Physical Disability Identity Scale (PDIS)

Physical Disability Identity Scale (PDIS)

Description

The Physical Disability Identity Scale (PDIS; Rule et al., 2025) is designed to evaluate the extent to which individuals with physical disabilities perceive disability as an integral part of their identity. The development of the scale involved a comprehensive literature review, which led to an initial item pool of 34 questions. This initial pool included 14 items adapted from the Multicomponent In-Group Identification Scale and 20 original items developed by the research team. Following a thorough review process, the item pool was refined to 27 items, comprising seven adapted from the Multicomponent In-Group Identification Scale and 20 newly created items. The psychometric properties of the scale were assessed using data collected from a sample of adults with physical disabilities in the United States, across two separate studies. Both exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses supported a six-factor structure, ultimately resulting in a 21-item scale. Detailed data regarding the scale’s validity and reliability were also reported.

Purpose

The PDIS aims to quantify physical disability identity among adults who have physical disabilities.

Instrument

Test Type: Original

Format: Items are rated on a 7-point scale.

Language Available: English

Population Group: Human; Male; Female; Transgender

Age Group: Adulthood (18 years & older)

Population Details: The scale was administered to adults with physical disabilities or reduced mobility in the United States. Gender identities reported included: Genderqueer and Other.

Test Methodology: The scale’s methodology incorporates Test Validity, Test Reliability, Internal Consistency, Factor Analysis, Confirmatory Factor Analysis, and Exploratory Factor Analysis.

Validity

Test Validity: The Connection factor showed strong alignment with the solidarity subscale of the Multicomponent In-Group Identification Scale (Leach et al., 2008) and conceptually overlaps with existing measures of disability identity. The Satisfaction factor closely aligned with the same subscale in the Multicomponent In-Group Identification Scale (Leach et al., 2008). Centrality was adversely related to well-being. Openness was associated with sense of purpose, life satisfaction, social support, self-efficacy, and lower derailment. Individual Self-Stereotyping was both adversely and adaptively associated with different health and well-being constructs, while Disability Lens was adversely associated with well-being and health-related constructs.

Reliability

Internal Consistency: Cronbach’s alpha values for the six factors ranged from 0.70 to 0.95: Connection (α = 0.95), Satisfaction (α = 0.86), Centrality (α = 0.79), Openness (α = 0.82), Individual Self-Stereotyping (α = 0.70), and Disability Lens (α = 0.91).

Factor Analysis

Exploratory Factor Analysis: Several methods of factor extraction and retention (parallel analysis, optimal coordinates, and Kaiser criterion) consistently indicated a six-factor structure. Five items that did not strongly align with any factor, along with one item that mapped onto multiple factors, were removed, resulting in a final set of 21 items. After these adjustments, factor loadings ranged from 0.79 to 0.95 for Connection, 0.75 to 0.82 for Satisfaction, 0.42 to 0.69 for Centrality, 0.53 to 0.81 for Openness, 0.65 to 0.89 for Individual Self-Stereotyping, and 0.60 to 0.73 for Disability Lens. Confirmatory Factor Analysis: The results of the CFA supported the six-factor structure identified in the EFA: RMSEA = 0.073, CFI = 0.931, Tucker-Lewis index = 0.917, χ²(174) = 450.53, p < 0.01, SRMR = 0.073. All items exhibited loadings greater than 0.30 on their respective factors.

Keywords

Centrality; Connection; Disability Lens; Face Validity; Individual Self-Stereotyping; Openness; Physical Disability; Satisfaction; Self-Concept; Well-Being; Disabilities; Physical Disabilities (Attitudes Toward); Self-Concept; Social Identity; Health Attitude Measures; Face Validity.

Authors

Rule, Payton D. (Author Identifier: http://orcid.org/0009-0000-1559-193X)

Ratner, Kaylin

Willroth, Emily C.

Hill, Patrick L.

Author Affiliations

Rule, Payton D.: Department of Psychological & Brain Sciences, Washington University in St. Louis, [email protected]

Ratner, Kaylin: Department of Educational Psychology, University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign

Willroth, Emily C.: Department of Psychological & Brain Sciences, Washington University in St. Louis

Hill, Patrick L.: Department of Psychological & Brain Sciences, Washington University in St. Louis

Correspondence Address

Rule, Payton D.: Washington University in St. Louis, Department of Psychological & Brain Sciences, 316D Somers Family Hall, Forsyth Boulevard, St. Louis, Missouri, United States, 63105, [email protected]

Permissions & Fee and Test Year

Permissions: May be used for Research/Teaching
Fee: No
Test Year: 2025

Email

Rule, Payton D. [email protected]

Files

No data is Available

Reference’s

Rule, P. D., Ratner, K., Willroth, E. C., & Hill, P. L. (2025). Development and validation of the Physical Disability Identity Scale: A multistudy quantitative investigation with participant feedback. Rehabilitation Psychology. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1037/rep0000606

Leach, T. M., van Zomeren, M., Zebel, S., Vliek, M. L., Pennekamp, S. F., Doosje, B., Ouwerkerk, J. W., & Spears, R. (2008). Group-level self-definition: A conceptual and operational analysis. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 95(1), 144–165.

Forber-Pratt, A. J., Young, R. A., & Balcells, A. (2022). Predictors of disability identity development in college students. Rehabilitation Psychology, 67(1), 1–12.

Hahn, H., & Belt, R. W. (2004). Disability identity and attitudes toward cure in a sample of people with spinal cord injuries. Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 45(4), 463–476.

Items of the “Physical Disability Identity Scale (PDIS)”

Physical Disability Identity Scale

(Connection)
I feel connected to other people with physical disabilities.
I feel solidarity with people with physical disabilities.
I feel committed to people with physical disabilities.
I feel a sense of belonging with other people with physical disabilities.

(Satisfaction)
Overall, I am glad to be a person with a physical disability.
I am proud to identify as a person with a physical disability.
I feel content with being a person with a physical disability.

(Centrality)
The fact that I am a person with a physical disability is an important part of my identity.
Being a person with a physical disability is an important part of how I see myself.
I view my physical disability similarly to the way I view my other identities (race, gender, etc.).
I refuse to see my physical disability as a part of how I see myself.

(Openness)
I feel comfortable talking about my physical disability with others.
I feel embarrassed or ashamed when others ask me about my physical disability, even if they are well intentioned.
I do my best to conceal/hide my physical disability from others.

(Individual self-stereotyping)
I have a lot in common with others with physical disabilities.
I am similar to other people with physical disabilities.
I experience a lot of similar challenges as other people with physical disabilities.
I view physical disability similarly to others in the disability community.

(Disability lens)
Being a person with a physical disability shapes how I see the world.
Being a person with a physical disability shapes how I interact with others.
Being a person with a physical disability shapes how I approach life.

Note. Items are rated on a scale of of 1 = strongly disagree to 7 = strongly agree.