFI = comparative fit index; TLI = Tucker-Lewis index; RMSEA = root mean square error of approximation; SRMR = standardized root mean square residual In addition, the results of the three related factors model indicate that the factors “acceptance” with “opportunity” are correlated ( β = 0.68), “opportunity” with “competence” ( β = 0.66), and “competence” with “acceptance” ( β = 0.54) Similarly, the indicators of the latent factors show factorial saturations that oscillate between λ = 0.45 and λ = 0.66 for the factor “acceptance”; λ = 0.42, λ = 0.53 for the factor “competence”, and λ = 0.46 and λ = 0.53 for the factor “opportunity” (Table 3 ). Table 3. Method, 1000 samples with replacement of the original sample (CI 95%), with the “Brief Questionnaire for Adolescents to Evaluate Their Attitudes towards Disability” (CBAD-12 A) Factors Items Factorial Saturations Mean 1000 Samples Lower Limit Upper Limit p F 1: Acceptance Rejection 1 0.657 0.658 0.602 0.711 0.002 2 0.594 0.595 0.535 0.661 0.002 3 0.516 0.515 0.446 0.579 0.002 4 0.450 0.432 0.369 0.492 0.002 F 2: Competence 5 0.530 0.530 0.466 0.594 0.002 6 0.500 0.498 0.436 0.562 0.002 7 0.440 0.437 0.376 0.497 0.002 8 0.419 0.418 0.361 0.472 0.002 F 3: Opportunity 9 0.489 0.392 0.311 0.475 0.002 10 0.460 0.362 0.285 0.443 0.002 11 0.498 0.495 0.438 0.551 0.002 12 0.534 0.532 0.473 0.587 0.002

Sustainability 2020 , 12 , 9007 7 of 11 On the other hand, using a total of 1000 samples, we obtain mean values of the factorial saturation that are very close to the values found in the CFA, and the values of the factorial saturation are between the upper and lower limits of the CI at 95.0%; thus, all of them are significant (Table 3 ). 3.3. Invariant Analysis by Gender To determine whether the model of three related factors was invariant due to gender, we carried out a multi-group analysis. Table 4 shows the results obtained in the di ff erent models compared Although significant di ff erences appear ( p < 0.001) in the value of χ 2 between model 1 (without restrictions) and model 4 (measurement residuals), the values found in the ∆ CFI in the model without restrictions, with di ff erences below 0.01 of the indices CFI and TLI among the four models, indicate that the factorial loads of the questionnaire are equivalent in males and females Table 4. Invariance analysis of the three-factor model of the “Questionnaire on Adolescents’ Attitudes towards Disability” (CBAD-12 A) Models χ 2 gl χ 2 / gl ∆ χ 2 ∆ gl CFI TLI SRMR RMSEA Model 1 222.675 100 2.227 - - 0.922 0.901 0.041 0.032 Model 2 226.256 109 2.076 3.581 9 0.925 0.910 0.042 0.030 Model 3 228.845 115 1.990 6.170 15 0.927 0.917 0.043 0.029 Model 4 257.603 128 2.013 34.928 28 0.917 0.915 0.042 0.029 Notes: Model 1 = without restrictions; Model 2 = measurement weights; Model 3 = structural covariance; Model 4 = measurement residues. CFI = comparative fit index; TLI = Tucker-Lewis index; SRMR = standardized root mean square residual; RMSEA = root mean square error of approximation 3.4. Nomological Validity The nomological validity refers to the degree to which the association that a construct can have with others that are partially or wholly a part of some theory or theories can be achieved. To do so, a comparison of the means is carried out to see whether di ff erences exist between the scores in the CBAD-12 A, with respect to whether or not frequent contact is maintained with persons with a disability Table 5 shows that the subjects who have had prior contact with disability obtain significantly lower scores ( p ≤ 0.05) in the three factors—acceptance / rejection, competence / limitations, and equal opportunities—as well as in the total score of the CBAD-12 A, i.e., the participants who stated that they had habitual contact with persons with a disability had more positive attitudes to these same persons Table 5. Comparison of means in the CBAD-12 A, with respect to prior contact, Yes / No Habitual Contact with Persons with a Disability Yes No Variables M SD M SD t p Total 20.38 4.81 25.33 5.95 − 6.910 0.000 Acceptance rejection 6.26 1.99 7.66 2.67 − 4.444 0.000 Competence limitations 8.76 2.76 10.82 3.02 − 5446 0.000 Equal opportunities 5.36 1.66 6.85 2.24 − 5.651 0.000 4. Discussion The aim of the CBAD-12 A study, faced with the need to have solid evaluation instruments to analyze attitudes towards the said collective, was to create and validate a brief instrument to evaluate the attitudes of a sample of adolescents towards persons with a disability [ 37 ]. We came up against the

