Explore the vast range of titles available.

Intellectual disability originates during the developmental period and is characterized by significant limitations both in intellectual functioning and in adaptive behavior as expressed in conceptual, social, and practical adaptive skills. In this article, we present a brief history of the diagnostic criteria of intellectual disability for both the DSM-5 and AAIDD. The article also (a) provides an update of the understanding of adaptive behavior, (b) dispels two thinking errors regarding mistaken temporal or causal link between intellectual functioning and adaptive behavior, (c) explains that there is a strong correlational, but no causative, relation between intellectual functioning and adaptive behavior, and (d) asserts that once a question of determining intellectual disability is raised, both intellectual functioning and adaptive behavior are assessed and considered jointly and weighed equally in the diagnosis of intellectual disability. We discuss the problems created by an inaccurate statement that appears in the DSM-5 regarding a causal link between deficits in intellectual functioning and adaptive behavior and propose an immediate revision to remove this erroneous and confounding statement.

There has been a significant transformation in the field of intellectual and developmental disabilities (IDD) over the last 5 decades. Although this transformation has profoundly influenced multiple stakeholders, the field is currently at a critical juncture and facing a number of social and political challenges. Given the relevance of the question, “where is the field of IDD and where do we go,” the present article describes the field's transformation, and suggests future action steps to facilitate and sustain the transformation. The seven action steps discussed in the article relate to using precise terminology, incorporating a functional and holistic approach to IDD, embracing the supports model and evidence-based practices, implementing outcome evaluation, empowering individuals and families, understanding better the multidimensional properties of context, and incorporating an explicit notion of professional responsibility.

Significant international work in the field of intellectual disability (ID) over the last decade has resulted in an emerging consensus regarding the definition of ID, the criteria used to diagnose a person with ID, the classification of individuals who have been diagnosed with ID, and the planning of individualized supports for people with ID. This article describes that emerging consensus

The American Association on Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities (AAIDD) has published terminology and classification manuals since 1921. Their goals over the last 100 years have been consistent: To fulfill the Association's continued responsibility to be the primary repository of intellectual disability-related research and best practices; to publish a scientific definition of intellectual disability (ID) and its assumptions based on research and one that provides a long, stable definitional history; to provide a singular focus on ID and the lives of people with ID and their families; and to communicate professional standards, ethics, and best practices regarding diagnosis, classification, and planning supports. Consistent with these historical goals, the goals of the 12th edition of the AAIDD manual (Schalock et al. 2021) are to: (a) integrate material published in the 11th edition (Schalock et al., 2010) of the AAIDD manual with post-2010 developments and historical markers; (b) develop a user-friendly manual that combines the theoretical and conceptual thoroughness of a manual with the practical aspects of a user's guide; (c) describe a systematic approach to the diagnosis, optional subgroup classification, and planning of supports for people with intellectual disability based on conceptual models, a clear rationale and purpose, and evidence-based practices; (d) combine current empirical knowledge and best practices into an integrative approach to intellectual disability; and (e) provide practice guidelines that frame best practices, increase understanding, and facilitate precise, valid, and effective decisions, recommendations, and actions. The content of the 12th edition reflects the transformation that is occurring in the field of ID. This transformation, which is occurring to various degrees internationally, is characterized by using precise terminology, incorporating a functional and holistic approach to ID, embracing the supports model and evidence-based practices, implementing outcome evaluation, empowering individuals and families, understanding better the multidimensional properties of context, and incorporating an explicit notion of professional responsibility (Schalock et al., in press). As a result of this transformation, the manual contains both modifications of previous concepts and terminology, and the addition of new terms and concepts. These modifications and additions are reflected in the definition of intellectual disability, the evidence-based approach to diagnosis and optional postdiagnosis subgroup classification, the operationalization of systems of supports, and the incorporation of an integrative approach to ID. Throughout the manual, human functioning is viewed from a systems perspective towards understanding human functioning, which includes human functioning dimensions, interactive systems of supports, and human functioning outcomes.

The purpose of this study was to examine the knowledge and desires of parents of middle school students with intellectual disability regarding inclusive education practices and laws in South Korea. We interviewed seven mothers of children with ID who attended South Korean middle schools. Three themes emerged including (a) mother-teacher communication, (b) particular knowledge that suppressed further desires for inclusive education, and (c) culture-based advocacy for inclusive education. We discussed these findings based on Rawls's theory of justice, Confucianism, and the social model of disability.

The field of disabilities is being challenged to adopt a paradigm that can be used to guide the transformation of services, supports, and research practices to ensure and enhance the personal autonomy, rights, and community inclusion of people with disabilities. This article describes strategies associated with the systematic diffusion and sustainability of an innovation such as the emerging Shared Citizenship Paradigm (SCP), which has the potential to guide the transformation. The systematic diffusion process incorporates five components: knowledge, persuasion, decision, implementation, and confirmation. The systematic process also addresses the risks of dissonance, backlash, unintended consequences, and backsliding that can emerge when the sustainability of a paradigm is not supported. Throughout the article, we stress that meaningful change in organizations and systems requires use of a paradigm such as the SCP and its principles and foundation pillars to guide the change, and a systematic process such as that described in this article to bring about and sustain the change.

Self-determination is recognized as a key outcome in the disability field. However, the alignment of self-determination research with the shared citizenship paradigm and growing research on the role of context and contextual variables in shaping personal and collective self-determination outcomes has not yet been fully explored. In this article we (a) describe the shared citizenship paradigm and self-determination; (b) summarize the current understanding of context; (c) identify contextual variables influencing self-determination; and (d) recommend research approaches, policies, and practices to guide the next generation of self-determination research. We highlight how adopting the shared citizenship paradigm and recognizing that context matters is essential to advancing self-determination, providing direction for future self-determination research, policy, and practice.

This article discusses the processes and implications of going beyond environment to context. The article (a) provides an operational definition of context; (b) describes a multidimensional model of context that views context as being multilevel, multifactorial, and interactive; (c) describes how conceptual models of quality of life, human rights, and human functioning can be used in conjunction with the multidimensional model of context to identify opportunities and develop context-based change strategies that improve quality of life, human rights, and human functioning outcomes; and (d) describes a four-step approach to leveraging an understanding of context to produce change. The article concludes with a discussion of the advantages of and barriers to moving beyond environment to context.

This article describes a multidimensional model of context that identifies, defines, and explains three key properties of context: multilevel, multifactorial, and interactive. The use of this model to drive a context-based enhancement cycle is also described. The enhancement cycle involves four steps: (a) identifying current interactions that influence personal goals and outcomes; (b) targeting the interaction that will have the highest impact on selected outcomes for the individual; (c) manipulating the contextual factors that will positively influence the interaction; and (d) evaluating the impact of the manipulated interaction on personal outcomes. The article concludes with a discussion of the implications of using a multidimensional model of context to enhance personal outcomes.

The field of intellectual and developmental disabilities (IDD) is currently experiencing a significant transformation that encompasses an integrated approach, especially regarding shared aspects such as a focus on the human and legal rights, the eligibility for services and supports, and an emphasis on individualized supports provided within inclusive community-based environments. Accompanying this transformation is the increased need of precision in both the operational definitions of IDD-related constructs, and the terminology used to describe the respective construct. the specialized literature was revised, and previous works on the subject by the authors were updated. This article provides psychologists with the current definition of intellectual disability, operational definitions of intellectual disability and developmental disabilities constructs and associated terminology, and the parameters of an integrated approach to disability. Implications for psychologists who are involved in diagnosis, classification, and planning supports for persons with intellectual or developmental disability are discussed.