The potential impact of experiencing social inclusion in recreation for children with and without disabilities

References

• Silver H. Understanding social inclusion and its meaning for Australia. Aust J Soc Issues. 2010;45(2):154–183.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Simplican SC, Leader G, Kosciulek J, et al. Defining social inclusion of people with intellectual and developmental disabilities: an ecological model of social networks and community participation. Res Dev Disabil. 2015;38:18–29.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Devine MA. Being a ‘doer’ instead of a ‘viewer’”: the role of inclusive leisure contexts in determining social acceptance for people with disabilities. J Leis Res. 2004;36(2):137–159.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mayer WE, Anderson LS. Perceptions of people with disabilities and their families about segregated and inclusive recreation involvement. Ther Recreation J. 2014;48(2):150–168.
   Google Scholar
• Scholl KG, Smith JG, Davison A. Agency readiness to provide inclusive recreation and after-school services for children with disabilities. Ther Recreation J. 2005;39(1):47–62.
   Google Scholar
• Devine MN, Parr MG. “Come on in, but not too far”: social capital in an inclusive leisure setting. Leis Sci. 2008;30(5):391–408.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hutchinson P, Mecke T, Sharpe E. Partners in inclusion at a residential summer camp: a case study. Ther Recreation J. 2008;42(3):179–196.
   Google Scholar
• Amado AN, Stancliffe RJ, McCarron M, et al. Social inclusion and community participation of individuals with intellectual/developmental disabilities. Intellect Dev Disabil. 2013;51(5):360–375.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Crawford SK, Stafford NK, Phillips SM, et al. Strategies for inclusion in play among children with physical disabilities in childcare centers: an integrative review. Phys Occup Ther Pediatr. 2014;34(4):404–423.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Allport G. The nature of prejudice. Cambridge (MA): Addison-Wesley; 1954.
   Google Scholar
• Pettigrew TF, Tropp LR. Allport’s intergroup contact hypothesis: Its history and influence. In Dovidio JF, Glick P, Rudman LA, editors. On the nature of prejudice: fifty years after Allport. Malden (MA): Blackwell Publishing; 2005. pp. 262–277.
   Google Scholar
• Keith JM, Bennetto L, Rogge RD. The relationship between contact and attitudes: reducing prejudice toward individuals with intellectual and developmental disabilities. Res Dev Disabil. 2015;47:14–26.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Belcher B, Palenberg M. Outcomes and impacts of development interventions: toward conceptual clarity. Am J Eval. 2018;39(4):478–495.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kramer JM, Olsen S, Mermelstein A, et al. Youth with disabilities' perspectives of the environment and participation: a qualitative meta-synthesis. Child Care Health Dev. 2012;38(6):763–777.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Peck CA, Staub D, Gallucci C, et al. Parent perception of the impacts of inclusion on their nondisabled child. Res Pract Persons Severe Disabl. 2004;29(2):135–143.
   Google Scholar
• Schleien SJ, Miller KD. Diffusion and innovation: a roadmap for inclusive community recreation services. Res Pract Persons Severe Disabl. 2010;35(3–4):93–101.
   Google Scholar
• Schwab S. The impact of contact on students' attitudes towards peers with disabilities. Res Dev Disabil. 2017;62:160–165.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Edwards BM, Cameron D, King G, et al. How typically developing students perceive social inclusion of children with disabilities in mainstream schools: a scoping review. Intl J Disabil Dev Educ. 2019;66(3):298–324.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McManus JL, Feyes KJ, Saucier DA. Contact and knowledge as predictors of attitudes toward individuals with intellectual disabilities. J Soc Pers Relatsh. 2011;28(5):579–590.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Barr JJ, Bracchitta K. Attitudes toward individuals with disabilities: the effects of contact with different disability types. Curr Psychol. 2015;34(2):223–228.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Siperstein GN, Glick GC, Parker RC. Social inclusion of children with intellectual disabilities in a recreational setting. Intellect Dev Disabil. 2009;47(2):97–107.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• King G, Law M, King S, et al. A conceptual model of the factors affecting the recreation and leisure participation of children with disabilities. Phys Occup Ther Pediatr. 2003;23(1):63–90.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Edwards B, Cameron D, King G, et al. Contextual strategies to support social inclusion for children with and without disabilities in recreation. Disabil Rehabil. 2019. DOI:10.1080/09638288.2019.1668972
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Caelli K, Ray L, Mill J. Clear as mud”: toward greater clarity in generic qualitative research. Int J Qual Methods. 2003;2(2):1–24.
   Google Scholar
• Edwards BM, Cameron D, King G, et al. Exploring Social Inclusion from the Perspectives of Children in an Inclusive Recreation Program [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. Toronto (Canada): University of Toronto, Canada.
   Google Scholar
• Kahlke RM. Generic qualitative approaches: pitfalls and benefits of methodological mixology. Int J Qual Methods. 2014;13(1):37–52.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sandelowski M. Theory unmasked: the uses and guises of theory in qualitative research. Res Nurs Health. 1993;16(3):213–218.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schwandt TA. Three epistemological stances for qualitative inquiry. In Denzin NK, Lincoln Y, editors. Handbook of qualitative research. Thousand Oaks (CA): Sage; 2000. pp. 189–214.
   Google Scholar
• Schwandt TA. Three epistemological stances for qualitative inquiry: interpretativism, hermeneutics and social constructionism. In Denzin NK, Lincoln YS, editors. The landscape of qualitative research: theories and issues. Thousand Oaks (CA): Sage; 2003. pp. 292–331.
   Google Scholar
• Yilmaz K. Comparison of quantitative and qualitative research traditions: epistemological, theoretical, and methodological differences. Eur J Educ. 2013;48(2):311–325.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Guba EG, The alternative paradigm dialog. In Guba EG, editor. The paradigm dialog. Newbury Park (CA): Sage; 1990. pp. 17–30.
