Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Quality of Life Model Development and Use in the Field of Intellectual Disability

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Enhancing the Quality of Life of People with Intellectual Disabilities

Part of the book series: Social Indicators Research Series ((SINS,volume 41))

Abstract

This chapter makes a distinction between logic models that provide a visual map or narrative description of how specific program components are related to a program’s desired results and an operational model that depicts key concepts and variables involved in understanding, operationalizing, and applying a phenomenon such as the quality of life (QOL) construct. The four sections of the chapter (a) describe how the authors have approached the first step of model development (formulating and validating a QOL conceptual and measurement framework); (b) describe how the model has been operationalized through its definition, components (concepts, indicators, and moderator–mediator variables), and premises; (c) suggest a number of criteria that can be used to evaluate any empirically derived model; and (d) reference how the model has been applied in four areas important to the application of the QOL construct in the field of intellectual and closely related developmental disabilities. The chapter should be read and understood within the context of the significant conceptual and empirical work that has occurred over the last three decades regarding the QOL concept. The work described in this chapter reflects the evolution of the concept from a philosophical concept to a measurable construct, and from a measurable construct to an operational model supported by considerable data, serving as a basis for application and hypothesis testing.

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

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 129.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Aguinis, H., Boik, R. J., & Pierce, C. A. (2001). A generalized solution for approximating the power to detect effects of categorical moderator variables using multiple regression. Organizational Research Methods, 4, 291–323.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Andrews, F. M., & Whithey, S. B. (1976). Social indicators of well-being: Americans’ perception of life quality. New York: Plenum Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Baron, R. M., & Kenny, D. A. (1986). The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51, 1173–1182.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bonham, G. S., Basehart, S., & Marchand, C. B. (2005, December). Ask Me! FY 2006: The QOL of Marylanders with developmental disabilities receiving DDA funded supports. Annapolis, MD: Bonham Research.

    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(5), 338–355.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bowling, A., & Gabriel, Z. (2004). An intergrational model of quality of life in older age. Results from the ESRC/MRC HSRC quality of life survey in Britain. Social Indicators Research, 69, 1–36.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brown, R. I. (1997). Quality of life: The development of an idea. In R. I. Brown (Ed.), Quality of life for people with disabilities: Models, research and practice (2nd ed., pp. 1–10). Cheltnham: Stanley Thornes.

    Google Scholar 

  • Byrne-Davis, L. M. T., Bennett, P. D., & Wilcock, G. K. (2006). How are quality of life ratings made? Toward a model of quality of life in people with dementia. Quality of Life Research, 15, 855–865.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carlisle, P. R., & Christensen, C. M. (2006). The cycles of theory building in management research. Boston: School of Management-Boston University and Harvard Business School.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chen, H. (2005). Theory-driven evaluation. In J. Mathison (Ed.), Encyclopedia of evaluation (pp. 415–419). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, J., Cohen, P., West, S. G., & Aiken, L. S. (2003). Applied multiple regression/correlation analysis for the behavioral sciences (3rd ed.). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cooksy, L. J., Gill, P., & Kelly, P. A. (2001). The program logic model as an integrative framework for a multimethod evaluation. Evaluation and Program Planning, 24(2), 119–128.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Corley, E. A. (2007). A use-and-transformation model for evaluation public R & D. Evaluation and Program Planning, 30(1), 21–35.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cummins, R. A. (1996). The domains of life satisfaction: An attempt to order chaos. Social Indicators Research, 52, 55–72.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cummins, R. A. (1997). Assessing quality of life. In R. I. Brown (Ed.), Quality of life for people with disabilities: Models, research and practice (2nd ed., pp. 116–150). Cheltenham: Stanley Thornes.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cummins, R. A. (2000). Objective and subjective quality of life: An interactive model. Social Indicators Research, 52, 55–72.

    Article  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 quality of life concept to a theory. Journal of Intellectual Disability Research, 49(10), 699–706.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Davis, E., & Fine-Davis, M. (1991). Social indicators of living conditions in Ireland with European comparisons. Social Indicators Research, 25(2–4), 318–353.

    Google Scholar 

  • Donaldson, S. E., & Gooler, L. E. (2003). Theory-driven evaluation and action. Evaluation and Program Planning, 26(4), 355–366.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fawcett, J. (1999). The relationship of theory and research (3rd ed.). Philadelphia, PA: F.A. Davis.

    Google Scholar 

  • Felce, D., & Emerson, E. (2001). Living with support in a home in the community: Predictors of behavioural development and household and community activity. Mental Retardation and Developmental Disabilities Research, 34(2), 23–41.