Sustainability 2020 , 12 , 9007 8 of 11 di ffi culty of finding specific evaluation instruments for adolescents with su ffi cient evidence of both validity and reliability and which would, at the same time, permit a fast and simple application The analyses carried out in our study confirm that the variables associated to adolescents’ attitudes towards persons with a disability can be grouped into three factors (acceptance / rejection, competence / limitation, and equal opportunities) made up of four well-defined items, both solid and relevant, as well as an adequate internal consistency [ 46 , 47 ]. On the other hand, we subjected the CBAD-12 A instrument to an CFA, testing three di ff erent factor structures. The values that showed the best fit were those of the model with three related factors The correlations between the three factors indicate that they are clearly related, indicating in turn that as the negative attitudes towards persons with a disability increase in one of the factors, they also increase in the other factors In addition, the analysis of the structural equations and the application of the bootstrap method allowed us to verify that the latent variables in the three factors are well-defined and adequately evaluated, rea ffi rming the good psychometric characteristics of the CBAD-12 A Similarly, so that the di ff erences between males and females cannot be erroneously interpreted in future research using the CBAD-12 A [ 48 ], we carried out a multi-group analysis that confirmed the equivalence of the factorial structure of the CBAD-12 A with respect to gender [ 49 ], a result that coincides with other studies [ 17 , 41 , 50 ]. Finally, in order to contrast the nomological validity of the questionnaire, and starting from the hypothesis that those subjects who maintain contact with persons with a disability have more positive attitudes towards them [ 17 , 47 ], we carried out comparisons between subjects with and without contact that confirm the said hypothesis. Various works of research have proved that there exist di ff erences in the attitudes towards persons with a disability with respect to the condition of having contact with them or not [ 19 , 51 , 52 ]. It is with good reason that programs aimed at changing attitudes to disability stress contact with persons with a disability in order to achieve a positive change in the evaluation of terms referring to persons with a disability and, consequently, in attitudes towards them [ 31 , 53 ]. Although the CBAD-12 A presents su ffi cient evidence of both validity and reliability, it is not exempt from limitations, such as those derived from the bias, for instance that of social desirability, of the responses introduced by the subjects themselves. In addition, there is no evidence concerning its convergent validity, so it would be desirable for any future research to establish relationships using instruments that evaluate similar constructs 5. Conclusions Throughout this study, we have posed the importance of attitudes towards persons with a disability, since they are still today a key element in their lives that condition, to a great extent, the degree of collective social inclusion or exclusion [ 54 ]. The analysis of these said attitudes is a relevant factor in reversing the di ffi culties that the said collective can find in their day to day lives [ 50 ]. Developing up-to-date, validated instruments that make the evaluation and identification of the characteristics that promote positive and / or negative attitudes towards disability takes on a special importance when considering the social inclusion of persons with a disability [ 37 ]. The educational sphere is thus considered to be a privileged space in which to initiate this change in attitudes [ 55 ]. On the basis of all the points set out in this study, we therefore proposed the creation of a questionnaire, the CBAD-12 A, which is an instrument to measure attitudes towards persons with a disability in the adolescent population between 12 and 16 years of age. Such a tool can be of great diagnostic and / or predictive use when analyzing the attitudes of this age group. Learning more about such attitudes may help to encourage the development of interventions whose aim is to reverse the negative attitudes and thus favor the social inclusion of persons with a disability [ 56 ]. We believe it is important to continue research in the sphere of attitudes towards this collective [ 37 ]. The contribution of the CBAD-12 A can be a key element in encouraging the study and understanding of such attitudes.

Sustainability 2020 , 12 , 9007 9 of 11 Author Contributions: Conceptualization, J Á .-D., B.L.-d.-B., and M.-I.P.-d.-R.; methodology, J Á .-D., B.L.-d.-B., and S.M.-L.; investigation, J Á .-D., B.L.-d.-B., S.M.-L., M.-I.P.-d.-R.; formal analysis, J Á .-D., B.L.-d.-B., and S.M.-L.; data curation, B.L.-d.-B., and S.M.-L.; writing—original draft preparation, J Á .-D., B.L.-d.-B., M.-I.P.-d.-R., and S.M.-L.; writing—review and editing, J Á .-D., B.L.-d.-B., and M.-I.P.-d.-R. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript Funding: This work has been funded by the support to Consolidation of Research Groups (Junta de Extremadura GR 18091 / 18.HJ.11) Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest References 1 Esparza, C.; Abell á n, A Encuesta de Discapacidad, Autonom í a Personal y Situaciones de Dependencia (EDAD 2008) Primeros Resultados ; Portal Mayores: Madrid, Spain, 2008 2 Jim é nez-Lara, A.; Huete-Garc í a, A Informe Olivenza 2016, Sobre la Situaci ó n de la Discapacidad en España ; Observatorio Estatal de la Discapacidad: Olivenza, Spain, 2016; pp. 1–698. Available online: http: // bit.ly / 2 zgB 2 ER (accessed on 17 September 2020) 3 Verdugo, M.A Personas con discapacidad Perspectivas Psicopedag ó gicas y Rehabilitadoras ; Siglo XXI: Madrid, Spain, 1995 4 Schalock, R.L.; Verdugo, M.A Calidad de vida: Manual para profesionales de la educaci ó n, salud y servicios sociales ; Alianza: Madrid, Spain, 2003 5 Jim é nez-Lara, A.; Arias-Garc í a, M.; Huete-Garc í a, A Alumnado con discapacidad y educaci ó n inclusiva en España ; Observatorio Estatal de la Discapacidad: Madrid, Spain, 2019 6 Mart í nez, M.A.; Bilbao, M.C. Los docentes de la universidad de Burgos y su actitud hacia las personas con discapacidad Rev. Esp. Disc. Intelec 2011 , 42 , 50–78 7 Allport, G.W The Nature of Prejudice ; Addison-Wesley: Oxford, UK, 1954 8 Triandis, H.C Attitude and Attitude Change ; Wiley: New York, NY, USA, 1971 9 Ovejero, A Las Relaciones Humanas. Psicolog í a social te ó rica y aplicada ; Biblioteca Nueva: Madrid, Spain, 1998 10 Gonz á lez, M.; Leal, A. Los estudiantes con discapacidad entre los mitos, prejuicios y estereotipos InterSedes 2009 , 10 , 118–129 11 Le ó n, B.; Felipe, E.; Gozalo, M.; G ó mez, T.; Latas, C. Mejora de las actitudes de los escolares hacia los alumnos inmigrantes mediante el aprendizaje cooperativo Rev. Psicol. Gen. Appl 2009 , 9 , 159–173 12 Antonak, R.F.; Livneh, H. Measurement of attitudes towards persons with disabilities Disabil. Rehabil 2000 , 22 , 211–224. [ CrossRef ] 13 UNICEF Fondo de las Naciones Unidas para la Infancia Estado Mundial de la Infancia 2013: Niñas y niños con discapacidad ; UNICEF: Nueva York, NY, USA, 2013 14 Thornicroft, G.; Rose, D.; Kassam, A. Discrimination in health care against people with mental illness J. Int. Rev. Psychiatry 2007 , 19 , 113–122. [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ] 15 Ferreira, M. Una aproximaci ó n sociol ó gica a la discapacidad desde el modelo social: Apuntes caracteriol ó gicos REIS 2008 , 124 , 141–174. [ CrossRef ] 16 Echeverr í a, R.; Galaz, M. Distancia social, creencias estereot í picas y emociones hacia las personas con discapacidad en universitarios mexicanos: Diferencias por sexo REDIS 2018 , 6 , 221–239. [ CrossRef ] 17 Garc í a-Lara, G.A.; Hern á ndez-Ortiz, S. Actitudes hacia la discapacidad de j ó venes y adultos de Chiapas Univ. Psychol 2011 , 10 , 817–827. [ CrossRef ] 18 Aguilar, M.L. Discapacidad: Entre el estigma y la comunidad Integr. Educ 2010 , 4 , 205–216 19 Polo, M.C.; Fern á ndez, C.; D í az, C. Estudio de las actitudes de estudiantes de ciencias sociales y Psicolog í a: Relevancia de la informaci ó n y contacto con personas discapacitadas Univ. Psychol 2011 , 10 , 113–123 [ CrossRef ] 20 Garc í a-Fern á ndez, J.M.; Ingl é s, C.J.; Vicent, M.; Gonz á lvez, C.; Mañas, C. Actitudes hacia la Discapacidad en el Á mbito Educativo a trav é s del SSCI (2000–2011). An á lisis Tem á tico y Bibliom é trico Electr. J. Res. Educ. Psych 2013 , 11 , 139–166. [ CrossRef ] 21 Barker, R.G. The Social Psychology of Physical Disability J. Soc. Issues 1948 , 4 , 28–38. [ CrossRef ] 22 Mussen, P.H.; Barker, R.G. Attitudes toward Cripples J. Abnorm. Soc. Psychol 1943 , 39 , 351–355. [ CrossRef ] 23 Strong, E.K Cbangesoj Interest with Axe ; Stanford University Press: Palo Alto, CA, USA, 1931.

