PTOTSLPQualitativeFrontiers in rehabilitation sciences2022

"Sympathy" vs."Empathy": Comparing experiences of I2Audits and disability simulations.

Emily C Hicks, Meg A Traci, Karin Korb

PMID 36188992

WHAT IT FOUND

Participants described disability simulations as embarrassing and sympathy-inducing, while I2Audits were seen as empowering because people with disabilities led them.

This qualitative study suggests shifting from mimicking disability to partnering with disabled community members for environmental change.

Key findings

01Participants reported that disability simulations often induced feelings of embarrassment, fear, and sympathy rather than empathy, and failed to address environmental barriers.

02In contrast, I2Audits were described as empowering because they centered the lived experiences of people with disabilities and allowed them to lead the discussion on community changes.

03Participants identified specific built environment improvements resulting from I2Audits, such as new wayfinding systems and curb extensions, driven by the partnership between disabled and non-disabled community members.

STILL TO COME

How it was doneWhat they foundWhat it means for PTsWhat it means for OTsWhat it means for SLPs

Read the rest of this summary

You get three full summaries a month, free, and we do not ask for a card. Search, the TL;DRs and your library stay unlimited either way.

Already have one?

What it does not show

The study used a small, convenience sample of only 12 participants, which limits the generalizability of the findings. Data was collected via an online survey without follow-up interviews, so the researchers could not clarify ambiguous responses or probe deeper into participants' experiences. Participants had varying levels of exposure to the interventions, and the study relied entirely on subjective self-reports rather than objective measures of attitude change or behavioral outcomes.

Declared interests

The research was funded by the Research and Training Center on Disability in Rural Communities (RTC:Rural) under the National Institute on Disability, Independent Living, and Rehabilitation Research (NIDILRR). No other conflicts of interest were declared.

The easy way to misread this

Do not interpret these themes as proof that I2Audits objectively improve attitudes or health outcomes. The study reports subjective experiences from a very small group of people who already had some connection to disability advocacy or community work, so it does not measure actual effectiveness compared to a control group.

Read it on PubMed →