dc.contributor.author | Vicente, Eva | |
dc.contributor.author | Guillén-Martín, Verónica Marina | |
dc.contributor.author | Gómez, Laura Elisabet | |
dc.contributor.author | Ibáñez García, Alba | |
dc.contributor.author | Sánchez, Sergio | |
dc.contributor.other | Universidad de Cantabria | es_ES |
dc.date.accessioned | 2024-01-12T08:15:43Z | |
dc.date.available | 2024-01-12T08:15:43Z | |
dc.date.issued | 2019 | |
dc.identifier.issn | 1360-2322 | |
dc.identifier.other | PSI2016-75826-P | es_ES |
dc.identifier.uri | https://hdl.handle.net/10902/31068 | |
dc.description.abstract | Background: Advances in international studies on self-determination point out the need for continuous efforts to deepen its understanding and implications. The aim of this study is to obtain a comprehensive pool of items to operationalize the self- determination construct that serves as a starting point towards a valid instrument based on the reports of others. Method: We conducted a Delphi study of three rounds involving three panels of ex-perts: ten professionals, five people with intellectual disability and six relatives of people with intellectual disability. Data analysis required both qualitative and quanti-tative methods. Results: The initial pool of 131 items was refined through the different rounds to a final set composed of 115?some were removed and new ones were added. Content- based evidence is provided. In this study, the present authors generated a potential valid pool of items to develop a new measurement tool based on the latest advances on the self- determination theoretical framework. Conclusions: The implications for future research focus on strengthening the knowl-edge of self- determination. | es_ES |
dc.format.extent | 13 p. | es_ES |
dc.language.iso | eng | es_ES |
dc.publisher | Wiley-Blackwell | es_ES |
dc.rights | © John Wiley & Sons This is the peer reviewed version of the following article: Vicente, E., Guillén, V. M., Gómez, L. E., Ibáñez, A., & Sánchez, S. (2019). What do stakeholders understand by self?determination? Consensus for its evaluation. Journal of Applied Research in Intellectual Disabilities, 32(1), 206-218, which has been published in final form at https://doi.org/10.1111/jar.12523. This article may be used for non-commercial purposes in accordance with Wiley Terms and Conditions for Self-Archiving. | es_ES |
dc.source | JARID. Journal of Applied Research in Intellectual Disabilities, 2019, 32(1),206-218 | es_ES |
dc.subject.other | Content validity | es_ES |
dc.subject.other | Experts | es_ES |
dc.subject.other | Delphi study | es_ES |
dc.subject.other | Assessment | es_ES |
dc.subject.other | Consensus | es_ES |
dc.subject.other | Self-determination | es_ES |
dc.title | What do stakeholders understand by self-determination? Consensus for its evaluation | es_ES |
dc.type | info:eu-repo/semantics/article | es_ES |
dc.rights.accessRights | openAccess | es_ES |
dc.identifier.DOI | 10.1111/jar.12523 | |
dc.type.version | acceptedVersion | es_ES |