View in EDS HTML Full Text PDF Full Text

Determinants of Quality of Life for People with Disabilities Using Panel Data Analysis

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Title: Determinants of Quality of Life for People with Disabilities Using Panel Data Analysis
Language: English
Authors: Hyejin Yoon, Jimin Shim, Won Seok Lee, Joonho Moon
Source: International Journal of Disability, Development and Education. 2026 73(1):196-210.
Availability: Routledge. Available from: Taylor & Francis, Ltd. 530 Walnut Street Suite 850, Philadelphia, PA 19106. Tel: 800-354-1420; Tel: 215-625-8900; Fax: 215-207-0050; Web site: http://www.tandf.co.uk/journals
Peer Reviewed: Y
Page Count: 15
Publication Date: 2026
Document Type: Journal Articles
Reports - Research
Descriptors: Quality of Life, Disabilities, Data Analysis, Social Experience, Participation, Foreign Countries, Cultural Activities, Travel, Employment, Stress Variables, Barriers, Leisure Time
Geographic Terms: South Korea
DOI: 10.1080/1034912X.2024.2361271
ISSN: 1034-912X
1465-346X
Abstract: This research aims to examine the determinants of the quality of life for people with disabilities using panel data. Through a review of the extant literature, this research proposes five attributes to account for differences in the quality of life for people with disabilities: social participation, cultural activity participation, travel, employment, and stress. For the data collection, this study employed the Panel Survey of Employment for people with disabilities data from 2016 to 2018, which is published by the Korea employment agency. In total, there are 11,467 valid observations available. This study implemented descriptive statistics, correlation matrix, and econometric analysis for the archival data analysis. The results indicate that the quality of life of a person with a disability is enhanced by participation in social, cultural activities, travel, and employment; meanwhile, the quality of life for people with disabilities is negatively influenced by stress. This study presents relevant implications given the results of the data analysis.
Abstractor: As Provided
Entry Date: 2026
Accession Number: EJ1504263
Database: ERIC
Full text is not displayed to guests.
FullText Links:
  – Type: pdflink
    Url: https://content.ebscohost.com/cds/retrieve?content=AQICAHj0k_4E0hTGH8RJwT4gCJyBsGNe_WN95AvKlDbXJGqwxwEns8oNh_rPW75vcP9roL2NAAAA4jCB3wYJKoZIhvcNAQcGoIHRMIHOAgEAMIHIBgkqhkiG9w0BBwEwHgYJYIZIAWUDBAEuMBEEDAb9XmcQF5JajZVhUAIBEICBmpR-iWOCf7sKHzpj_IiiX3XIlCIWnYJUcpdCZ3BcRALhzxJiz0TGyQq15c0xSp8w02RtT_FvIWWaiOJbuqmaK9W-TU8PX51DWMALPsifB97rryyEEbT17BjAp_Q6Yll_9vOM1Ra375lLUI2zB9NzqaQRX4w8nLxeY_oCkQh5zdvMIndGLqdfsA4xiu03r6k0zIiWT2N72-JmeN8=
Text:
  Availability: 1
  Value: <anid>AN0190412996;54q01jan.26;2025Dec24.08:08;v2.2.500</anid> <title id="AN0190412996-1">Determinants of Quality of Life for People with Disabilities Using Panel Data Analysis </title> <p>This research aims to examine the determinants of the quality of life for people with disabilities using panel data. Through a review of the extant literature, this research proposes five attributes to account for differences in the quality of life for people with disabilities: social participation, cultural activity participation, travel, employment, and stress. For the data collection, this study employed the Panel Survey of Employment for people with disabilities data from 2016 to 2018, which is published by the Korea employment agency. In total, there are 11,467 valid observations available. This study implemented descriptive statistics, correlation matrix, and econometric analysis for the archival data analysis. The results indicate that the quality of life of a person with a disability is enhanced by participation in social, cultural activities, travel, and employment; meanwhile, the quality of life for people with disabilities is negatively influenced by stress. This study presents relevant implications given the results of the data analysis.</p> <p>Keywords: Quality of life for people with disabilities; social participation; cultural activity participation; travel; employment; stress</p> <hd id="AN0190412996-2">Introduction</hd> <p>Enhancing the quality of life of people with disabilities represents a human rights issue. People with disabilities are regularly subject to human rights violations, including acts of violence, abuse, disregard, and prejudice due to their disability (Memisevic et al., [<reflink idref="bib44" id="ref1">44</reflink>]). People with disabilities also confront multiple barriers, discrimination, and stigmatisation when accessing employment, leisure and recreational activities, and related services (Memisevic et al., [<reflink idref="bib44" id="ref2">44</reflink>]). Leisure is increasingly being seen as an indispensable aspect of quality of life for people with disabilities, yet they have fewer leisure opportunities than people without disabilities (Shikako-Thomas et al., [<reflink idref="bib59" id="ref3">59</reflink>]). In this context, articles 27 and 30 of the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD) highlight 'the right of persons with disability to work and take part on an equal basis with others in cultural life, recreation, leisure'.</p> <p>The number of people with disabilities worldwide is growing significantly. Due to the ageing population and increasing rates of chronic health conditions, it is projected that over one billion people (about 15% of the world's population) have a disability (World Health Organization, [<reflink idref="bib66" id="ref4">66</reflink>]). Recent disasters, such as the Corona Virus Disease-19 (COVID-19) crisis, have negatively impacted the lives of people with disabilities more than people without disabilities worldwide (Theis et al., [<reflink idref="bib62" id="ref5">62</reflink>]). During the pandemic, people with disability have had greater difficulty accessing health services and significantly higher stress levels compared to the prior period (Lakhani et al., [<reflink idref="bib38" id="ref6">38</reflink>]). Several research investigates that people with intellectual and developmental disabilities have been more isolated, stressed, and traumatised than people without disabilities, thus facing a greater reduction in quality of life (Friedman, [<reflink idref="bib23" id="ref7">23</reflink>]; Lakhani et al., [<reflink idref="bib38" id="ref8">38</reflink>]; Pettinicchio et al., [<reflink idref="bib51" id="ref9">51</reflink>]; Scheffers et al., [<reflink idref="bib57" id="ref10">57</reflink>]). Such research confirmed that the COVID-19 pandemic has had a negative impact on the quality of life in people with disability, and thus, enhancing their health and well-being post-COVID-19 is necessary. Despite this background, research on the quality of life in people with disabilities still remains in its infancy (Bickenbach, Felder, & Schmitz, 2013; Friedman, [<reflink idref="bib23" id="ref11">23</reflink>]; Lakhani et al., [<reflink idref="bib38" id="ref12">38</reflink>]).</p> <p>Quality of life has comprised one of the most popular topics in the study of disability over the last 30 years (Memisevic et al., [<reflink idref="bib44" id="ref13">44</reflink>]). This concept has become a critical framework for improving services and evaluating personal needs and results and an advocacy instrument highlighting the rights of people with disability (Berástegui et al., [<reflink idref="bib8" id="ref14">8</reflink>]). However, few studies have examined the quality of life in terms of the types of leisure activities people are participating in; nor has the self-reported stress from a longitudinal perspective occurred. Social and cultural activities play a significant role in increasing quality of life in people with disabilities (Egeljić-Mihailović et al., [<reflink idref="bib19" id="ref15">19</reflink>]; Ngamaba et al., [<reflink idref="bib47" id="ref16">47</reflink>]; Schall et al., [<reflink idref="bib56" id="ref17">56</reflink>]; Tesky et al., [<reflink idref="bib61" id="ref18">61</reflink>]). Yet, little is known about the determinants of the quality of life, including the diverse types of leisure activities, for people with disabilities are unclear. Thus, this research gap has motivated us to conduct a panel data analysis of secondary data collected from 11,467 people with disabilities to examine the determinants of the quality of life for people with disabilities. Since panel data, including both time and individual information, allows researchers to consider both time and individual effects for estimation, this research produces longitudinal patterns regarding the quality of life of people with disabilities.</p> <hd id="AN0190412996-3">Literature Review and Hypotheses Development</hd> <p></p> <hd id="AN0190412996-4">Quality of Life</hd> <p>The concept of quality of life is an essential framework for people with disabilities to evaluate individual results and design support services (Berástegui et al., [<reflink idref="bib8" id="ref19">8</reflink>]). Yet, the definitions and measurements have no consensus and deal with almost researcher-specific (Koot & Wallander, [<reflink idref="bib37" id="ref20">37</reflink>]). The quality of life represents both objective and subjective features as a multidimensional dimension (Balboni et al., [<reflink idref="bib4" id="ref21">4</reflink>]); the objective measures are used to assess life conditions such as physical health, functional activities, personal circumstances, and socio-economic influences (Felce & Perry, [<reflink idref="bib22" id="ref22">22</reflink>]). Yet, the outside and objective aspects cannot completely measure the concept of quality of life (Berástegui et al., [<reflink idref="bib8" id="ref23">8</reflink>]), and people with disabilities' subjective perspective plays an essential role in accurately assessing their quality of life (Emerson et al., [<reflink idref="bib20" id="ref24">20</reflink>]). Many scholars argue that quality of life is an individual's degree of satisfaction with their life (Levasseur et al., [<reflink idref="bib39" id="ref25">39</reflink>]; Moradi et al., [<reflink idref="bib45" id="ref26">45</reflink>]; Tobin et al., [<reflink idref="bib63" id="ref27">63</reflink>]). The perceived life satisfaction of people with disabilities can give accurate information on their life quality; thus, this paper focuses on the subjective aspect of quality of life.</p> <p>Many studies have researched the quality of life because it is a representative indicator for subjectively appraising the lives of individuals (Alizadeh et al., [<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref28">1</reflink>]; Huebner et al., [<reflink idref="bib32" id="ref29">32</reflink>]; Levasseur et al., [<reflink idref="bib40" id="ref30">40</reflink>]). For example, Moradi et al. ([<reflink idref="bib45" id="ref31">45</reflink>]) inspected the determinants for quality of life in a study considering senior citizens. In a similar vein, Levasseur et al. ([<reflink idref="bib40" id="ref32">40</reflink>]) used quality of life as an endogenous attribute to examine the lives of older adults. In another work, Jespersen et al. ([<reflink idref="bib34" id="ref33">34</reflink>]) investigated the characteristics of the lives of people with disabilities using quality of life as a dependent variable; meanwhile, Levasseur et al. ([<reflink idref="bib39" id="ref34">39</reflink>]) documented the antecedents of quality of life among people with disabilities. Alizadeh et al. ([<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref35">1</reflink>]) investigated women's quality of life, and Huebner et al. ([<reflink idref="bib32" id="ref36">32</reflink>]) similarly conducted research aiming to determine the influential elements on quality of life for patients with brain injury The literature review shows that numerous studies have used quality of life as an outcome variable. Therefore, this research adopts quality of life as the outcome variable to understand the lives of people with disabilities.</p> <hd id="AN0190412996-5">Social Participation</hd> <p>Being social animals, humans gain energy by interacting with others (Levasseur et al., [<reflink idref="bib39" id="ref37">39</reflink>]; Moradi et al., [<reflink idref="bib45" id="ref38">45</reflink>]). Connecting with other people and the community is strongly related to the quality of life and health (Egeljić-Mihailović et al., [<reflink idref="bib19" id="ref39">19</reflink>]; Levasseur et al., [<reflink idref="bib40" id="ref40">40</reflink>]; McLean et al., [<reflink idref="bib43" id="ref41">43</reflink>]; Tobin et al., [<reflink idref="bib63" id="ref42">63</reflink>]). Therefore, having limited opportunities for social participation can lower the living quality of individuals. Depression and loneliness occur much more often in people with disabilities and those who are less able to associate with everyday activities (Tesky et al., [<reflink idref="bib61" id="ref43">61</reflink>]). During the COVID-19 pandemic, they have a more severe experience of depression and a lower quality of life (Theis et al., [<reflink idref="bib62" id="ref44">62</reflink>]). In this sense, social participation is a vital protective factor for those who have disabilities in enhancing the quality of life and preventing depression.</p> <p>Empirical studies have provided evidence about the relationship between social participation and quality of life. For instance, Jespersen et al. ([<reflink idref="bib34" id="ref45">34</reflink>]) showed that social participation positively affects the quality of life of people with disabilities. In another study, Alizadeh et al. ([<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref46">1</reflink>]) showed that quality of life for women was positively correlated with social participation. Egeljić-Mihailović et al. ([<reflink idref="bib19" id="ref47">19</reflink>]) also found that social distancing negatively affected subjective well-being among Serbia older adults in a nursing home during COVID-19 pandemic. The recent research of Ngamaba et al. ([<reflink idref="bib47" id="ref48">47</reflink>]) confirmed that people with psychosis who participates more leisure activities have a higher quality of life. In a review of extant literature, Tobin et al. ([<reflink idref="bib63" id="ref49">63</reflink>]) indicated that social participation is positively associated with quality of life. Based on this overall literature review, the following research hypothesis is proposed:</p> <hd id="AN0190412996-6">H1:</hd> <p>Social leisure participation positively affects the quality of life of people with disabilities.</p> <hd id="AN0190412996-7">Cultural Activity</hd> <p>Cultural activities such as visiting an art gallery, movie theatre, and music concert refresh people's mental conditions; art helps inspire humans, thus allowing them to live better (Fung & Lehmberg, [<reflink idref="bib24" id="ref50">24</reflink>]; Galloway, [<reflink idref="bib25" id="ref51">25</reflink>]). Urzúa et al. ([<reflink idref="bib64" id="ref52">64</reflink>]) demonstrated that entertaining cultural activities have a positive effect on life quality. In a similar vein, scholars have shown that engaging with music concerts or art shows significantly enhances quality of life (Barbeau & Cossette, [<reflink idref="bib6" id="ref53">6</reflink>]; Fung & Lehmberg, [<reflink idref="bib24" id="ref54">24</reflink>]). In addition, Brajša-Žganec et al. ([<reflink idref="bib12" id="ref55">12</reflink>]) found that quality of life is substantially determined by cultural activity. In a study considering dementia patients, Schall et al. ([<reflink idref="bib56" id="ref56">56</reflink>]) reported that an art-museum-based intervention substantially improves the quality of life in people with dementia. Despite the important role that cultural activities play in individuals' health, wellness and quality of life, the research addressing the relationship between leisure participating in cultural activity and disability remain extremely limited. Hence, this research proposes the following hypothesis:</p> <hd id="AN0190412996-8">H2:</hd> <p>Social leisure participation positively impacts the quality of life of people with disabilities.</p> <hd id="AN0190412996-9">Leisure Travel</hd> <p>Through travel, humans attain new experiences, widen their perspectives, and gain more energy and revitalisation, as travel allows people to escape from their daily lives and access a unique atmosphere (Dolnicar et al., [<reflink idref="bib18" id="ref57">18</reflink>]; Oppermann & Cooper, [<reflink idref="bib50" id="ref58">50</reflink>]; Schubert et al., [<reflink idref="bib58" id="ref59">58</reflink>]; Sirgy, [<reflink idref="bib60" id="ref60">60</reflink>]). Empirical studies have offered evidence demonstrating this relationship. For example, Neal et al. ([<reflink idref="bib46" id="ref61">46</reflink>]) as well as Kim et al. ([<reflink idref="bib35" id="ref62">35</reflink>]) revealed a positive relationship between travel activity and quality of life in research examining tourists. In another study, Backer and Weiler ([<reflink idref="bib3" id="ref63">3</reflink>]) showed that travelling exerts a remarkably positive impact on quality of life. Campón-Cerro et al. ([<reflink idref="bib13" id="ref64">13</reflink>]) investigated water-based tourists and uncovered a positive impact of travel on quality of life. Further, Hernández-Mogollón et al. ([<reflink idref="bib31" id="ref65">31</reflink>]) scrutinised culinary tourists and found that quality of life is positively affected by travel experience. With respect to the literature review, the following hypothesis is proposed:</p> <hd id="AN0190412996-10">H3:</hd> <p>Travel participation positively impacts the quality of life of people with disabilities.</p> <hd id="AN0190412996-11">Employment</hd> <p>People develop their careers, make a living, and become a part of society through their job (Blake et al., [<reflink idref="bib9" id="ref66">9</reflink>]; Kober & Eggleton, [<reflink idref="bib36" id="ref67">36</reflink>]). Scholars also claim that individuals feel a sense of achievement via accomplishments in their job (Azuma & Akechi, [<reflink idref="bib2" id="ref68">2</reflink>]; Bouwmans et al., [<reflink idref="bib11" id="ref69">11</reflink>]). A vast body of literature has shown a positive relationship between employment and quality of life. Specifically, Blalock et al. ([<reflink idref="bib10" id="ref70">10</reflink>]) showed that the life quality of patients is positively influenced by their occupation. Reisine et al. ([<reflink idref="bib53" id="ref71">53</reflink>]) and Guisan and Aguayo ([<reflink idref="bib29" id="ref72">29</reflink>]) found that employment positively impacted quality of life in a study with women participants. Further, Carlier et al. ([<reflink idref="bib14" id="ref73">14</reflink>]) unveiled that individuals who regained jobs showed an enhanced quality of life. In a study examining Chinese workers, Chen et al. ([<reflink idref="bib15" id="ref74">15</reflink>]) showed that employment has a positive impact on quality of life. Chinese older adults who participated in paid work activities were significantly associated with fewer depressive symptoms in rural and urban areas than those who are not. As is the case in the general population, employment can be considered important for people with disabilities, as it allows them to increase social opportunities and physical and mental health (Robertson et al., [<reflink idref="bib55" id="ref75">55</reflink>]). Based on the literature review, the third hypothesis is proposed as follows:</p> <hd id="AN0190412996-12">H4:</hd> <p>Employment positively impacts the quality of life of people with disabilities.</p> <hd id="AN0190412996-13">Stress</hd> <p>Stress refers to stimulation that imposes both physical and mental burdens on individuals (Darling et al., [<reflink idref="bib16" id="ref76">16</reflink>]; Mah et al., [<reflink idref="bib41" id="ref77">41</reflink>]; Ribeiro et al., [<reflink idref="bib54" id="ref78">54</reflink>]). Excessive stress causes poor physical and mental conditions, implying that stress reduces the quality of life (Delgado, [<reflink idref="bib17" id="ref79">17</reflink>]; Gardner et al., [<reflink idref="bib27" id="ref80">27</reflink>]). Numerous studies have provided evidence linking stress and life quality. For example, Nordheim et al. ([<reflink idref="bib48" id="ref81">48</reflink>]) examined parental stress and showed a positively negative association between stress and quality of life. In another study, Maruyama and Morimoto ([<reflink idref="bib42" id="ref82">42</reflink>]) showed that Japanese managers' stress negatively affected their quality of life. This finding is consistent with Darling et al. ([<reflink idref="bib16" id="ref83">16</reflink>]) findings showing that stress among clergy is negatively related to the quality of life. Odden et al. ([<reflink idref="bib49" id="ref84">49</reflink>]) also showed that stress negatively affects the quality of life in their work. However, evidence on the negative effects of stress on the quality of life is generally studied in general populations, while little is known about the relationship between stress and the quality of life for people with disabilities (Fekete et al., [<reflink idref="bib21" id="ref85">21</reflink>]). Given the results of this literature review, this study proposes the following hypothesis:</p> <hd id="AN0190412996-14">H5:</hd> <p>Stress negatively impacts on the quality of life in people with disabilities.