Education Makes the Difference: Work Preferences of Young Adults with Physical Disability
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Literature Review
2.1. Theory of Planned Behavior (TPB)
2.2. Mediating Role of Self-Assessed Health
3. Materials and Methods
3.1. Participants and Procedures
3.2. Measures
3.2.1. Dependent Variables
3.2.2. Independent Variables
3.2.3. Mediating Variables
3.3. Data Analysis
4. Results
Path Analysis by Structural Equation Modeling
5. Discussion
Limitations and Future Directions
6. Conclusions
Author Contributions
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Informed Consent Statement
Data Availability Statement
Acknowledgments
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Rimmerman, A. Social Inclusion of People with Disabilities: National and International Perspectives (Cambridge Disability Law and Policy Series); Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK, 2012. [Google Scholar]
- Brook, K. Labour Market Participation: The Influence of Social Capital; Office for National Statistics: Newport, UK, 2005; pp. 113–123.
- Rios, J.A.; Ling, G.; Pugh, R.; Becker, D.; Bacall, A. Identifying critical 21st-century skills for workplace success: A content analysis of job advertisements. Edu. Res. 2020, 49, 80–89. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Avey, J.B.; Luthans, F.; Smith, R.M.; Palmer, N.F. Impact of positive psychological capital on employee well-being over time. J. Occup. Health Psychol. 2010, 15, 17–28. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Konrad, A.M.; Moore, M.E.; Doherty, A.J.; Ng, E.S.W.; Breward, K. Vocational status and perceived well-being of workers with disabilities. Equal. Divers. Incl. 2012, 31, 100–123. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs. Available online: https://www.un.org/development/desa/disabilities/convention-on-the-rights-of-persons-with-disabilities.html (accessed on 15 March 2022).
- Harpur, P. Embracing the new disability rights paradigm: The importance of the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. Disabil. Soc. 2012, 27, 1–14. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Greve, B. The Labour Market Situation of Disabled People in European Countries and Implementation of Employment Policies: A Summary of Evidence from Country Reports; Academic Network of European Disability Experts (ANED): Brussels, Belgium, 2009. [Google Scholar]
- Shier, M.; Graham, J.R.; Jones, M.E. Barriers to employment as experienced by disabled people: A qualitative analysis in Calgary and Regina, Canada. Disabil. Soc. 2009, 24, 63–75. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yosef, L.; Soffer, M.; Malul, M. From welfare to work and from work to welfare: A comparison of people with and without disabilities. J. Disabil. Policy Stud. 2019, 29, 226–234. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cinamon, R.G.; Rich, Y. Work and family plans among at-risk Israeli adolescents: A mixed-methods study. J. Career Dev. 2014, 41, 163–184. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lindsay, S. Discrimination and other barriers to employment for teens and young adults with disabilities. Disabil. Rehabil. 2011, 33, 1340–1350. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Barlev, L.; Seneder-Loeff, A. Facts and Figures: People with Disability in Israel 2018 [Hebrew]; Myers-JDC-Brookdale Institute: Jerusalem, Israel, 2018; Available online: https://brookdale.jdc.org.il/publication/facts-and-figures-people-with-disabilities-in-israel-2018/ (accessed on 12 February 2021).
- Ali, M.; Schur, L.; Blanck, P. What types of jobs do people with disabilities want? J. Occup. Rehabil. 2011, 21, 199–210. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pinto, O.Y.; Strawczynski, M.; Rimmerman, A. Exploring the right to work among persons with disabilities: The role of labor-oriented values. Work 2020, 67, 193–202. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- National Insurance Institute. Available online: https://www.btl.gov.il/benefits/Vocational_Rehabilitation/Vocational_Rehabilitation_disabeld/Pages/default.aspx (accessed on 22 March 2022).
- Shreffler, K.M.; Johnson, D.R. Fertility Intentions, career considerations and subsequent births: The moderating effects of women’s work hours. J. Fam. Econ. Issues 2013, 34, 285–295. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Wöhrmann, A.M.; Brauner, C.; Michel, A. Working time preferences and early and late retirement intentions. Chronobil. Int. 2020, 37, 1283–1286. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Ajzen, I. Constructing a Theory of Planned Behavior Questionnaire. 2006. Available online: https://people.umass.edu/aizen/tpb.measurement.pdf. (accessed on 10 February 2022).
