Active Support Measure: a multilevel exploratory factor analysis.

BACKGROUND: Active Support is a person-centred practice that enables people with intellectual disabilities (IDs) to engage in meaningful activities and social interactions. The Active Support Measure (ASM) is an observational tool designed to measure the quality of support that people with IDs living in supported accommodation services receive from staff. The aim of the study was to explore the underlying constructs of the ASM. METHODS: Multilevel exploratory factor analysis was conducted on ASM data (n = 884 people with IDs across 236 accommodation services) collected during a longitudinal study of Active Support in Australian accommodation services. RESULTS: Multilevel exploratory factor analysis indicated that 12 of the ASM's 15 items loaded on two factors, named Supporting Engagement in Activities and Interacting with the Person. CONCLUSIONS: The 12-item ASM measures two dimensions of the quality of staff support. Both technical and interpersonal skills comprise good Active Support.

Social workers' attributions towards individuals with dual diagnosis of intellectual disability and mental illness.

BACKGROUND: The present study aimed to explore the applicability of the attribution model to social workers' attributions towards clients with dual diagnosis of intellectual disability and psychiatric illness. Specifically, the study examined the relations between social workers' attribution of responsibility, causality, stereotypes of dangerousness, their emotional reactions and behavioural reactions towards clients with dual diagnosis. METHOD: Social workers (N = 279) completed questionnaires measuring attributions of responsibility, causation and dangerousness, and reported on their emotional and behavioural reactions to clients diagnosed with DD. RESULTS: Most social workers reported high levels of helping behaviours. The strongest predictor of discriminatory behaviours was the stereotype of dangerousness. Social workers who reported feeling less anger and more pity towards clients with DD tended to report higher levels of helping behaviour. But contrary to attribution theory, fear and anger did not predict discriminatory behaviours. CONCLUSION: The results are discussed in relation to the core values of social work and to professional identity.