</p> <hd id="AN0190412996-15">Method</hd> <p></p> <hd id="AN0190412996-16">Data Collection and Illustration of Variables</hd> <p>This research uses archival data as the information source. The Korean Panel Survey of Employment for People with Disabilities is used to attain the data. The Panel Survey of Employment for People with Disabilities, which began in 2016, provides longitudinal survey information; the Korean employment agency performed the data collection for persons with disabilities from 2016 to 2018.</p> <p>People with disabilities were individually interviewed for the survey. Because the structure and contents of these data are more complex than cross-sectional data, this survey used a computer-assisted personal interviewing method to perform 'logic checks' to identify inconsistent or contradictory responses. The survey only allowed the head of the household or the legal guardian to respond if a mental disorder or an intellectual disability limited a direct response. The Korean Panel Survey of Employment for People with Disabilities used a systematic stratified cluster sample of households. The sample was stratified by 15 metropolitan cities and provinces in South Korea, age, and type of disability. The sample size was calculated based on a proportional distribution using the area and the type of disability.</p> <p>The initial number of participants was 4,577, but 2,264 observations were eliminated due to poor quality of responses: both no response to the survey questions and refusal of survey questions. The data appeared unbalanced panel which denotes that every survey participant did not respond to the questions for the whole study period (Wooldridge, [<reflink idref="bib65" id="ref86">65</reflink>]).</p> <p>This study used quality of life (QOL) as the dependent variable. QOL was measured using five-point scales (1 = Very dissatisfied, 5 = Very satisfied). This study used social participation (SP), cultural activity (CA), travel (TRA), and stress (STR) as the independent variables. SP was measured using four-point scales (1 = Very low participation, 2 = Low participation, 3 = High participation, 4 = Very high participation). CA and TRA appeared as binary variables (0 = No, 1 = Yes). STR was measured using a five-point scale (1 = Very low stress 5 = Very high stress). Further, four attributes were considered as control variables: level of disability (0 = Mild, 1 = Severe), gender (0 = Female, 1 = Male), age, and assets amount (Unit 10 thousand KRW).</p> <hd id="AN0190412996-17">Description of Data Analysis</hd> <p>This research first computed descriptive statistics to obtain the mean, standard deviation, minimum, and maximum. Then, correlation matrix analysis was implemented to examine the data. This study also performed three multiple linear regression analyses to test the research hypotheses: ordinary least square (OLS), fixed effect (FE), and feasible generalised least square (FGLS). OLS is the econometric instrument that minimises the estimation residual (Wooldridge, [<reflink idref="bib65" id="ref87">65</reflink>]). In addition, because the data showed the longitudinal trajectory of the five determinants, this study performed FE, which incorporates multiple time-related (annual) dummy variables into the regression model (Baltagi, [<reflink idref="bib5" id="ref88">5</reflink>]; Gujarati & Porter, [<reflink idref="bib30" id="ref89">30</reflink>]). Further, this study carried out FGLS because the instrument minimises the bias caused by autocorrelation and heteroskedasticity in panel data estimation. Moreover, this research performed two types of multiple linear regression analyses-one including only main attributes and one incorporating control variables – to examine the robustness of the estimation. Altogether, this study proposes the multiple linear regression equation as follows:</p> <p>Graph</p> <p> <ephtml> <math xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML"><mi mathvariant="italic">QOLit</mi><mo>=</mo><msub><mi>β</mi><mn>0</mn></msub><mo>+</mo><msub><mi>β</mi><mn>1</mn></msub><mi mathvariant="italic">S</mi><msub><mi>P</mi><mrow><mi mathvariant="italic">it</mi></mrow></msub><mo>+</mo><msub><mi>β</mi><mn>2</mn></msub><mi mathvariant="italic">ST</mi><msub><mi>R</mi><mrow><mi mathvariant="italic">it</mi></mrow></msub><mo>+</mo><msub><mi>β</mi><mn>3</mn></msub><mi mathvariant="italic">EM</mi><msub><mi>P</mi><mrow><mi mathvariant="italic">it</mi></mrow></msub><mo>+</mo><msub><mi>β</mi><mn>4</mn></msub><mi mathvariant="italic">C</mi><msub><mi>A</mi><mrow><mi mathvariant="italic">it</mi></mrow></msub><mo>+</mo><msub><mi>β</mi><mn>5</mn></msub><mi mathvariant="italic">TR</mi><msub><mi>A</mi><mrow><mi mathvariant="italic">it</mi></mrow></msub><mo>+</mo><msub><mi>β</mi><mn>6</mn></msub><mi mathvariant="italic">D</mi><msub><mi>L</mi><mrow><mi mathvariant="italic">it</mi></mrow></msub><mo>+</mo><msub><mi>β</mi><mn>7</mn></msub><mi mathvariant="italic">GE</mi><msub><mi>N</mi><mrow><mi mathvariant="italic">it</mi></mrow></msub><mo>+</mo><msub><mi>β</mi><mn>8</mn></msub><mi mathvariant="italic">AG</mi><msub><mi>E</mi><mrow><mi mathvariant="italic">it</mi></mrow></msub><mo>+</mo><msub><mi>β</mi><mn>9</mn></msub><mi mathvariant="italic">AS</mi><msub><mi>T</mi><mrow><mi mathvariant="italic">it</mi></mrow></msub><mo>+</mo><msub><mi>ε</mi><mrow><mi mathvariant="italic">it</mi></mrow></msub><mfenced open="(" close=")"><mrow><mi mathvariant="italic">i</mi><mo>=</mo><mn>1</mn><mo>,</mo><mn>2</mn><mo>⋅</mo><mo>⋅</mo><mtext mathcolor="red">\cdotM</mtext><mo>,</mo><mi mathvariant="italic">t</mi><mo>=</mo><mn>1</mn><mo>,</mo><mn>2</mn><mo>⋅</mo><mo>⋅</mo><mo>⋅</mo><mi mathvariant="italic">N</mi></mrow></mfenced></math> </ephtml> </p> <p>Where QOL is quality of life (1 = Very dissatisfied, 5 = Very satisfied), SP is social participation (1 = Very low participation, 2 = Low participation, 3 = High participation, 4 = Very high participation), STR is stress (1= Very low stress 5= Very high stress), EMP is employment status (0 = Unemployed, 1= Employed), CA is cultural activity (0 = No, 1= Yes), TRA is travel activity (0 = No, 1 = Yes), DL is level of disability (0 = Mild, 1 = Severe), GEN is gender (0 = Female, 1 = Male), AGE is age in years, and AST is assets amount (Unit 10 thousand KRW) i i<subs>th</subs> survey participants, t t<subs>th</subs> year.</p> <hd id="AN0190412996-18">Results</hd> <p></p> <hd id="AN0190412996-19">Descriptive Statistics and Correlation Matrix</hd> <p>Table 1 presents the descriptive statistics. The mean value of QOL is 3.27 and its standard deviation is 0.69. Further, the mean values of SP, STR, and EMP are 2.26, 3.53, and 0.50, respectively. Moreover, the mean values of CA and TRA are 0.46 and 0.10, respectively, while the respective standard deviations of CA and TRA are 0.50 and 0.30. Table 1 also presents the information on DL (Mean = 0.32, SD = 0.47), GEN (Mean = 0.65, SD = 0.48), AGE (Mean = 43.70, SD = 12.61), and AST (Mean = 13824.52, SD = 25985.18).