Sustainability 2020 , 12 , 9007 10 of 11 24 Mella, S.; Gonz á lez, L. Actitudes de los estudiantes de la salud de la Universidad de Chile hacia las personas con discapacidad Rev. Chil. Ter. Ocup 2007 , 7 , 3–12. [ CrossRef ] 25 Yuker, H.E.; Block, J.R.; Campbell, W.J A Scale to Measure Attitudes toward Disabled Persons (Human Resources Study No. 5) ; Albertson, Human Resources Center: New York, NY, USA, 1960 26 Siller, J General form of the Disability Factor Scale (DFS-G) ; University New York: New York, NY, USA, 1967 27 Tringo, J.L. Hierarchy of preference toward disability groups J. Special Educ 1970 , 4 , 295–306. [ CrossRef ] 28 Voeltz, L.M. Children’s attitudes toward handicapped peers Am. J. Ment. Defic 1980 , 84 , 455–464. [ PubMed ] 29 Antonak, R.F. Development and psychometric analysis of the Scale of Attitudes Toward DisabledPersons J. Appl. Rehab. Counsel 1982 , 13 , 22–29. [ CrossRef ] 30 Yuker, H.; Hurley, M. Contact with and attitudes towards disabled persons: The measurement of inter-group contact Rehab. Psychol 1987 , 32 , 145–154 31 Barroso, D.; Mendo, S. La relevancia de la formaci ó n y el contacto previo en la opini ó n de estudiantes universitarios sobre las personas con trastorno mental Electr. J. Res. Educ. Psychol 2018 , 16 , 59–78 32 Gething, L.; Wheeler, B. The Interaction with Disabled Persons Scale: A new Australian instrument to measure attitudes towards people with disabilities Austral. J. Psychol 1992 , 44 , 75–82. [ CrossRef ] 33 Verdugo, M.A.; Arias, B.; Jenaro, C Actitudes hacia las personas con minusval í a ; Ministerio de Asuntos Sociales, IMSERSO: Madrid, Spain, 1994 34 Christison, G.W.; Haviland, M.G.; Riggs, M.L. The medical condition regard scale: Measuring reactions to diagnoses Acad. Med 2002 , 77 , 257–262. [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ] 35 Findler, L.; Vilchinsky, N.; Werner, S. The multidimensional attitudes scale toward persons with disabilities (MAS): Construction and validation Rehabil. Couns. Bull 2007 , 50 , 166–176. [ CrossRef ] 36 Bossaert, G.; Petry, K. Factorial validity of the Chedoke-McMaster Attitudes Towards Children with Handicaps Scale (CATCH) Res. Dev. Disabil 2013 , 34 , 1336–1345. [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ] 37 Arias, V.; Arias, B.; Verdugo, M.A.; Rubia, M.; Jenaro, C. Evaluaci ó n de actitudes de los profesionales hacia las personas con discapacidad Siglo Cero 2016 , 47 , 7–41 38 Aguado, A.L.; Alcedo, M.A.; Arias, B. Cambio de actitudes hacia la discapacidad con escolares de Primaria Psicothema 2008 , 20 , 697–704 39 Garabal, J.; Pousada, T.; Espinosa Breen, P.C.; Canosa, S.; Luis, J. Las actitudes como factor clave en la inclusi ó n universitaria Rev. Esp. Discapac 2018 , 6 , 181–198 40 Hurlock, B Psicolog í a de la adolescencia ; Paid ó s: Buenos Aires, Argentina, 1971 41 Muratori, M.; Gunt í n, C.; Delfino, G. Actitudes de los adolescentes hacia las personas con discapacidad: Un estudio con alumnos del polimodal en la zona norte del conurbano bonaerense Rev. Psicol 2010 , 6 , 39–56 42 Aguado, A.L.; Fl ó rez, M.A.; Alcedo, M.A. Un programa de cambio de actitudes hacia personas con discapacidad en entorno escolar An á l. Modif. Conducta 2003 , 29 , 673–704 43 Blos, P La transici ó n adolescente ; Amorrortu Editores: Buenos Aires, Argentina, 1979 44 Livneh, H A Dimensional Perspective on the Origin of Negative Attitudes toward Persons with Disabilities ; Yuker, H.E., Ed.; Springer: New York, NY, USA, 1988; pp. 35–46 45 Felipe-Rello, C.; Tejero-Gonz á lez, C.M.; Garoz Puerta, I. Escala CATCH: Validaci ó n de una version reducida traducida al español para la medici ó n de actitudes hacia la discapacidad Bord ó n. Rev. Pedag 2020 , 72 , 83–97 [ CrossRef ] 46 Costello, A.B.; Osborne, J. Best practices in exploratory factor analysis: Four recommendations for getting the most from your analysis Pract. Assess. Res. Eval 2005 , 10 , 1–9 47 Morales, V.P.; Urosa, S.B.; Blanco, B.A Construcci ó n de escalas de actitudes tipo Likert ; Unagu í apr á ctica; La Muralla: Madrid, Spain, 2003 48 Cheung, G.W.; Rensvold, R.B. Evaluating goodness-of-fit indexes for testing measurement invariance. Structur Equ. Model 2002 , 9 , 233–255. [ CrossRef ] 49 Novo-Corti, I.; Muñoz-Cantero, J.M.; Calvo-Bab í o, N. Los futuros docentes y su actitud hacia la inclusi ó n de personas con discapacidad. Una perspectiva de g é nero Anal. Psicol 2015 , 31 , 155–171. [ CrossRef ] 50 Moreno, J.; Rodr í guez, I.; Saldaña, D.; Aguilera, A. Actitudes ante la discapacidad en el alumnado universitario matriculado en materias afines Rev. Iberoam. Educ 2006 , 40 , 1–12 51 Polo, M.; L ó pez-Justicia, M. Actitudes hacia las personas con discapacidad de estudiantes de la Universidad de Granada Rev. Esp. Orientac. Psicopedag 2006 , 17 , 195–211.