    Google Scholar 

  • Felce, D., & Perry, J. (1995). Quality of life: Its definition and measurement. Research in Developmental Disabilities, 16(1), 51–74.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Felce, D., & Perry, J. (1996). Assessment of quality of life. In R. L. Schalock (Ed.), Quality of life: Vol. I: Conceptualization and measurement (pp. 63–72). Washington, DC: American Association on Mental Retardation.

    Google Scholar 

  • Felce, D., & Perry, J. (1997). Quality of life: The scope of the term and its breadth of measurement. In R. I. Brown (Ed.), Quality of life for persons with disabilities: Models, research and practice (2nd ed., pp. 56–71). Cheltenham: Stanley Thornes.

    Google Scholar 

  • Frazier, P. A., Tix, A. P., & Barron, K. E. (2004). Testing moderator and mediator effects in counseling psychology research. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 51, 115–134.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Frechtling, J. A. (2007). Logic modeling methods in program evaluation. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gardner, J. F., & Carran, D. (2005). Attainment of personal outcomes by people with developmental disabilities. Mental Retardation, 43(3), 157–174.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goode, D. A. (1990). Thinking about and discussing quality of life. In R. L. Schalock (Ed.), Quality of life: Perspectives and issues (pp. 41–57). Washington, DC: American Association on Mental Retardation.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gugiu, P. C., Rodriguez, G., & Campos, L. (2007). Semi-structured interview protocol for constructing logic models. Evaluation and Program Planning, 30(4), 339–350.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hair, J. F., Jr., Black, B., Babin, B., Anderson, R., & Tatham, R. (2006). Multivariate data analysis (6th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hartley, S. L., & MacLean, W. E., Jr. (2006). A review of the reliability and validity of Likert-type scales for people with intellectual disability. Journal of Intellectual Disability Research, 50(Part II), 813–827.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hoyle, R. H., & Robinson, J. I. (2003). Mediated and moderated effects in social psychological research: Measurement, design, and analysis issues. In C. Sansone, C. Morf, & A. T. Panter (Eds.), Handbook of methods in social psychology. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hughes, C., & Hwang, B. (1996). Attempts to conceptualize and measure quality of life. In R. L. Schalock (Ed.), Quality of life: Volume I: Conceptualization and measurement (pp. 51–61). Washington, DC: American Association on Mental Retardation.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hughes, C., Hwang, B., Kim, J.-H., Eisenman, L. T., & Killian, D. J. (1995). Quality of life in applied research: A review and analysis of empirical measures. American Journal on Mental Retardation, 99(6), 623–641.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hunter, D. E. K. (2006). Using a theory of change approach to build organizational strength, capacity, and sustainability with not-for-profit organizations in the human services sector. Evaluation and Program Planning, 29(2), 193–200.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Isaacs, B., Clark, C., Correia, S., & Flannery, J. (2007). The utility of logic models to plan quality of life outcomes evaluations. Journal of Policy and Practice in Intellectual Disabilities, 4, 177–185.

    Google Scholar 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kane, M., & Trochim, W. (2007). A review of concept mapping for planning and evaluation. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kaplan, S. A., & Garrett, K. E. (2005). The use of logic models by community-based initiatives. Evaluation and Program Planning, 28(2), 167–172.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Keith, K. D. (2001). International quality of life: Current conceptual, measurement, and implementation issues. International Review of Research in Mental Retardation, 24, 49–74.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Keith, K. D. (2007). Quality of life. In A. Carr, G. O’Reilly, P. N. Walsh, & J. McEvoy (Eds.), The handbook of intellectual disability and clinical psychology practice (pp. 143–168). London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Keith, K. D., & Bonham, G. S. (2005). The use of quality of life data at the organization and systems level. Journal of Intellectual Disability Research, 49(Part 10), 799–805.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Keith, K. D., & Ferdinand, L. R. (2000). Project to compare quality of life of Nebraskans with developmental disabilities and citizens without disabilities. Lincoln, NE: Governor’s Planning Council on Developmental Disabilities.

    Google Scholar 

  • Keith, K. D., Heal, L. W., & Schalock, R. L. (1996). Cross-cultural measurement of critical quality of life concepts. Journal of Intellectual and Developmental Disability, 21, 273–293.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lachappelle, Y., Wehmeyer, M. L., Haelewyck, M. C., Courbois, Y., Keith, K. D., Schalock, R. L., et al. (2005). The relationship between quality of life and self-determination: An international study. Journal of Intellectual Disability Research, 49(10), 740–744.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Millar, A., Simeone, R. S., & Carnevale, J. T. (2001). Logic models: A systems tool for performance management. Evaluation and Program Planning, 24(1), 73–81.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Neeley-Barnes, S., Marcenko, M., & Weber, L. (2008). Does choice influence quality of life for people with mild intellectual disability? Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities, 46(1), 12–26.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Parmenter, T. R., & Donelly, M. (1997). An analysis of the dimensions of quality of life. In R. I. Brown (Ed.), Quality of life for people with disabilities: Models, research and practice (2nd ed., pp. 91–115). Cheltenham: Stanley Thornes.