</p> <p>Table 1. Descriptive statistics (<emph>N</emph> = 11467).</p> <p> <ephtml> <table><thead><tr><td>Variable</td><td>Mean</td><td>SD</td><td>Minimum</td><td>Maximum</td></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>QOL SP STR EMP CA TRA DL GEN AGE AST</td><td>3.27 2.26 3.53 0.50 0.46 0.10 0.32 0.65 43.70 13824.52</td><td>0.69 0.78 0.83 0.50 0.50 0.30 0.47 0.48 12.61 25985.18</td><td>1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 15 0</td><td>5 4 5 1 1 1 1 1 66 600000</td></tr></tbody></table> </ephtml> </p> <p>1 SD is standard deviation, QOL is quality of life (1 = Very dissatisfied, 5 = Very satisfied), SP is social participation (1 = Very low participation, 2 = Low participation, 3 = High participation, 4 = Very high participation), STR is stress (1 = Very low stress 5 = Very high stress), EMP is status of employment (0 = Unemployed, 1 = Employed), CA is cultural activity (0 = No, 1 = Yes), TRA is travel activity (0 = No, 1 = Yes), DL is level of disability (0 = Mild, 1 = Severe), GEN is gender (0 = Female, 1 = Male), AGE is age in years, and AST is assets amount (Unit 10 thousand KRW).</p> <p>Table 2 presents the correlation matrix. The results show that QOL positively correlates with SP (r =.390, p <.05), EMP (r =.342, p <.05), CA (r =.306, p <.05), TRA (r =.190, p <.05), and AST (r =.198, p <.05), whereas QOL negatively correlates with STR (r = −.211, p <.05), DL (r = −.167, p <.05), and AGE (r = −.118, p <.05). Further, SP positively correlates with EMP (r =.331, p <.05), CA (r =.384, p <.05), TRA (r =.215, p <.05), and AST (r =.115, p <.05). Moreover, EMP positively correlates with CA (r =.262, p <.05), TRA (r =.150, p <.05), and AST (r =.118, p <.05). In addition, CA positively correlates with TRA (r =.231, p <.05) and AST (r =.163, p <.05).</p> <p>Table 2. Correlation matrix.</p> <p> <ephtml> <table><thead><tr><td>Variable</td><td>1</td><td>2</td><td>3</td><td>4</td><td>5</td><td>6</td><td>7</td><td>8</td><td>9</td></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>1.QOL</td><td>.1</td><td /><td /><td /><td /><td /><td /><td /><td /></tr><tr><td>2.SP</td><td>.390*</td><td>1</td><td /><td /><td /><td /><td /><td /><td /></tr><tr><td>3.STR</td><td>−.211*</td><td>−.056*</td><td>1</td><td /><td /><td /><td /><td /><td /></tr><tr><td>4.EMP</td><td>.342*</td><td>.331*</td><td>−.008</td><td>1</td><td /><td /><td /><td /><td /></tr><tr><td>5.CA</td><td>.306*</td><td>.384*</td><td>−.018</td><td>.262*</td><td>1</td><td /><td /><td /><td /></tr><tr><td>6.TRA 7.DL</td><td>.190* −.167*</td><td>.215* −.257*</td><td>−.029* −.048*</td><td>.150* −.304*</td><td>.231* −.182*</td><td>1 −.115*</td><td>1</td><td /><td /></tr><tr><td>8.GEN</td><td>.034*</td><td>.052*</td><td>.015</td><td>.221*</td><td>.020*</td><td>.001</td><td>−.041*</td><td>1</td><td /></tr><tr><td>9.AGE</td><td>−.118*</td><td>−.047*</td><td>.026*</td><td>.008</td><td>−.317*</td><td>−.063*</td><td>−.203*</td><td>−.062*</td><td>1</td></tr><tr><td>10.AST</td><td>.198*</td><td>.115*</td><td>−.023*</td><td>.118*</td><td>.163*</td><td>.175*</td><td>−.077*</td><td>.018</td><td>−.038*</td></tr></tbody></table> </ephtml> </p> <p>2 *<emph>p</emph> <.05, QOL is quality of life (1 = Very dissatisfied, 5 = Very satisfied), SP is social participation (1 = Very low participation, 2 = Low participation, 3=High participation, 4 = Very high participation), STR is stress (1 = Very low stress 5 = Very high stress), EMP is status of employment (0 = Unemployed, 1 = Employed), CA is cultural activity (0 = No, 1 = Yes), TRA is travel activity (0 = No, 1 = Yes), DL is level of disability (0 = Mild, 1 = Severe), GEN is gender (0 = Female, 1 = Male), AGE is age in years, and AST is assets amount (Unit 10 thousand KRW).</p> <p>Table 3 presents the results of the multiple linear regression analysis that only considers main attributes. Three linear multiple regression models are statistically significant given the values of F-statistics and Wald χ<sups>2</sups> (p <.05). Regarding the coefficients of the variables, SP (β = 0.214, p <.05), EMP (β = 0.300, p <.05), CA (β = 0.194, p <.05), and TRA (β = 0.157, p <.05) are all positively associated with QOL. Moreover, QOL is negatively influenced by STR (β = −0.162, p <.05). The results of Model1, Model2, and Model3 were all similar. It can be inferred that the five hypotheses are supported.</p> <p>Table 3. Results of hypotheses testing excluding control variables (N = 11467).</p> <p> <ephtml> <table><thead><tr><td>Variable</td><td>Model1 β(t-value) OLS</td><td>Model2 β(t-value) FE</td><td>Model3 β(t-value) FGLS</td></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>Intercept SP STR EMP CA TRA F- value Wald χ<sup>2</sup> R<sup>2</sup></td><td>3.102(102.17)* 0.214(26.46)* −0.162(−23.83)* 0.300(24.94)* 0.194(15.56)* 0.157(8.20)* 817.50* -.2626</td><td>3.085(97.09)* 0.216(26.53)* −0.162(−23.79)* 0.299(24.81)* 0.194(15.56)* 0.158(8.23)* 584.53* -.2627</td><td>3.102(102.19)* 0.215(26.47)* −0.162(−23.84)* 0.300(24.94)* 0.194(15.56)* 0.157(8.21)* - 4089.62 -</td></tr></tbody></table> </ephtml> </p> <p>3 * <emph>p</emph><.05, QOL is quality of life (1 = Very dissatisfied, 5 = Very satisfied), Dependent variable, SP is social participation (1 = Very low participation, 2 = Low participation, 3 = High participation, 4 = Very high participation), STR is stress (1 = Very low stress 5 = Very high stress), EMP is status of employment (0 = Unemployed, 1 = Employed), CA is cultural activity (0 = No, 1 = Yes), TRA is travel activity (0 = No, 1 = Yes), OLS is ordinary least square, FE is fixed effect, and FGLS is feasible generalised least square.</p> <p>Table 4 lists the results of hypotheses testing. Model 4, Model 5, and Model 6 are all statistically significant given the value of F-statics and Wald χ<sups>2</sups> (<emph>p</emph> <.05). In addition, SP (β = 0.212, <emph>p</emph> <.05), EMP (β = 0.299, <emph>p</emph> <.05), CA (β = 0.135, <emph>p</emph> <.05), and TRA (β = 0.117, <emph>p</emph> <.05) all positively affect QOL. Moreover, QOL is negatively related to STR (β = −0.160, <emph>p</emph> <.05). Hence, the five hypotheses are supported by the results of multiple linear regression analysis.</p> <p>Table 4. Results of hypotheses testing including control variables (N = 11467).</p> <p> <ephtml> <table><thead><tr><td>Variable</td><td>Model4 β(t-value) OLS</td><td>Model5 β(t-value) FE</td><td>Model6 β(t-value) FGLS</td></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>Intercept SP STR EMP CA TRA DL GEN AGE AST F- value Wald χ<sup>2</sup> R<sup>2</sup></td><td>3.322(82.50)* 0.212(26.14)* −0.160(−23.82)* 0.299(23.81)* 0.135(10.21)* 0.117(6.11)* −0.051(−3.90)* −0.048(−4.05)* −0.004(−8.56)* 0.001(13.68)* 495.61* -.2797</td><td>3.308(80.58)* 0.213(26.19)* −0.160(−23.78)* 0.298(23.73)* 0.135(10.18)* 0.118(6.15)* −0.051(−3.90)* −0.048(−4.04)* −0.004(−8.65)* 0.001(13.58)* 584.53* -.2627</td><td>3.322(82.54)* 0.212(26.15)* −0.160(−23.83)* 0.299(23.82)* 0.135(10.22)* 0.117(6.11)* −0.051(−3.90)* −0.048(−4.05)* −0.004(−8.57)* 0.001(13.69)* 4464.39* - -</td></tr></tbody></table> </ephtml> </p> <p>4 *<emph>p</emph><.05, QOL is quality of life (1 = Very dissatisfied, 5 = Very satisfied), Dependent variable, SP is social participation (1 = Very low participation, 2 = Low participation, 3 = High participation, 4 = Very high participation), STR is stress (1 = Very low stress 5 = Very high stress), EMP is status of employment (0 = Unemployed, 1 = Employed), CA is cultural activity (0 = No, 1 = Yes), TRA is travel activity (0 = No, 1 = Yes), DL is level of disability (0 = Mild, 1 = Severe), GEN is gender (0 = Female, 1 = Male), AGE is age in years, AST is assets amount (Unit 10 thousand KRW), OLS is ordinary least square, FE is fixed effect, and FGLS is feasible generalised least square.</p> <p>The results also show that the quality of life of people with severe disabilities is lower than that of people with mild disabilities (β = −0.051, p <.05). Further, the quality of life of men is lower than that of women (β = −0.048, p <.05). Further, AGE (β = −0.004, p <.05) negatively affects QOL whereas AST (β = 0.001, p <.05) positively affects QOL.</p> <p>All in all, the five research hypotheses are supported by the results of multiple linear regression analysis (Table 5). In other words, social participation, cultural activity, travel, and employment all improve the quality of life of people with disabilities, while stress reduces their quality of life.</p> <p>Table 5. Summary of hypotheses testing.</p> <p> <ephtml> <table><thead><tr><td>Hypothesis</td><td>Variable and direction</td><td>Results</td></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>H<sub>1</sub> H<sub>2</sub> H<sub>3</sub> H<sub>4</sub> H<sub>5</sub></td><td>SP (+) CA (+) TRA (+) EMP (+) STR (-)</td><td>Supported Supported Supported Supported Supported</td></tr></tbody></table> </ephtml> </p> <p>5 QOL is quality of life (1 = Very dissatisfied, 5 = Very satisfied), Dependent variable, SP is social participation (1 = Very low participation, 2 = Low participation, 3 = High participation, 4 = Very high participation), CA is cultural activity (0 = No, 1 = Yes), TRA is travel activity (0 = No, 1 = Yes), EMP is status of employment (0 = Unemployed, 1 = Employed), and STR is stress (1 = Very low stress 5 = Very high stress).</p> <hd id="AN0190412996-20">Discussion</hd> <p>This research explored the determinants of quality of life among people with disabilities using the Korean Panel Survey of Employment for the Disabled. Five attributes were inspected: social participation, cultural activity, travel activity, employment, and stress. This research shows that social participation leads to a higher quality of life for people with disabilities, meaning that interacting with others could be a critical element for people with disabilities to live better. Further, the quality of life of people with disabilities is positively affected by cultural leisure activities (e.g. watching movies, listening to music, visiting museums and art galleries) and leisure travel. The findings confirm the importance of leisure participation in the quality of life for people with disabilities.</p> <p>It is well-known that people with disabilities tend to participate less in leisure participation, including social, club, and travel activities, and paid/unpaid work than those without (Ngamaba et al., [<reflink idref="bib47" id="ref90">47</reflink>]). Their physical and mental disabilities negatively affect social relationships and everyday activities, leading to isolation, loneliness, and separation from others and the community. However, for people with disabilities, leisure activities afford a great opportunity whereby social acceptance and life satisfaction may be gained (Ngamaba et al., [<reflink idref="bib47" id="ref91">47</reflink>]). The finding of this research supports the previous research that leisure participation in social activities indicates a key resource for people with disabilities, increasing their life satisfaction and decreasing depression and loneliness (Alizadeh et al., [<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref92">1</reflink>]; Egeljić-Mihailović et al., [<reflink idref="bib19" id="ref93">19</reflink>]; Jespersen et al., [<reflink idref="bib34" id="ref94">34</reflink>]; Levasseur et al., [<reflink idref="bib40" id="ref95">40</reflink>]; Tobin et al., [<reflink idref="bib63" id="ref96">63</reflink>]). Even worse, many countries have undertaken various regulations to decrease the spread of COVID-19 during the pandemic, including social distancing restrictions and stay-at-home orders. This social distancing restriction adversely impacts the quality of life compared to people without disability (Friedman, [<reflink idref="bib23" id="ref97">23</reflink>]; Lakhani et al., [<reflink idref="bib38" id="ref98">38</reflink>]; Pettinicchio et al., [<reflink idref="bib51" id="ref99">51</reflink>]; Scheffers et al., [<reflink idref="bib57" id="ref100">57</reflink>]). Thus, for people with disabilities to have a good quality of life, it is necessary to publicly ensure a social connection with people and the community through participating in meaningful social and cultural activities and work. The government policies for people with disabilities should allocate resources to constructing social activity places that are accessible to people with disabilities. They also should consider dedicating some of their budgets to supporting a variety of leisure programs that help people with disabilities reduce stress and loneliness.</p> <p>The findings also support the hypothesis that leisure travel participation significantly impacts the quality of life for people with disabilities. People with disabilities considerably face space and time constraints compared to people without disabilities (Ralph et al., [<reflink idref="bib52" id="ref101">52</reflink>]). Thus, they tend to participate in fewer out-of-home activities, particularly leisure travel, raising concerns regarding their quality of life. While all people can benefit from travel experience, people with disabilities particularly benefit from travel as a physically and mentally healthy pursuit (Ralph et al., [<reflink idref="bib52" id="ref102">52</reflink>]). Some research has suggested that participation in travel may contribute to life satisfaction and improve the quality of life of people with disabilities (Ralph et al., [<reflink idref="bib52" id="ref103">52</reflink>]). However, there is still a lack of empirical evidence on the effects of tourism participation on the life satisfaction and quality of life of people with disabilities. Thus, research is needed on the topic of the mechanisms of enhancing the quality of life through travel.