Revisiting Disability Studies

Part of the SpringerBriefs in Education book series (BRIEFSEDUCAT)


This chapter highlights the marked changes in paradigms for defining disability from the individual approach or, more specifically, the medical model to the social approach. This facilitates understanding the diverse expressions and manifestations of disability being perceived predominantly as medical or biological or the social approach theories which were found to be more concerned with structural and material conditions, culture, and representation. Attempt was also made to highlight certain important issues as well as shortcomings existing in the area of research concerning visual impairment thus urging the need for undertaking more in-depth and extensive research.


Theories Culture Paradigm Research 


  1. Abberley, P. (1987). The concept of oppression and the development of social theory of disability. Disability, Handicap and Society, Taylor & Francis Online, 12(1), 5–9.Google Scholar
  2. Bandura, A. (1977). Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. Psychological Review, 84, 191–215.Google Scholar
  3. Bronfenbrenner, U. (1979). The ecology of human development. MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  4. Bronfenbrenner, U. (1989). Ecological systems theory. Annals of Child Development, 6, 189–249.Google Scholar
  5. Burgdorf, K. (1980). Recognition and treatment of child maltreatment. Rockville, MD: Westat.Google Scholar
  6. Chadwick, A. (1996). Knowledge, power and the disability discrimination bill. Disability and Society, 11, 25–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Cooley, C. H. (1902). Human nature and the social order. New York: Scribner’s.Google Scholar
  8. Coopersmith, S. (1975). The antecedents of self-esteem. CA: Consulting Psychologists Press.Google Scholar
  9. Degerner, T., & Koster-Dreese, Y. (Eds). (1995). Human rights and disabled persons: Essays and relevant human rights instruments. In G. N. Karna (Ed.), United Nations and rights of disabled persons: A study in Indian perspective. New Delhi: A. P. H. Publishing Corporation.Google Scholar
  10. Festinger, L. (1954). A theory of social comparison processes. Human Relations, 7, 117–140.Google Scholar
  11. Finkelstein, V. (1980). Attitudes and Disability: Issues for Discussions. World Rehabilitation Fund, New York.Google Scholar
  12. Foucault, M. (1970). The order of things: An archaeology of the human sciences. London: Tavistock.Google Scholar
  13. Foucault, M. (1971). Madness and civilization: A history of insanity in the age of London, in D. Reeve, negotiating psycho-emotional dimensions of disability and their influence on identity constructions. Disability and Society, 7(5), 493–508.Google Scholar
  14. Foucault, M. (1972). The archaeology of knowledge. London: Tavistock.Google Scholar
  15. Foucault, S. (1976). History of Sexuality Volume 1: An Introduction. London: Allen Lane.Google Scholar
  16. Foucault, M. (1981a). The order of discourse. In R. Young (Ed.), Untying the text: A post-structural anthology (pp. 48–78). Boston: Routledge and Kegan Paul.Google Scholar
  17. Foucault, M. (1981b). Questions of method. I & C, 8, 3–14.Google Scholar
  18. French, S. (1993). Can you see the rainbow? The roots of denial. In J. Swain, V. Finkelstein, S. French, & M. Oliver (Eds.), Disability. Barriers, Enabling Environment, Milton Keynes, UK: Open University Press.Google Scholar
  19. French, S. (1999). The wind gets in my way. In M. Corker & S. French (Eds.), Disability discourse. Milton Keynes, UK: Open University Press.Google Scholar
  20. French, K. R., & Fama, E. F. (2001). Disappearing dividends: Changing firm characteristics or lower propensity to pay? (June 2000). AFA 2001 New Orleans; CRSP Working Paper No. 509.Google Scholar
  21. Goffman, E. (1963). Stigma: Notes on the management of spoiled identity. Englewood Cliffs: NJ. Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
  22. Hayes, A. (1994). Families and disability. In A. Ashman & J. Elkins (Eds.), Educating children with special needs. New York.Google Scholar
  23. Hornby, G. (1994). Counseling in child disability: Skills for Working with parents. London: Chapman and Hall.Google Scholar
  24. Hudson, D. (1994). Self-esteem and visual impairment. In J. D. Beach., J. M. Robinet., & J. Hakim-Larson (Eds.), Self-esteem and independent living skills of adults with visual impairment. Journal of Visual Impairment and Blindness, 89(6), 531–540.Google Scholar
  25. Hughes, H. M., & Paterson, M. (1997). The social model of disability and disappearing body: Towards a social model of impairment. Disability and Society, 12(3), 325–340.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Karna, G. N. (1999). United Nations and rights of disabled persons: A study in Indian perspective. New Delhi: A. P. H. Publishing Corporation.Google Scholar
  27. Kleege, G. (1999). Sight Unseen. Yale University Press.Google Scholar
  28. Martin, G. J., & Hoben, M. (1977). Supporting Visually Impaired Students in the Mainstream. Reston, VA: Council for Exceptional Children.Google Scholar
  29. Mead, G. H. (1934). Mind, self and society. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  30. Michalko, R. (1998). The Mystery of the eye and the shadow of blindness. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.Google Scholar
  31. Mitchell, D. R. (1986). A developmental systems approach to planning and evaluating services for persons with handicaps. In R. J. Brown (Ed.), Rehabilitation Education (Vol. 2). Kent: Croom Helm, Beckhenham.Google Scholar
  32. Oliver, M. (1983). Social work with disabled people. London: The Macmillan Press Ltd.Google Scholar
  33. Oliver, C. (1986). Self-concept assessment: A case study. Mental Handicap, 14, 24–25.Google Scholar
  34. Oliver, M. (1990). The politics of disablement. London: Macmillan Press.Google Scholar
  35. Quinn, P. (1998). Understanding disability: A life approach. New Delhi: Sage.Google Scholar
  36. Sartre, J. P. (1958). Being and nothingness: An essay on phenomenological ontology, translated by H. Metheun and Co: E. Barnes. London.Google Scholar
  37. Sartre, J. P. (1982). Critique of dialectical reasoning. In B. Hughes (Ed.), The Constitution of Impairment: Modernity and Aesthetic Oppression. Disability and Society, 14(2), 155–172.Google Scholar
  38. Scott, R. A. (1969). The making of blind men. In D. Hudson (Ed.), Causes of emotional and psychological reactions to adventitious blindness. Journal of Visual Impairment and Blindness, 88(6), 498–503.Google Scholar
  39. Seighart, P. (1985). The Lawful Rights of Mankind. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  40. Shakespeare, T. (1997, December). Researching disabled sexuality. In C. Barnes (Ed.), A working social model? Disability and work in the 21 st century. Paper presented at the Disability Studies Conference and Seminar, Edinburgh.Google Scholar
  41. Sinha, A. K. P., & Singh, R. P. (1971). Adjustment inventory. Agra: National Psychological Corporation.Google Scholar
  42. Soder, M. (1989). Disability as a social construct: The labeling approach revisited. European Journal of Special Needs Education, 4(2), 117–129.Google Scholar
  43. Tajfel, H., & Turner, J. C. (1979). An integrative theory of intergroup conflict. The Social Psychology of Intergroup Relations?, 33, 47.Google Scholar
  44. Tomlinson, S. (1982). A sociology of special education. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.Google Scholar
  45. UPIAS. (1976). Fundamental principles of disability. London: Union of the Physically Impaired Against Segregation. As retrieved in April, 2017.Google Scholar
  46. Vernon, A. (1999). The dialectics of multiple identities and the disabled people’s movement. Disability and Society, 14(3), 385–398.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Loreto College, KolkataKolkataIndia

Personalised recommendations