In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:

Appendix B: Methodology In this appendix we explain in detail how the data reported in this book were collected . We also explain the basis on which some decisions regarding categorization and data analysis were made. These decisions are important because they determine the scope of the book. Understanding these decisions permits the reader to know what is included in this book and what is not. The decisions about the operationalizations (measurements) of the variables used here set the limits about what the data reported in this book can tell us and what they cannot. BASIC METHODOLOGY The methodology used to gather and analyze the data for all chapters of this book except chapter 3 is called event-history analysis (Olzak, 1989). In this methodology, the unit ofanalysis is the protest event. This means that we did not collect systematic data on specific people or their attitudes. Rather, we collected information about instances of contentious political action that fit the conceptual definitions described in our introduction and elucidated in this appendix. Reports of protests were collected primarily from mainstream newspapers, but information was also gathered from books, newspapers, and magazines published within or about the deaf and disability communities, from electronic news lists in which protest events were discussed , and from World Wide Web sites oforganizations involved in protests. In most cases, information about protests mentioned in these sources was also located in a newspaper for the relevant city. This was done so that sources ofbias could be reduced and sources ofinformation kept as consistent as possible. Based upon the information gathered, each incident of collective action was coded according to a number of variables. Data were entered into an SPSSlWindows system file for analysis. In total, 745 protest incidents were identified and used in the analyses presented here. These protests do not include AIDS protests that focused on gay and lesbian issues, although they do include AIDS protests that focused on impairment-related issues (when these were reported in prior chapters, they were referred to as "other impairments "). Media reports about AIDS protests were also collected for the years 1989 through 1996. Although the 161 AIDS-related cases that comprise that database are less comprehensive than the data on disability protests, comparable analyses were reported in some instances. Information was also collected on some protests that occurred outside the United States, and instances of celebrations were also collected. These data were not included in our analysis unless so noted.! There were a number ofrules that were followed about whether a case ofprotest was to be included or not. 227 228 Appendix B First, the protests had to have been discussed in the past tense. That is, newspaper articles that discussed protests planned for some future time (usually tomorrow or next week) were not included unless we could also find a report of the actual occurrence .2 We eliminated reports about future protests in order to ensure some level of accuracy about actual events rather than projected events. Usually information about projected events came from an organizational sponsor trying to get publicity and motivate and mobilize participants; it is not the same as a report of a finished event. In addition, it is possible that some protests that were announced in advance did not happen. This could be because not enough people came, and so the action was a failure . Alternatively, it could be because the threat ofa protest galvanized the opposition into giving in to the demand that sparked the threat. This apparently happens frequently with strikes, but it is unknown what proportion ofother types ofcontentious actions might achieve their goal simply by being announced. Second, the protests included here were either conducted by people with disabilities or involved an issue specifically identified as being of importance to people with disabilities. Some of the early protests were conducted by conscience constituents, such as parents, rather than by the potential beneficiaries (Altman and Barnartt, 1993). Although Dwybad (1990) suggests that the parent protests were part ofa different social movement, we are including them under the purview ofprotests, but are considering the type of participant to be one variable. We did not choose to identify disability-related protests by whether the participants themselves had an impairment because, as noted previously, some protests were about disability issues but were carried out by people who did not themselves have impairments. These people may have been family members, educators, or conscience constituents, people who cared about disability-related issues for a variety ofreasons. Rather, we...

Share