Corry, S J (2002) A collective profile: Meaning in the built environment among designers, managers and users with a mobility disability. PhD thesis, Washington State University, USA.
Abstract
A qualitative research approach was employed to develop a collective profile of current attitudes about and preferences for the design of interior spaces. 18 case studies comprised of two groups of participants: users with a mobility disability and designers/facility managers of the built environment were analyzed. The findings revealed the depth of the schism between users who have a mobility disability and designers and managers of the built environment, and illuminated the nature of discrimination and social stratification that is perpetuated in our designed environments. Results of the analysis showed that users with a mobility disability focused almost exclusively on accessible attributes of interior spaces in contrast to designers and managers who focused on sensory stimulation and meaning. The implications of this study provide a foundation for increasing awareness of the diverse needs of all users and question our reliance on the Americans with Disabilities Act as a measure for accessibility and inclusionary spaces.
| Item Type: | Thesis (Doctoral) |
|---|---|
| Thesis advisor: | Thompson, J A A and Bicknell, C |
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | accessibility; built environment; disability; discrimination; designer; case study; qualitative research |
| Index terms: | meaning, manager, discrimination, preference, stratification, disability, qualitative research, designer, accessibility, case study, mobility, built environment |
| Subjects: | decision-making and reasoning, inclusive design, professional ethics, infrastructure and transport systems, health conditions and diseases, social justice, sociology, practitioner, data collection methods, profession, research design and methodology |
| Topics: | Health and Safety, Ethics, Legal Issues, Research Practice, Roles and Professions, Design Practice, Urban Studies |
| Descriptive scope: | 4 PCTE |
N.B. Descriptive scope is a count of how many of the five facets of empirical research are indicated by the words used in title, abstract and keywords. It is not intended as a judgement on the research; merely a count of the kind of word we would expect to indicate Phenomenon, Concepts, Theoretical framing, Empirical techniques, Analytical techniques. If all five are present, then a code of “5 PCTEA” will indicate this. If you feel the coding for this record is questionable, we welcome discussion around the terms we matched or the way we categorized them. The facet you would expect may not be coded, or a facet may be coded inappropriately. This can also bear on a larger question, of which facets should be treated as defining in construction management research. Please get in touch, and we will look at it. More details here