    Google Scholar 

  • Perry, J., & Felce, D. (2005). Factors associated with outcomes in community group homes. American Journal on Mental Retardation, 110, 121–135.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Petry, K., Maes, B., & Vlaskamp, C. (2005). Domains of quality of life of people with profound multiple disabilities: The perspective of parents and direct support staff. Journal of Applied Research in Intellectual Disabilities, 18, 35–46.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Petry, K., Maes, B., & Vlaskamp, C. (2007). Operationalizing quality of life for people with profound multiple disabilities: A Delphi study. Journal of Intellectual Disability Research, 51(5), 334–349.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rahtz, D. R., Sirgy, M. J., & Lee, D.-J. (2004). Further validation and extension of the quality of life/community-health care model and measures. Social Indicators Research, 69, 167–198.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rogers, E. M. (1995). Diffusion of innovations (4th ed.). New York: Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rogers, J. D., & Bozeman, B. (2001). Knowledge value alliances: An alternative to the R & D project focus in evaluation. Science Technology and Human Values, 26(1), 23–55.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rosas, S. R., & Camphausen, L. C. (2007). The use of concept mapping for scale development and validation in evaluation. Evaluation and Program Planning, 30(2), 125–135.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schalock, R. L. (1999). Three decades of quality of life. In M. L. Wehmeyer & J. R. Patton (Eds.), Mental retardation in the 21st century (pp. 335–358). Austin, TX: Pro-Ed.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schalock, R. L., & Bonham, G. S. (2003). Measuring outcomes and managing for results. Evaluation and Program Planning, 26(3), 229–235.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schalock, R. L., Bonham, C. B., & Marchand, C. B. (2000). Consumer based quality of life assessment: A path model of perceived satisfaction. Evaluation and Program Planning, 23(1), 77–88.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schalock, R. L., Bonham, G. S., & Verdugo, M. A. (2008). 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., & Felce, D. (2004). Quality of life and subjective well-being: Conceptual and measurement issues. In E. Emerson, C. Hatton, T. Thompson, & T. Parmenter (Eds.), Handbook of applied research in intellectual disabilities (pp. 261–279). New York: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schalock, R. L., Gardner, J. F., & Bradley, V. J. (2007). Quality of life of 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. (1993). Quality of life questionnaire manual. Worthington, OH: IDS.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schalock, R. L., & Luckasson, R. (2005). Clinical judgment. Washington, DC: American Association on Mental Retardation.

    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. (2008). Enhancing personal outcomes: Organizational strategies, guidelines, and examples. Journal of Policy and Practice in Intellectual Disabilities, 5(4), 276–285.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schalock, R. L., Verdugo, M. A., Jenaro, C., Wang, W., 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 

  • Shoemaker, P. J., Tankard, J. W., Jr., & Lasorsa, D. L. (2004). How to build social science theories. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shogren, K. A., Bradley, V. J., Gomez, S. C., Yeager, M. H., et al. (2009). Public policy and the enhancement of desired public policy outcomes for persons with intellectual disability. Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities, 47, 307–319.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stancliffe, R., Abery, B., & Smith, J. (2000). Personal control and the ecology of community living settings: Beyond living-unit size and type. American Journal on Mental Retardation, 105, 431–454.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stancliffe, R. J., & Lakin, C. K. (1998). Analysis of expenditures and outcomes of residential alternatives for persons with developmental disabilities. American Journal on Mental Retardation, 102, 552–568.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stancliffe, R. J., & Lakin., K. C. (2005). Costs and outcomes of community services for people with intellectual disabilities. Baltimore, MD: Paul H. Brookes.

    Google Scholar 

  • State of Nebraska Health and Human Services. (2008). 2008 Nebraska developmental disabilities provider profiles. Lincoln, NE: Author (Division of Developmental Disabilities).

    Google Scholar 

  • Summers, J. A., Poston, D. J., Turnbull, A. P., Marquis, J., Hoffman, L., Mannan, H., et al. (2005). Conceptualizing and measuring family quality of life. Journal of Intellectual Disability Research, 49(10), 777–783.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sutherland, S., & Katz, S. (2005). Concept mapping methodology: A catalyst for organizational learning. Evaluation and Program Planning, 28(3), 257–269.

    Article  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Taylor, S. J., & Bogdan, R. (1998). Introduction to qualitative research methods: A guidebook and resource (3rd ed.). New York: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tossebro, J. (1995). Impact of size revised: Relation of number of residents to self-determination and deprivation. American Journal on Mental Retardation, 100, 59–67.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van Loon, J. (2008). Aligning quality of life domains and indicators to support intensity scale data. In R. L. Schalock, J. R. Thompson, & M. J. Tasse (Eds.), Supports intensity scale companion guide: A resource for SIS users (pp. 80–87). Washington, DC: American Association on Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van Loon, J., van Hove, G., Schalock, R. L., & Claes, C. (2008). Personal Outcomes Scale. Middleburg, NL/Gent: Arduin Steichlich/Department of Special Education, University of Gent.

    Google Scholar 

  • Veerman, J. W., & van Yperen, T. A. (2007). Degrees of freedom and degrees of certainty: A developmental model for the establishment of evidence-based youth care. Evaluation and Program Planning, 30(2), 136–148.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Verdugo, M. A., Arias, B., Gómez, L. E., & Schalock, R. L. (2008a). GENCAT Scale. Formulary of the Gencat Scale. Application Manual of the Gencat Scale. Barcelona: Department of Social action and Citizenship, Generalitat of Catalonia.

    Google Scholar 

  • Verdugo, M. A., Arias, B., Gómez, L. E., & Schalock, R. L. (2008b). GENCAT Scale. Final report about the development of a multidimensional scale for assessing the quality of life of human services users in Catalunya. Barcelona: Department of Social action and Citizenship, Generalitat of Catalonia.

    Google Scholar 

  • Verdugo, M. A., Arias, B., Gómez, L. E., & Schalock, R. L. (2009). The integral scale. Madrid: CEPE.

    Google Scholar 

  • Verdugo, M. A., Arias, B., Gómez, L. E., & Schalock, R. L. (in press). Development of an objective instrument to assess quality of life in social services: Reliability and validity in Spain. International Journal of Clinical and Health Psychology.

    Google Scholar 

  • Verdugo, M. A., & Schalock, R. L. (2003). Cross-cultural survey of QOL indicators. Salamanca: Institute on Community Integration-Faculty of Psychology-University of Salamanca.

    Google Scholar 

  • Verdugo, M. A., Schalock, R. L., Gomez, L. E., & Arias, B. (2007). Developing multidimensional quality of life scales focusing on the context: The Gencat Scale. Siglo Cero, 38(4), 57–72.

    Google Scholar 

  • Verdugo, M. A., Schalock, R. L., 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 

  • Walsh, P., Erickson, E., Bradley, V., Moseley, C., & Schalock, R. L. (2006). Supported accommodation services for people with intellectual disabilities: A review of models and instruments used to measure quality of life in various settings. Dublin: National Disability Authority.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wang, M., Schalock, R. L., Verdugo, M. A., & Jenaro, C. (2010). Examining the factor structure and hierarchical nature of the quality of life construct. American Journal on Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities, 115, 218–233.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wehmeyer, M., & Schwartz, M. (1998). The relationship between self-determination and quality of life for adults with mental retardation. Education and Training in Mental Retardation and Developmental Disabilities, 31(1), 3–12.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgment

The authors are appreciative of the inputs and suggestions given by these valued colleagues at the University of Salamanca (Institute on Community Integration, School of Psychology) in Spain (Benito Arias, Maria Gómez-Vela, Pedro Jimenez Navarro, Esther Navallas, and Fabian Sainz) and Dr. Gordon Bonham (Bonham Research – Baltimore, MD).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Hastings College, Hastings, NE, USA

    Robert L. Schalock

  2. Department of Psychology, University of San Diego, San Diego, CA, USA

    Kenneth D. Keith

  3. School of Psychology-University of Salamanca, Institute on Community Integration, University of Salamanca, Salamanca, Spain

    Miguel Á. Verdugo & Laura E. Gómez

Authors
  1. Robert L. Schalock
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Kenneth D. Keith
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Miguel Á. Verdugo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Laura E. Gómez
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Robert L. Schalock .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. , Department of Accounting and Finance, Monash University, PO Box 197, Caulfield East, 3145, Victoria, Australia

    Ralph Kober

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2010 Springer Science+Business Media B.V.

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Schalock, R.L., Keith, K.D., Verdugo, M.Á., Gómez, L.E. (2010). Quality of Life Model Development and Use in the Field of Intellectual Disability. In: Kober, R. (eds) Enhancing the Quality of Life of People with Intellectual Disabilities. Social Indicators Research Series, vol 41. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-90-481-9650-0_2

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation