20 orthopaedically disabled hospital patients responded to a self-ideal discrepancy scale and the Eysenck Personality Inventory. The severely disabled Ss were more self-accepting and less neurotic than the marginally disabled Ss. A direct relationship obtained between age and a composite measure of maladjustment (r = .42, p < .001), but this was not due simply to the duration of the disabilities. The results were interpreted as supporting the role-conflict hypothesis rather than the social-rejection hypothesis concerning the psychological consequences of physical disability.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
CowenE. L.BobroveP. H.Marginality of disability and adjustment. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 1966, 23, 869–870.
2.
CowenE. L.UnderbergR. P.VerrilloR. T.BenhamF. G.Adjustment to visual disability in adolescence. New York: American Foundation for the Blind, 1961.
3.
GeschwenderJ. A.Status inconsistency, social isolation, and individual unrest. Social Forces, 1968, 46, 477–483.
4.
GoffmanE.Stigma: notes on the management of spoiled identity. (2nd ed.) Harmondsworth: Pelican, 1968.
5.
IngwellR. H.ThoresonR. W.SmitsS. J.Accuracy of social perception of physically handicapped and nonhandicapped persons. Journal of Social Psychology, 1967, 72, 107–116.
6.
KleckR.Physical stigma and nonverbal cues emitted in face-to-face interaction. Human Relations, 1968, 21, 19–28.
7.
MeyersonL.Somatopsychology of physical disability. In CruickshankW. M. (Ed.), Psychology of exceptional children and youth. Englewood Cliffs, N. J.: Prentice-Hall, 1963 Pp. 1–52.
8.
MyersJ. K.RobertsB. H.Family and class dynamics in mental illness. New York: Wiley, 1959.
9.
PhillipsE. L.Some psychological characteristics associated with orthopaedic complaints. Current Practice in Orthopaedic Surgery, 1964, 2, 165–170.
10.
WrightB. A.Physical disability: a psychological approach. New York: Harper, 1960.