   Google Scholar
• Singh KD. Creating your own qualitative research approach. Selecting, integrating and operationalizing philosophy, methodology and methods. Vision. 2015;19(2):132–146.
   Google Scholar
• Angen MJ. Evaluating interpretive inquiry: reviewing the validity debate and opening the dialogue. Qual Health Res. 2000;10(3):378–395.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Willis JW. Foundations of qualitative research: Interpretive and critical approaches. Thousand Oaks (CA): Sage Publications, Inc; 2012.
   Google Scholar
• Haverkamp BE, Young RA. Paradigms, purpose and the role of the literature: formulating a rationale for qualitative research. Couns Psychol. 2007;35(2):265–294.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lincoln YS, Lynham SA, Guba EG, Paradigmatic controversies, contradictions, and emerging confluences, revisited. In Denzin NK, Lincoln YS, editors. The Sage handbook of qualitative research. 4th ed. Thousand Oaks (CA): Sage Publications, Inc; 2011. pp. 97–128.
   Google Scholar
• Gale NK, Heath G, Cameron E, et al. Using the framework method for the analysis of qualitative data in multi-disciplinary health research. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2013;13(1):117.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tracy S. Qualitative quality: eight “big tent” criteria for excellent qualitative research. Qual Inq. 2010;16(10):837–851.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• King G, Kingsnorth S, Sheffe S, et al. An inclusive arts-mediated program for children with and without disabilities: establishing community and an environment for child development through the arts. Children’s Health Care. 2016;45(2):204–226.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Smart E, Edwards B, Kingsnorth S, et al. Creating an inclusive leisure space: strategies used to engage children with and without disabilities in the arts-mediated program Spiral Garden . Disabil Rehabil. 2018;40(2):199–207.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Crossman S, Donovan M, MacKie J, et al. Spiral garden resource book. Toronto (Canada): Bloorview MacMillan Children’s Centre and Spiral Community Artists’ Circle; 2002.
   Google Scholar
• Foley KR, Blackmore AM, Girdler S, et al. To feel belonged: the voices of children and youth with disabilities on the meaning of wellbeing. Child Indic Res. 2012;5(2):375–391.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Koller D, San Juan VS. Play-based interview methods for exploring young children’s perspectives on inclusion. Int J Qual Methods. 2015;28(5):610–631.
   Google Scholar
• Koster M, Nakken H, Pijl SJ, et al. Being part of the peer group: a literature study focusing on the social dimension in education. Int J Qual Methods. 2009;13(2):117–140.
   Google Scholar
• DiCicco-Bloom B, Crabtree B. The qualitative research interview. Med Educ. 2006;40(4):314–321.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Braun V, Clarke V. Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qual Res Psychol. 2006;3(2):77–101.
   Google Scholar
• Eriksson L, Welander J, Granland M. Participation in everyday school activities for children with and without disabilities. J Intellect Dev Disabil. 2007;19(5):485–502.
   Google Scholar
• Garrote A, Sermier Dessemontet R, Moser Opitz E. Facilitating the social participation of pupils with special educational needs in mainstream schools: a review of school based interventions. Educ Res Rev. 2017;20:12–23.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pettigrew TF, Tropp LR, Wagner U, et al. Recent advances in intergroup contact theory. Int J Intercult Relat. 2011;35(3):271–280.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lindsay S, Edwards A. Children’s lack of knowledge about disability can adversely impact their attitudes toward people with disabilities. Disabil Rehabil. 2013;35(8):623–646.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Biggs EE, Carter EW, Gustafson J. Efficacy of peer support arrangements to increase peer interaction and AAC use. Am J Intellect Dev Disabil. 2017;122(1):25–48.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Kalymon K, Gettinger M, Hanley-Maxwell C. Middle school boys' perspectives on social relationships with peers with disabilities. Remedial Spec Educ. 2010;31(4):305–316.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Anderson K, Balandin S, Clendon S. "He cares about me and I care about him." Children's experiences of friendship with peers who use AAC. Augment Altern Commun. 2011;27(2):77–90.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wolfensberger W. Normalization. Toronto: National Institute on Mental Retardation; 1972.
   Google Scholar
• Wolfensberger W. Social role valorization: a proposed new term for the principle of normalization. Intellect Dev Disabil. 2011;49(6):435–440.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mann G, Moni K, Cuskelly M. Parents’ views of an optimal school life: using Social Role Valorization to explore differences in parental perspectives when children have intellectual disability. Int J Qual Stud Educ. 2016;29(7):964–979.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yates S, Dyson S, Hiles D. Beyond normalization and impairment: theorizing subjectivity in learning difficulties– theory and practice. Disabil Soc. 2008;23(3):247–258.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Deleuze G, Guattari F. A thousand plateaus: capitalism and schizophrenia. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press; 1987.
   Google Scholar
• Gibson B. Parallels and problems of normalization in rehabilitation and universal design: enabling connectivities. Disabil Rehabil. 2014;36(16):1328–1333.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Feely M. Disability studies after the ontological turn: a return to the material world and material bodies without a return to essentialism. Disabil Soc. 2016;31(7):863–883.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brown HK, Ouellette-Kuntz H, Lysaght R, et al. Students' behavioral intentions towards peers with disability. J Appl Res Intellect Disabil. 2011;24(4):322–332.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gasser L, Malti T, Buholzer A. Children’s moral judgements and moral emotions following exclusion of children with disabilities: relations with inclusive education, age, and contact intensity. Res Devs Disabil. 2013;34(3):948–958.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hodson G. Do ideologically intolerant people benefit from intergroup contact? Curr Dir Psychol Sci. 2011;20(3):154–159.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar