Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
My reply to Hatton & Ager concentrates on two major themes. The first concerns the psychological reality and measurement of the quality of life (QOL) construct for people with an intellectual disability. I conclude that a substantial weight of evidence supports the psychological reality of the construct, and that reliable and valid measurement of subjective life quality can be achieved for the majority of people. The second theme concerns the usefulness of subjective life quality measurement for service delivery. Here, I argue that such measurement can have major benefits for both respondents and service providers provided that the psychometric character of the data is understood. To this end, I recommend that journal editors, academics dealing in applied research, and practitioners, have a duty of care concerning the dissemination, investigation, and application of contemporary understanding in this area.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Robert A. Cummins (2002) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: