‘An Association for All’—Notions of the Meaning of Autistic Self‐Advocacy Politics within a Parent‐Dominated Autistic Movement

In this paper, we seek to explore the tensions between advocacy and self advocacy autistic movements in a Swedish context with a special focus on the meanings that enable the production of particular understandings of autism and the autistic subject. Drawing on articles written for the Swedish advocacy magazine Empowerment written for and by people with autism, the discourse analysis explores two competing discourses: a reformist and a radical. The reformist discourse underlines a goal of (political) representation expressed in Empowerment. It may be understood as an important part of producing a legitimate autistic political subject–positioned as a full member, with a full membership–within a parent‐dominated autistic advocacy movement. The reformist discourse can be viewed as a result of a negotiation, where full membership is conditioned on the parents' terms and granted on specific terms. These include working together (neuro‐inclusively), advocacy based on interest rather than identity/position as a specific target/member group, agreement upon a definition of autism as a disability (a deficit) a person has rather than an identity. In relation to this, an alternative legitimate autistic subject is produced through invoking the counter‐hegemonic radical discourse. Such a narrative produces the ‘Asperger’ or ‘Aspie’. Here, the ‘full membership’ refers to a sense of identification with sense of belonging to and being at home with other people with autism. It contains a certain amount of autistic solidarity within the group of adults with autism. Copyright © 2014 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Social Advocacy: A Call for Nursing Action

The nursing profession has long held advocacy on behalf of a patient as a tenet of protection for the patient, particularly in the hospital setting. In more recent years, nursing has indicated that advocacy is a critical professional nursing function on behalf of individual patients and for addressing societal issues, a role similar to other professionals such as chaplains. This paper will reflect on the history of nursing ethics and advocacy, examine the current state of the research and literature surrounding social advocacy and social justice, and discuss implications for the future of nursing and nursing research. Particular focus will be placed on the preparation for the nurse to act as a social advocate and for nursing to begin overtly addressing social issues.     

Information sampling and group decision making: the effects of an advocacy decision procedure and task experience

Group discussions tend to focus on information that was previously known by all members (shared information) rather than information known by only 1 member (unshared information). If the shared information implies a suboptimal alternative, this sampling bias is associated with inaccurate group decisions. The present study examines the impact of 2 factors on information exchange and decision quality: (a) an advocacy group decision procedure versus unstructured discussion and (b) task experience. Results show that advocacy groups discussed both more shared and unshared information than free-discussion groups. Further, with increasing experience, more unshared information was mentioned in advocacy groups. In contrast, there was no such increase in unstructured discussions. Yet advocacy groups did not significantly improve their decision quality with experience.     

Effects of Devil′s Advocacy and Dialectical Inquiry on Individuals versus Groups

There is a long history of research that has investigated the effects of cognitive conflict on group and individual decision making. No study has simultaneously compared the effects of two techniques, devil′s advocacy and dialectical inquiry, on the performance of individuals versus groups. In this paper, we report the results of a laboratory experiment that makes this comparison. Artificial groups (groups formed by pooling individuals working independently) obtained an overall lower-quality solution for a case analysis problem than intact groups. However, there were no performance differences between intact groups and the performance of the best member of artificial groups. When artificial and intact groups were examined together, those given the devil′s advocacy treatment produced higher-quality solutions than those given the dialectical inquiry treatment and a simpler expert-based approach involving no conflict. Intact groups given the devil′s advocacy treatment produced higher-quality solutions than those given the expert treatment. Artificial groups given devil′s advocacy produced higher-quality solutions than those given the expert or dialectical inquiry treatment. Overall, the results suggest that the devil′s advocacy treatment has a slightly greater advantage over the dialectical inquiry with individuals than with groups.     

Off the stage,on the page: on the relationship between advocacy and scholarship

When and how should scholars of religion draw a line between advocacy and research activities? In what ways does advocacy contribute to or cut against scholarly credibility? Addressing these questions from the intersection of the academic study of religion and Indigenous Studies, this article opens by asserting that both fields are frequently hampered by deferential treatments of their subject matter, a problem that is potentially exacerbated when scholars in these fields engage in forms of political advocacy. Problematizing this narrative, the author turns to his ethnographic experiences in Hawai'i with regard to burial-protection struggles in order to describe ways his theoretical commitments and advocacy activities stand in tension and how he has attempted to navigate these competing but sometimes complementary elements of his scholarly life. In this context, a heuristic definition of advocacy is advanced in order to sketch a spectrum of forms, ranging from direct advocacy (e.g., physical action, legal testimony, or publication) to indirect advocacy (e.g., sharing documents, brainstorming about pending issues, or providing transportation to a meeting). The article concludes with reflections on advocacy and changing institutional demands upon scholars in the humanities and social sciences with reference to perceived public relevance.     

Social justice advocacy among doctoral students in professional psychology programs

This study examined the relationships among multicultural competency, task-oriented coping, spirituality, political involvement, and experiences of discrimination on students’ engagement in social justice advocacy in a sample of 412 clinical, counseling, and school psychology doctoral students. Specifically, this study examined the mediating role of political involvement and task-oriented coping between the predictor variables and social justice advocacy. The results showed that the relationship between experiencing discrimination and social justice advocacy was only present when participants reported more political involvement and more task-oriented coping. The same was true for the relationship between spirituality and social justice advocacy; this relationship was only present when going through task-oriented coping. Further while there was a relationship between students’ multicultural knowledge and social justice advocacy, it was partly accounted for by political involvement. Similarly, the relationship between multicultural awareness and social justice advocacy was partly accounted for by task-oriented coping. Implications and recommendations for future research are addressed.     

Empowerment and Advocacy for Domestic Violence Victims

Empowering women victims of domestic violence has been a goal of advocacy since its inception. The concept of empowerment is also widely shared in social science disciplines where the goal of applied research is to address the lived effects of social injustice. While in some fields, such as community psychology, there has been a long history of engaging theoretically with the concept of empowerment, elsewhere theory has received less attention. In the case of addressing domestic violence, victim advocacy has often been assumed to be empowering. Advocates worked to establish support services for individual women and participate in coordinating community responses to domestic violence that included the criminal justice system so as to improve women's safety. The question of whether this kind of social action is empowering domestic violence victims has been discussed in the literature for almost a decade. In this paper, we consider a proposed theory of empowerment and recommendations of advocacy practices by Kasturirangan (2008) to consider how her conceptualisation of empowerment processes has influenced the field and whether it provides a scaffold for bridging the theoretical gaps that have been identified.     

Gay-Straight Alliances Vary on Dimensions of Youth Socializing and Advocacy: Factors Accounting for Individual and Setting-Level Differences

Gay‐Straight Alliances (GSAs) are school‐based youth settings that could promote health. Yet, GSAs have been treated as homogenous without attention to variability in how they operate or to how youth are involved in different capacities. Using a systems perspective, we considered two primary dimensions along which GSAs function to promote health: providing socializing and advocacy opportunities. Among 448 students in 48 GSAs who attended six regional conferences in Massachusetts (59.8 % LGBQ; 69.9 % White; 70.1 % cisgender female), we found substantial variation among GSAs and youth in levels of socializing and advocacy. GSAs were more distinct from one another on advocacy than socializing. Using multilevel modeling, we identified group and individual factors accounting for this variability. In the socializing model, youth and GSAs that did more socializing activities did more advocacy. In the advocacy model, youth who were more actively engaged in the GSA as well as GSAs whose youth collectively perceived greater school hostility and reported greater social justice efficacy did more advocacy. Findings suggest potential reasons why GSAs vary in how they function in ways ranging from internal provisions of support, to visibility raising, to collective social change. The findings are further relevant for settings supporting youth from other marginalized backgrounds and that include advocacy in their mission.     

The Process Through Which an Advocacy Intervention Resulted in Positive Change for Battered Women Over Time

A prior experimental evaluation of a community-based advocacy program for women with abusive partners demonstrated positive change in the lives of women even 2 years postintervention (C. M. Sullivan & D. I. Bybee, 1999). The current study explored the complex mediational process through which this change occurred, using longitudinal structural equation modeling and formal tests of mediation. As hypothesized, the advocacy intervention first resulted in women successfully obtaining desired community resources and increasing their social support, which enhanced their overall quality of life. This improvement in well-being appeared to serve as a protective factor from subsequent abuse, as women who received the intervention were significantly less likely to be abused at 2-year follow-up compared with women in the control condition. Increased quality of life completely mediated the impact of the advocacy intervention on later reabuse. Discussion places advocacy for women in the context of other efforts that are needed to build an effective community response to preventing intimate violence against women.     

Integrating medical ethics with normative theory: Patient advocacy and social responsibility

It is often assumed that the chief responsibility medical professionals bear is patient care and advocacy. The meeting of other duties, such as ensuring a more just distribution of medical resources and promoting the public good, is not considered a legitimate basis for curtailing or slackening beneficial patient services. It is argued that this assumption is often made without sufficient attention to foundational principles of professional ethics; that once core principles are laid bare this assumption is revealed as largely unwarranted; and, finally, that these observations at the level of moral theory should be reflected, in various ways, in medical practice. Specifically, this essay clarifies a tension that exists between different kinds of moral principles and explores the possibility of dissipating that tension by shoring up foundational principles. The paper begins by setting out three alternative models of how best to balance patient advocacy responsibilities with broader social responsibilities. It then turns to critically assess these models and argue that one has several advantages over the others.     

Devil′s Advocacy and Dialectical Inquiry Effects on Face-to-Face and Computer-Mediated Group Decision Making

For more than 20 years, researchers have investigated the effects of cognitive conflict techniques on the decision making performance of groups and individuals. Past research on two techniques, devil′s advocacy and dialectical inquiry, has shown that both techniques improve group performance over nonconflictual, expert-based approaches. More recently, researchers have begun to investigate how advanced decision and communication technologies can be used to enhance group processing and outcomes. In this paper, we extend both streams of research by reporting the results of a laboratory experiment on the effects devil′s advocacy and dialectical inquiry within face-to-face and computer-mediated groups. The results suggest that groups given the devil′s advocacy treatment developed and considered more alternative solutions to a case problem and selected a higher quality recommendation than those in the dialectical inquiry and expert-based treatments. Computer-mediated groups developed and considered more solution alternatives but required more voting rounds to reach agreement than did face-to-face groups. Computer-mediated groups were more satisfied with the process than face-to-face groups; no differences were found in satisfaction with decision outcome. The implications of the results for future research and practice are discussed.     

Counterattitudinal Advocacy on a Matter of Prejudice: Effects of Distraction,Commitment, and Personal Importance1

White students were asked to advocate a tuition policy beneficial to Blacks at either high or low personal cost. Advocates wrote an essay while undistracted or distracted, or only committed to writing it. More attitude change occurred when the policy was personally costly (important) and advocates were undistracted. Distraction may disrupt the dominant covert cognitive response, which is normally favorable to a freely agreed‐to advocacy. This makes anti‐advocacy thoughts more likely and the advocacy seem weaker, especially when the advocacy involves conflicted racial beliefs whose contemplation under load activates negative stereotypes. Some participants wrote essays that defied their agreement to endorse the policy, and distraction enhanced their attitude change. In this case, distraction presumably disrupted an anti‐advocacy dominant cognitive response. Thought listings supported these interpretations. Finally, commitment alone led to attitude change. Coun‐terattitudinal advocacy fosters attitude change in prejudice‐relevant domains if conditions support advocacy‐favorable thoughts during advocacy.     

Feminist identity and program characteristics in the development of trainees’ social advocacy

Feminism, multiculturalism, and social justice (SJ) are closely related constructs, with an important shared emphasis on societal barriers and client empowerment. Yet, research on the relationships between the three variables in their links to counselor advocacy remains scarce. Employing the Input–Environment–Outcome framework, this study examined the unique contributions of 235 female trainees’ feminist identity, training environment SJ supports, and training multicultural focus in explaining trainees’ advocacy using a three-step hierarchical MMLR model. Findings revealed that all three factors were important to trainees’ advocacy. However, the extent to which each factor influenced advocacy varied. For instance, the more strongly identified trainees were with the Feminist Identity Active Commitment stage, the more likely they were to engage at all four levels of advocacy. Conversely, the more aligned trainees were with Passive Acceptance, the less likely they were to empower clients. Moreover, although both training environment SJ support and multicultural focus were influential, SJ training environment was a better predictor of trainee’s advocacy than multicultural training environment. These findings not only highlight the distinctions between SJ and multiculturalism, but also argue for the importance of SJ training in addition to multicultural training. Implications for theories, training, and practice are discussed.     

Citizen Advocacy Observed: Tool or Tokenism?

Citizen advocacy, where a volunteer works in partnership with a vulnerable person, compliments self- and legal advocacy. In the context of mental health services, citizen advocacy is a tool for enabling and empowering people who use these services, and is founded on the recognition that mental health service users are frequently socially oppressed and disadvantaged. This article describes the development of a Citizen Advocacy service for people with mental health difficulties, and also the problems they brought to this service. The problems encountered in sustaining the service are noted and lessons are drawn for the future.     

Assessing Advocacies for Forcibly Displaced People: A Comprehensive Approach

This article assesses various advocacy practices for forcibly displaced people (FDP) through the analysis of advocacy networks, the examination of the goals that they pursue, and their ways of working. Three basic approaches, the welfare-based, the legal-based, and the capability-based approaches, are assessed. From this assessment, this study suggests the recognition of shared humanity as an entry point for advocacy, which offers a cosmopolitan understanding of rights and duties, and the most comprehensive protection for FDP. The main argument of this study is that if the demand for recognition is not heard, relief for refugees and other displaced people will lack an essential dimension. It is the demand to be recognized as human beings that engenders responsibility for forced migrants. Instead of prescribing a list of what to do, or not to do, this reflection has rather suggested a way of being and dealing with the forcibly displaced. This stance goes beyond the facility of typical responses that are known in advance.     

When in doubt, shout! paradoxical influences of doubt on proselytizing

A seminal case study by Festinger found, paradoxically, that evidence that disconfirmed religious beliefs increased individuals' tendency to proselytize to others. Although this finding is renowned, surprisingly, it has never been subjected to experimental scrutiny and is open to multiple interpretations. We examined a general form of the question first posed by Festinger, namely, how does shaken confidence influence advocacy? Across three experiments, people whose confidence in closely held beliefs was undermined engaged in more advocacy of their beliefs (as measured by both advocacy effort and intention to advocate) than did people whose confidence was not undermined. The effect was attenuated when individuals affirmed their beliefs, and was moderated by both importance of the belief and open-mindedness of a message recipient. These findings not only have implications for the results of Festinger's seminal study, but also offer new insights into people's motives for advocating their beliefs.     

Are all experiences of fit created equal? Two paths to persuasion

Regulatory fit influences the effectiveness of persuasion through two paths: 1) a “feeling right” as “feeling good about the target” effect where feeling right is a positive feeling that transfers positivity directly to the target, similar to “feelings as information” or fluency effects, and 2) a “feeling right” as “feeling confident about the evaluation” effect where feeling right is feeling confident about one's evaluative judgments of the target that increases reliance on those evaluations. We propose that the involvement with an attitude-related issue in a persuasion message is one key factor that determines when each effect will occur. Five studies demonstrate that under high involvement, fit increased reliance on evaluative reactions to the target, making a target of a positive advocacy message evaluated as more positive and a target of a negative advocacy message evaluated as more negative; and under low involvement, fit increased the positivity of feelings toward the target regardless of the valence of the message advocacy, making the evaluation of the target more positive for either a positive or negative advocacy message.     

From the body: an exchange on scholarship and advocacy

Abstract

In this article, the authors draw from their own experiences working among religious congregations that minister to unauthorized immigrants in the new destinations in the U.S. to reflect on the relationship between scholarship and advocacy. They argue that because of the scholar's embodied condition, his/her location in networks of relations characterized by power differentials, scholarship will always involve a measure of advocacy, invariably containing judgments not only about what counts as legitimate and authoritative methods, arguments, and data for the religious-studies scholarly ‘community,’ but also about the place of the scholar and her/his scholarly community in the larger society. However, as their own experiences show, not all forms of advocacy are equal – they vary in their level of publicness, as well as the intensity and type of the engagement – and these various modalities carry potential payoffs and pitfalls. Thus, rather than trying to draw fixed, sharp, and ultimately untenable boundaries between scholarship and advocacy, the task is to develop a reflexive, pragmatic, and experimental attitude that can allow for these two dimensions of praxis to benefit from each other, animated by a critical approach and an emancipatory interest focused on the intractable problems and defining dilemmas of our age.     

Effects of Consensus and Devill's Advocacy On Strategic Decision-Making

Strategic consensus within management teams is thought to affect company performance because of its effects on the quality of team decision-making (Bourgeois, 1985, p. 571). Past research dealing with the relationship between consensus and company performance, however, has not specifically examined the effects of consensus on decision-making. The debate on the effects of strategic consensus parallels a debate on the effects of consensus-based and conflict-based decision aids (Schweiger & Finger, 1984; Schweiger, Sandberg, & Ragan, 1986; Schwenk, 1988). The experiment described in this paper is the first which deals with the effects of group consensus and conflict-based decision aids on group decision-making. The results showed that high-consensus groups generally had higher performance, suggesting that consensus improves group decision-making. Further, groups given the decision technique of devil's advocacy had higher levels of critical evaluation in decision-making but less desire to work with each other in the future, suggesting that devil's advocacy has mixed effects on decision-making groups. An interaction effect showed that devil's advocacy increased the commitment of high-consensus group members to the decisions their groups had reached but did not have a similar effect on low-consensus groups. This result demonstrates the importance of examining both consensus and decision aids simultaneously. The implications of the results for the interpretation of past research on consensus and on conflict-based decision aids are offered in the conclusion.     

Development and initial validation of the anti-racism behavioral inventory (ARBI)

This investigation reports on the development and initial validation of the anti-racism behavioral inventory, a measure designed to assess anti-racism awareness and behavior among students in counseling and counseling psychology programs within the United States (US). Data from 513 participants were collected over three related studies. Factor analyses suggested that the 21-item scale was best represented as a bifactor model with one general anti-racism behavior factor and three domain-specific factors, namely individual advocacy, awareness of racism, and institutional advocacy. Additional validity was supported through inverse associations with measures of symbolic racism and color-blind racial attitudes, as well as positive associations with scores on the Quick Discrimination Index. Potential utility of the measure and future directions for ongoing development is discussed.