- Ajzen, I. Behavioral interventions: Design and evaluation guided by the theory of planned behavior. In Social Psychology and Evaluation; Mark, M.M., Donaldson, S.I., Campbell, B., Eds.; Guilford: New York, NY, USA, 2011; pp. 74–100. ISBN 9781609182120. [Google Scholar]
- Edelstein, O.E.; Vered, I.; Sarid, O. Correlates of participation in physical activity among older women in Israel: Does ethno-cultural background matter? Health Promt. Int. 2021, 36, 34–45. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Beatson, A.; Riedel, A.; Chamorro-Koc, M.; Marston, G.; Stafford, L. Encouraging young adults with a disability to be independent in their journey to work: A segmentation and application of Theory of Planned Behavior approach. Heliyon 2020, 6, e03420. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Van Hoye, G.; Saks, A.M.; Lievens, F.; Weijters, B. Development and test of an integrative model of job search behaviour. Eur. J. Work Organ. Psychol. 2015, 24, 544–559. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Arnold, J.; Loan-Clarke, J.; Coombs, C.; Wilkinson, A.; Park, J.; Preston, D. How well can the theory of planned behavior account for occupational intentions? J. Voc. Behav. 2006, 69, 374–390. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Corbière, M.; Zaniboni, S.; Lecomte, T.; Bond, G.; Gilles, P.Y.; Lesage, A.; Goldner, E. Job acquisition for people with severe mental illness enrolled in supported employment programs: A theoretically grounded empirical study. J. Occup. Rehabil. 2011, 21, 342–354. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ajzen, I. Perceived behavioral control, self-efficacy, locus of control, and the theory of planned behavior. J. Appl. Soc. Psychol. 2002, 32, 665–683. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chen, G.; Gully, S.M.; Eden, D. Validation of a new general self-efficacy scale. Organ. Res. Methods 2001, 4, 62–83. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Panagos, R.J.; DuBois, D.L. Career self-efficacy development and students with learning disabilities. Learn. Disabil. Res. Pract. 1999, 14, 25–34. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Brouwer, S.; Reneman, M.F.; Bültmann, U.; van der Klink, J.J.; Groothoff, J.W. A prospective study of return to work across health conditions: Perceived work attitude, self-efficacy and perceived social support. J. Occup. Rehabil. 2010, 20, 104–112. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Tabernero, C.; Gutiérrez-Domingo, T.; Vecchione, M.; Cuadrado, E.; Castillo-Mayén, R.; Rubio, S.; Arenas, A.; Delgado-Lista, J.; Jiménez-Pérez, P.; Luque, B. A longitudinal study on perceived health in cardiovascular patients: The role of conscientiousness, subjective wellbeing and cardiac self-efficacy. PLoS ONE 2019, 14, e0223862. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Jackson, B.E.; Coultas, D.B.; Ashmore, J.; Russo, R.; Peoples, J.; Uhm, M.; Singh, K.P.; Bae, S. Domain-specific self-efficacy is associated with measures of functional capacity and quality of life among patients with moderate to severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Ann. Am. Thorac. Soc. 2014, 11, 310–315. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Rimmerman, A.; Botuck, S.; Levy, J.M.; Royce, J.M. Job placement of urban youth with developmental disabilities: Research and implications. J. Rehabil. 1996, 62, 56–65. [Google Scholar]
- Carter, E.W.; Austin, D.; Trainor, A.A. Predictors of postschool employment outcomes for young adults with severe disabilities. J. Disabil. Policy Stud. 2012, 23, 50–63. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Beenstock, M.; Pinto, O.; Rimmerman, A. Transition into adulthood with autism spectrum disorders: A longitudinal population cohort study of socioeconomic outcomes. J. Disabil. Policy Stud. 2021, 32, 159–170. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ng, T.W.H.; Feldman, D.C. How broadly does education contribute to job performance? Pers. Psychol. 2009, 62, 89–134. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Michna, A.; Kmieciak, R.; Burzyńska-Ptaszek, K. Job preferences and expectations of disabled people and small and medium-sized enterprises in Poland: Implications for disabled people’s professional development. Hum. Resour. Dev. Q. 2017, 28, 299–336. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ivzori, Y. Career Education and Vocational Transition Program: Preparation for a Working Life for Students with Intellectual Disabilities. Ph.D. Thesis, University of Haifa, Haifa, Israel, 2010. [Google Scholar]
- Gross, D.P.; Algarni, F.S.; Niemeläinen, R. Reference values for the SF-36 in Canadian injured workers undergoing rehabilitation. J. Occup. Rehabil. 2015, 25, 116–126. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Brucker, D.; Henly, M. Job quality for Americans with disabilities. J. Vocat. Rehabil. 2019, 50, 121–130. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Faul, F.; Erdfelder, E.; Buchner, A.; Lang, A.G. Statistical power analyses using G*Power 3.1: Tests for correlation and regression analyses. Behav. Res. Methods 2009, 41, 1149–1160. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Clarke, P.J.; Ailshire, J.A.; Nieuwenhuijsen, E.R.; de Kleijn-de Vrankrijker, M.W. Participation among adults with disability: The role of the urban environment. Soc. Sci. Med. 2011, 72, 1674–1684. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Naon, D.; Haran, D.; Sofer-Furman, H.; Pinto, O.; Prior, R. Facilitators and Barriers of Workforce Integration by General Disability Allowance Recipients following Amendment 109 to the National Insurance Law (Laron Law); National Insurance Institute Research and Planning Administration & Myers-JDC-Brookdale Institute: Jerusalem, Israel, 2017. Available online: https://www.btl.gov.il/Publications/research/Documents/mechkar_124.pdf (accessed on 11 March 2021).
- Kulik, L. Sense of Empowerment, Life Values, and Work Centrality among Ultra-Orthodox Women in the Job Market; [Hebrew]; Israel National Insurance Institute: Jerusalem, Israel, 2012. Available online: https://www.btl.gov.il/Mediniyut/BakashatNetunim/dohot/Documents/%D7%AA%D7%99%D7%A7%20137.pdf (accessed on 11 May 2021).
- Henson, R.K.; Roberts, J.K. Use of exploratory factor analysis in published research: Common errors and some comment on improved practice. Educ. Psychol. Meas. 2006, 66, 393–416. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Kanungo, R.N. Measurement of job and work involvement. J. Appl. Psychol. 1982, 67, 341–349. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kulik, L. Explaining employment hardiness among women in Israel’s ultraorthodox community: Facilitators and inhibitors. J. Career Assess. 2016, 24, 67–85. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dunstan, D.A.; Covic, T.; Tyson, G.A. What leads to the expectation to return to work? Insights from a Theory of Planned Behavior (TPB) model of future work outcomes. Work 2013, 46, 25–37. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Pearlman-Avnion, S.; Aloni, A. The impact of a post-secondary education program on the self-efficacy and future orientation of people with high-functioning autism. Eur. Sci. J. 2016, 12. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ware, J.E., Jr.; Sherbourne, C.D. The MOS 36-item short-form health survey (SF-36). I. Conceptual framework and item selection. Med. Care 1992, 30, 473–483. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gujarati, D.N.; Porter, D.C. Basic Econometrics, 5th ed.; McGraw-Hill Education: New York, NY, USA, 2009. [Google Scholar]
- Byrne, B.M. Structural Equation Modeling with AMOS (Multivariate Applications Series), 3rd ed.; Routledge: New York, NY, USA, 2016. [Google Scholar]
- Preacher, K.J.; Hayes, A.F. Asymptotic and resampling strategies for assessing and comparing indirect effects in multiple mediator models. Behav. Res. Methods 2008, 40, 879–891. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sobel, M.E. Asymptotic confidence intervals for indirect effects in structural equation models. Sociol. Methodol. 1982, 13, 290–312. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Luo, J.; Jamieson-Drake, D. Predictors of study abroad intent, participation, and college outcomes. Res. High. Educ. 2015, 56, 29–56. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Conner, M.; McEachan, R.; Jackson, C.; McMillan, B.; Woolridge, M.; Lawton, R. Moderating effect of socioeconomic status on the relationship between health cognitions and behaviors. Ann. Behav. Med. 2013, 46, 19–30. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Alivernini, F.; Lucidi, F. Relationship between social context, self-efficacy, motivation, academic achievement, and intention to drop out of high school: A longitudinal study. J. Educ. Res. 2011, 104, 241–252. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lindstrom, L.; Doren, B.; Metheny, J.; Johnson, P.; Zane, C. Transition to employment: Role of family in career development. Except. Child. 2007, 73, 348–366. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Variable | N (%) |
---|---|
Age | 24.5 (SD = 3.51) |
Gender (women) | 185 (53) |
Education | |
High school | 167 (48) |
Professional Training | 28 (8) |
Academic studies | 107 (31) |
Academic degree (BA) | 45 (13) |
SES | |
Extremely not good | 14 (4) |
Not good | 25 (7) |
Fair | 120 (34) |
Good | 124 (36) |
Extremely good | 65 (19) |
Marital status | |
Married/in a relationship | 56 (16) |
Single | 293 (84) |
Residence | |
Independent residence | 131 (38) |
Living with family of origin | 293 (84) |
Work experience | |
Not working | 161 (46) |
National service | 43 (12) |
Sheltered employment | 46 (13) |
Supported employment | 23 (7) |
Labor market | 75 (22) |
Type of disability | |
Nervous system | 160 (48.2) |
Skeletal and muscular | 49 (14.8) |
Hearing | 43 (13) |
Vision | 28 (8.4) |
Chronic illness | 25 (7.5) |
Genetic disorder | 23 (6.9) |
Other | 4 (1.2) |
Onset of disability | |
Congenital disability | 229 (65) |
Interest, Security, and Advancement at Work | Intention to Work | Willingness to Work in the Free Market | Part Time vs. Full Time | Organization Size | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
How much would you prefer an interesting job? | 0.815 | 0.058 | 0.168 | −0.090 | −0.002 |
How much would you prefer a job where you can exercise your talents? | 0.761 | 0.302 | 0.077 | 0.001 | −0.048 |
How much would you prefer opportunities for advancement? | 0.760 | 0.116 | 0.031 | 0.072 | 0.107 |
How much would you prefer a job with fair wages? | 0.731 | 0.337 | 0.059 | 0.001 | −0.052 |
How much would you prefer a job with responsibilities? | 0.627 | 0.116 | 0.073 | 0.236 | 0.104 |
How much would you prefer working independently? | 0.590 | 0.145 | 0.007 | 0.110 | −0.241 |
How much would you prefer a job with tenure/occupational security? | 0.584 | 0.330 | 0.048 | 0.004 | 0.075 |
How much would you prefer a job with social security benefits? | 0.479 | 0.440 | 0.024 | −0.271 | 0.104 |
How much are you interested in going to work in the next 5 years? | 0.241 | 0.702 | 0.131 | 0.007 | −0.021 |
How much do you estimate that your friends, who are your age, will go out to work in the future? | 0.121 | 0.698 | 0.066 | 0.187 | 0.010 |
How much are you interested in working when you graduate from school/national or military service/university? | 0.311 | 0.686 | 0.126 | 0.007 | 0.112 |
How much do you have good friends who are of working age and working? | 0.165 | 0.650 | −0.027 | 0.043 | −0.125 |
How much would you prefer to work in sheltered employment? | −0.078 | −0.142 | −0.749 | 0.012 | 0.075 |
How much would you prefer to work in the free market without support? | 0.275 | 0.172 | 0.707 | 0.027 | −0.030 |
How much would you prefer to work in supported employment? | 0.055 | 0.083 | −0.659 | −0.096 | −0.184 |
How much would you prefer to work full time? | 0.056 | 0.016 | −0.038 | −0.874 | −0.040 |
How much would you prefer to work part time? | 0.205 | 0.215 | 0.077 | 0.811 | 0.051 |
How much would you prefer to work in a small firm or organization? | 0.156 | 0.203 | 0.003 | 0.032 | −0.783 |
How much would you prefer to work in a large firm or organization? | 0.192 | 0.187 | 0.081 | 0.130 | 0.752 |
Measures | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1. Age | - | |||||||||||
2. Gender | −0.034 | - | ||||||||||
3. Education | 0.400 *** | −0.087 | - | |||||||||
4. SES | −0.167 ** | 0.039 | −0.166 ** | - | ||||||||
5. Work experience | 0.360 *** | −0.098 | 0.242 *** | 0.030 | - | |||||||
6. Self-assessed health | −0.080 | 0.018 | −0.188 *** | 0.278 *** | 0.036 | - | ||||||
7. SE | −0.024 | 0.033 | −0.021 | 0.295 *** | 0.143 ** | 0.347 *** | - | |||||
8. Subjective norms | 0.076 | −0.051 | 0.156 *** | 0.090 | 0.125 * | 0.075 | 0.233 *** | - | ||||
9. Attitudes towards Work | −0.011 | −0.099 | −0.094 | 0.112 * | 0.055 | 0.085 | 0.319 *** | 0.221 *** | - | |||
10. Intention to work | 0.191 *** | −0.033 | 0.252 *** | 0.023 | 0.168 ** | 0.005 | 0.201 *** | 0.362 *** | 0.182 *** | - | ||
11. Interest, security, and advancement at work. | 0.077 | 0.003 | 0.216 *** | 0.128 * | 0.081 | 0.033 | 0.528 *** | 0.350 *** | 0.264 *** | 0.407 *** | - | |
12. Willingness to work in the free market | 0.027 | −0.054 | 0.184 *** | 0.071 | 0.112 * | 0.068 | 0.276 *** | 0.187 *** | 0.084 | 0.185 *** | 0.313 *** | - |
Mean | 240.83 | - | 20.83 | 30.32 | 20.37 | 700.78 | 30.88 | 40.11 | 40.01 | 40.11 | 40.44 | 30.55 |
Standard Deviation | 30.44 | - | 10.05 | 00.93 | 10.39 | 190.83 | 00.86 | 00.86 | 00.60 | 00.83 | 00.68 | 10.19 |
VIF | 10.804 | 10.835 | 10.658 | 10.428 | 10.923 | 10.400 | 10.810 | 10.497 | 10.282 | - | - | - |
Measures | Direct Effect | Total Effect | Mediation Effect by Sobel’s Z | 95% CI | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Attitude toward Work | Self-Efficacy | Subjective Norms | Self-Assessed Health | Lower Bound | Upper Bound | |||
Dependent variable: Interest, security, and advancement at work | ||||||||
Independent variables: | ||||||||
(1) SES | b = 0.01, SE = 0.03, ns | b = 0.07, SE = 0.03, p < 0.05 | - | 4.92 *** | - | - | 0.03 | 0.12 |
(2) Education | b = 0.09, SE = 0.02, p < 0.001 | b = 0.11, SE = 0.03, p < 0.001 | - | - | 2.40 * | - | 0.002 | 0.017 |
Dependent variable: Intention to work | ||||||||
Independent variable: | ||||||||
(3) Education | b = 0.13, SE = 0.03, p < 0.001 | b = 0.18, SE = 0.03, p < 0.001 | - | - | 2.99 ** | - | 0.02 | 0.08 |
Measures | Direct Effect | Total Effect | Mediation Effect by Z of Sobel | Confidence Interval 95% | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Self-Assessed Health | Lower Bound | Upper Bound | |||
Dependent variable: self-efficacy | |||||
Independent variables: | |||||
(1) SES | b = 0.17, SE = 0.04, p < 0.001 | b = 0.23, SE = 0.04, p < 0.001 | Z = 3.90 *** | 0.03 | 0.12 |
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. |
© 2022 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Gadot, L.; Faran, Y.; Sarid, O. Education Makes the Difference: Work Preferences of Young Adults with Physical Disability. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2022, 19, 9021. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph19159021
Gadot L, Faran Y, Sarid O. Education Makes the Difference: Work Preferences of Young Adults with Physical Disability. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. 2022; 19(15):9021. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph19159021
Chicago/Turabian StyleGadot, Limor, Yifat Faran, and Orly Sarid. 2022. "Education Makes the Difference: Work Preferences of Young Adults with Physical Disability" International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health 19, no. 15: 9021. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph19159021