Sustainability 2020 , 12 , 9007 11 of 11 52 Rodr í guez, M.A.; S á nchez, L.E.; D í az, A.L.; Mart í nez, B.; Garc í a, R.G. Eficacia del contacto e informaci ó n como t é cnicas de cambio de actitudes hacia personas con discapacidad en niños de Educaci ó n Primaria Univ. Psychol 2013 , 12 , 493–504 53 Aguado, A.L.; Fl ó rez, M.A.; Alcedo, M.A. Programas de cambio de actitudes ante la discapacidad Psicothema 2004 , 16 , 667–673 54 Alemany, I.; Villuendas, M.D. Las actitudes del profesorado hacia el alumnado con necesidades educativas especiales Converg. Rev. Cienc. Soc 2004 , 34 , 183–215 55 Felipe, C.; Garoz, I.; Tejero, C.M. An á lisis comparativo del efecto de tres programas de sensibilizaci ó n hacia la discapacidad en Educaci ó n F í sica Retos Nuevas Tend. Educ. F ís . Deporte Recreaci ó n 2018 , 34 , 258–262 56 Felipe, C.; Garoz, I.; D í az, M. Determinantes de las t é cnicas de cambio de actitudes hacia la discapacidad en programas educativos: Una revisi ó n internacional Siglo Cero 2014 , 45 , 28–46 Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional a ffi liations © 2020 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http: // creativecommons.org / licenses / by / 4.0 / ).

Other Environmental Sciences Concepts:

[back to top]

Discover the significance of concepts within the article: ‘Questionnaire for Adolescents to Evaluate Their Attitudes towards Disability’. Further sources in the context of Environmental Sciences might help you critically compare this page with similair documents:

Adolescent, Negative attitude, Secondary education, Discriminatory behavior, Positive attitude, Inclusion, Prejudice, Research, Persons with disabilities, Disability, Age-group, Equal opportunities, ATTITUDE, Social inclusion, Random selection, Adolescent Population, Social desirability, Sustainability, Questionnaire, Multistage sampling, Adolescent students, Negative consequence, Educational sphere, Diagnostic use, Development of interventions, Evaluation, Contextual perspective, Social construct, Key element, Stereotype, Three-factor, Exploratory factorial analysis, Confirmatory factorial analysis, Bioethics and Biosafety Committee, Persons with disability, Educational center, Likert-type items, Psychometric characteristic, Prior Contact, Inclusion in society, Attitudes towards disability.