CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 88Disability Education and EmploymentAssistive Technology in Communication and MobilityDigital Accessibility for Disabilities

‘Home is at work and work is at home’: telework and individuals who use augmentative and alternative communication

McNaughton, David, Rackensperger, Tracy, Dorn, Dana, Wilson, Natasha·2014·WORK: A Journal of Prevention, Assessment & Rehabilitation
DOI 10.3233/wor-141860
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Telework, the use of distance communication technologies to participate in the workforce, has been suggested as a promising employment strategy for individuals with disabilities. OBJECTIVE: The goal of this study was to obtain a better understanding of the benefits and negative impacts of telework, as well as the supports and challenges to telework activities, for persons who use augmentative and alternative communication (AAC). METHODS: This study used a series of focus group discussions, conducted on the internet, to examine the employment experiences of nine individuals with disabilities who used AAC and who held jobs that involved the use of telework. RESULTS: Four major themes emerged from the discussion: (a) benefits of telework, (b) negative impacts of telework, (c) strategies for addressing negative impacts of telework, and (d) recommendations for improving employment outcomes for individuals who use AAC. CONCLUSIONS: In summary, while participants identified the elimination of travel time and flexible work schedules as key strengths of telework, concerns were expressed regarding feelings of isolation and the difficulty in separating home and work environments. The participants also emphasized the important role of educational programs in supporting the acquisition of literacy and self-advocacy skills, and the need for post-secondary programs to support the school-to-workplace transition.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.3233/wor-141860

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Qualitative findings showed that many participants believed WFH helped them to feel less exhausted.

    “less exhausted [48]”

    From Homeworking experiences of neuro-divergent workers: systematic review (2024) · cites this paper as [48]

  • Working in the home meant there was no clear division between home and work environments, which made it difficult to maintain an appropriate balance.

    “Working in the home meant there was no clear division between home and work environments, which made it difficult to maintain an appropriate balance [39,42,44,48,55,57,58].”

    From Homeworking experiences of neuro-divergent workers: systematic review (2024) · cites this paper as [48]

  • Some participants described difficulties configuring accessible workspaces: this was difficult for those living in resource-constrained spaces and others struggled with getting family members/housemates to acknowledge the use of the home as an office.

    “Some participants described difficulties configuring accessible workspaces (Sub-theme: 'Challenges of turning the home into a workspace'): this was difficult for those living in resourceconstrained spaces [39] and others struggled with getting family members/housemates to acknowledge the use of the home as an office [48].”

    From Homeworking experiences of neuro-divergent workers: systematic review (2024) · cites this paper as [48]

  • For some, this was preferable to speaking in person because it did not require immediate response and was thus empowering and improved communication.

    “For some, this was preferable to speaking in person because it did not require immediate response [44,57] and was thus empowering [59] and improved communication [48].”

    From Homeworking experiences of neuro-divergent workers: systematic review (2024) · cites this paper as [48]

Cites

Still being checked.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
McNaughton, D., Rackensperger, T., Dorn, D., & Wilson, N.
Affiliations
  • Pennsylvania State University (US)
  • University of Georgia (US)
Corresponding author
McNaughton, David
ORCID
Venue
WORK: A Journal of Prevention, Assessment & Rehabilitation
Publisher
SAGE Publications
Published
2014-01
Volume
48
Issue
1
Pages
117-126
ISSN
  • 1051-9815 (ISSN-L)
  • 1875-9270
DOI
10.3233/wor-141860
OpenAlex
W1660361036
Cited by
88
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 10 · 2023: 17 · 2022: 15 · 2021: 17 · 2020: 8 · 2019: 5 · 2018: 1 · 2017: 1 · 2016: 4 · 2013: 2
FWCI
4.65
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
journals.sagepub.com/page/policies/text-and-data-mining-license (tdm)
Locations
  • Work (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
National Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation Research
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Safety Research › Disability Education and Employment
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Occupational Therapy › Assistive Technology in Communication and Mobility
  • Social Sciences › Human Factors and Ergonomics › Digital Accessibility for Disabilities
Keywords
remote work, augmentative and alternative communication, employment of people with disabilities, social isolation, work-home boundaries, flexible working hours, literacy, self-advocacy, school-to-work transition, employment support
MeSH terms
Disability Evaluation, Employment, Female, Disabled Persons, Persons with Disabilities, Humans, Interpersonal Relations, Job Satisfaction, Male, Social Isolation, Telecommunications, United States, Conflict of Interest, Workplace, Focus Groups, Internet, Qualitative Research

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review