</p> <p>Moreover, the results show that employment contributes to a better life for people with disabilities. Namely, people with disabilities could become happier by working, allowing them to achieve career development and economic benefits and to experience community participation (Robertson et al., [<reflink idref="bib55" id="ref104">55</reflink>]). Yet, people with disabilities already face unequal employment opportunities and adverse employment consequences compared to people without disabilities (Lakhani et al., [<reflink idref="bib38" id="ref105">38</reflink>]). Thus, the government should create more jobs for people with disabilities and establish a social system that minimises discrimination in offering job opportunities.</p> <p>However, the result showed that stress negatively impacts the quality of life for people with disabilities. Similar to this finding, previous studies have found the effects of high perceived stress on the lower level of health and well-being (Darling et al., [<reflink idref="bib16" id="ref106">16</reflink>]; Nordheim et al., [<reflink idref="bib48" id="ref107">48</reflink>]; Odden et al., [<reflink idref="bib49" id="ref108">49</reflink>]). Stress, in particular, is more dominant in people with disabilities than in those who are not (Bellini, [<reflink idref="bib7" id="ref109">7</reflink>]) and is significantly related to the psychological, physiological, and various maladaptive behaviours in people with disabilities (García‐Villamisar & Dattilo, [<reflink idref="bib26" id="ref110">26</reflink>]). Also, behavioural insufficiencies linked with socialisation, communication, sensory processing, and physical functioning could result in people with disabilities being vulnerable to stressors (García‐Villamisar & Dattilo, [<reflink idref="bib26" id="ref111">26</reflink>]; Groden et al., [<reflink idref="bib28" id="ref112">28</reflink>]). Therefore, research investigating the effects of various interventions, including various leisure activities, on the perceived stress of people with disabilities is a significant undertaking. Our study, as a first step, confirmed the negative relationship between perceived stress and quality of life in people with disability. However, future studies need to examine the bidirectional effects of perceived stress and quality of life to clarify causality and the moderating effects of leisure participation. In addition, the role of leisure participation as a contributor to enhancing the quality of life of people with disabilities is needed to study further, even though there is evidence of a positive relationship between leisure participation and quality of life and stress reduction (Iwasaki, [<reflink idref="bib33" id="ref113">33</reflink>]).</p> <p>Additionally, this study examined four control variables: level of disability, gender, age, and amount of possessing economic assets. The results show that people with severe disabilities have a lower quality of life than people with mild disabilities. Government programs need to consider investing more in supporting people with severe disability. The results also suggest that women with disabilities had a lower quality of life than men with disabilities and that older people with disabilities displayed a better quality of life. Policy design also needs to consider how the quality of life of females and younger people with disabilities can be enhanced. Last, the results indicate that the level of personal assets improves the quality of life among people with disabilities. It implies that economic support policy should be varied by inspecting the personal assets of people with disabilities, which could become an avenue for distributing government resources more efficiently.</p> <hd id="AN0190412996-21">Conclusion</hd> <p>This study contributes to the literature by outlining the determinants of quality of life for people with disabilities while considering the longitudinal trajectory of the five determinants. Since an individual's behavioural pattern is likely to vary over time, this research sheds light on the literature by presenting results considering the longitudinal effect in a study model with econometric instruments. Another contribution of this research is that it provides external validity to the findings of prior studies. Specifically, the results of the current work are consistent with the findings of Alizadeh et al. ([<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref114">1</reflink>]) and Jespersen et al. ([<reflink idref="bib34" id="ref115">34</reflink>]) in that social participation is a critical element for the quality of life. Moreover, the findings of this study support the outcomes of previous research in terms of stress (Maruyama & Morimoto, [<reflink idref="bib42" id="ref116">42</reflink>]; Odden et al., [<reflink idref="bib49" id="ref117">49</reflink>]) and employment (Blalock et al., [<reflink idref="bib10" id="ref118">10</reflink>]; Reisine et al., [<reflink idref="bib53" id="ref119">53</reflink>]). Additionally, the finding of this study externally validates the outcomes of prior studies regarding cultural activity participation (Brajša-Žganec et al., [<reflink idref="bib12" id="ref120">12</reflink>]; Schall et al., [<reflink idref="bib56" id="ref121">56</reflink>]) and travelling (Kim et al., [<reflink idref="bib35" id="ref122">35</reflink>]; Neal et al., [<reflink idref="bib46" id="ref123">46</reflink>]).</p> <p>This study has a few limitations. First, this study depended on archival data. The measurement item was also constrained to a single item. Future research should thus consider more complex measurement instruments for more precise statistical inference using multiple items for each variable. This study also only considered Korean cases. To attain more generalisable results, future research should consider the cases of other countries and compare them with the results of the current study. In doing so, scholars could further elucidate how the quality of life of people with disabilities can be enhanced.</p> <hd id="AN0190412996-22">Disclosure Statement</hd> <p>No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).</p> <ref id="AN0190412996-23"> <title> References </title> <blist> <bibl id="bib1" idref="ref28" type="bt">1</bibl> <bibtext> Alizadeh, S., Mohseni, M., Khanjani, N., & Momenabadi, V. (2014). Correlation between social participation of women and their quality of life in Kerman. Journal of Health Promotion Management, 3 (2), 34 – 42.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib2" idref="ref68" type="bt">2</bibl> <bibtext> Azuma, H., & Akechi, T. (2014). Effects of psychosocial functioning, depression, seizure frequency, and employment on quality of life in patients with epilepsy. Epilepsy & Behavior, 41, 18 – 20. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.yebeh.2014.09.025</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib3" idref="ref63" type="bt">3</bibl> <bibtext> Backer, E., & Weiler, B. (2018). Travel and quality of life: Where do socio-economically disadvantaged individuals fit in? Journal of Vacation Marketing, 24 (2), 159 – 171. https://doi.org/10.1177/1356766717690575</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib4" idref="ref21" type="bt">4</bibl> <bibtext> Balboni, G., Coscarelli, A., Giunti, G., & Schalock, R. L. (2013). The assessment of the quality of life of adults with intellectual disability: The use of self-report and report of others assessment strategies. Research in Developmental Disabilities, 34 (11), 4248 – 4254. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ridd.2013.09.009</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib5" idref="ref88" type="bt">5</bibl> <bibtext> Baltagi, B. (2008). Econometric analysis of panel data (Vol. 1). John Wiley & Sons.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib6" idref="ref53" type="bt">6</bibl> <bibtext> Barbeau, A. K., & Cossette, I. (2019). The effects of participating in a community concert band on senior citizens' quality of life, mental and physical health. International Journal of Community Music, 12 (2), 269 – 288. https://doi.org/10.1386/ijcm.12.2.269_1</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib7" idref="ref109" type="bt">7</bibl> <bibtext> Bellini, S. (2004). Social skill deficits and anxiety in high-functioning adolescents with autism spectrum disorders. Focus on Autism & Other Developmental Disabilities, 19 (2), 78 – 86. https://doi.org/10.1177/10883576040190020201</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib8" idref="ref14" type="bt">8</bibl> <bibtext> Berástegui, A., Santos, A., & Suárez, G. (2021). The reporters' agreement in assessing the quality of life of young people with intellectual disabilities. Research in Developmental Disabilities, 116, 104026. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ridd.2021.104026</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib9" idref="ref66" type="bt">9</bibl> <bibtext> Blake, C., Codd, M. B., Cassidy, A., & O'Meara, Y. M. (2000). Physical function, employment and quality of life in end-stage renal disease. Journal of Nephrology, 13 (2), 142 – 149.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Blalock, A., Mcdaniel, J., & Farber, E. (2002). Effect of employment on quality of life and psychological functioning in patients with HIV/AIDS. Psychosomatics, 43 (5), 400 – 404. https://doi.org/10.1176/appi.psy.43.5.400</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Bouwmans, C., de Sonneville, C., Mulder, C. L., & Hakkaart van Roijen, L. (2015). Employment and the associated impact on quality of life in people diagnosed with schizophrenia. Neuropsychiatric Disease and Treatment, 11, 2125. https://doi.org/10.2147/NDT.S83546</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Brajša-Žganec, A., Merkaš, M., & Šverko, I. (2011). Quality of life and leisure activities: How do leisure activities contribute to subjective well-being? Social Indicators Research, 102 (1), 81 – 91. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11205-010-9724-2</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Campón-Cerro, A., DiClemente, E., Hernández-Mogollón, J., & Folgado-Fernández, J. (2020). Healthy water-based tourism experiences: Their contribution to quality of life, satisfaction and loyalty. International Journal of Environmental Research Public Health, 17 (6), 1961. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17061961</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Carlier, B. E., Schuring, M., Lötters, F. J., Bakker, B., Borgers, N., & Burdorf, A. (2013). The influence of re-employment on quality of life and self-rated health, a longitudinal study among unemployed persons in the Netherlands. BMC Public Health, 13 (1), 1 – 7. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2458-13-503</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Chen, X., Yu, B., Gong, J., Wang, P., & Elliott, A. L. (2018). Social capital associated with quality of life mediated by employment experiences: Evidence from a random sample of rural-to-urban migrants in China. Social Indicators Research, 139 (1), 327 – 346. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11205-017-1617-1</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Darling, C. A., Hill, E. W., & McWey, L. M. (2004). Understanding stress and quality of life for clergy and clergy spouses. Stress and Health, 20 (5), 261 – 277. https://doi.org/10.1002/smi.1031</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Delgado, C. (2007). Sense of coherence, spirituality, stress and quality of life in chronic illness. Journal of Nursing Scholarship, 39 (3), 229 – 234. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1547-5069.2007.00173.x</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Dolnicar, S., Lazarevski, K., & Yanamandram, V. (2013). Quality of life and tourism: A conceptual framework and novel segmentation base. Journal of Business Research, 66 (6), 724 – 729. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2011.09.010</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Egeljić-Mihailović, N., Brkić-Jovanović, N., Krstić, T., Simin, D., & Milutinović, D. (2022). Social participation and depressive symptoms among older adults during the Covid-19 pandemic in Serbia: A cross-sectional study. Geriatric Nursing, 44, 8 – 14. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gerinurse.2021.12.014</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Emerson, E., Felce, D., & Stancliffe, R. J. (2013). Issues concerning self-report data and population-based data sets involving people with intellectual disabilities. Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities, 51 (5), 333 – 348. https://doi.org/10.1352/1934-9556-51.5.333</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Fekete, C., Wahrendorf, M., Reinhardt, J. D., Post, M. W., & Siegrist, J. (2014). Work stress and quality of life in persons with disabilities from four European countries: The case of spinal cord injury. Quality of Life Research, 23, 1661 – 1671. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-013-0610-7</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Felce, D., & Perry, J. (1995). Quality of life: Its definition and measurement. Research in Developmental Disabilities, 16 (1), 51 – 74. https://doi.org/10.1016/0891-4222(94)00028-8</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Friedman, C. (2021). The COVID-19 pandemic and quality of life outcomes of people with intellectual and developmental disabilities. Disability and Health Journal, 14 (4), 101117. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dhjo.2021.101117</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Fung, C. V., & Lehmberg, L. J. (2016). Music for life: Music participation and quality of life of senior citizens. Oxford University Press.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Galloway, S. (2006). Cultural participation and individual quality of life: A review of research findings. Applied Research in Quality of Life, 1 (3), 323 – 342. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11482-007-9024-4</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> García‐Villamisar, D. A., & Dattilo, J. (2010). Effects of a leisure programme on quality of life and stress of individuals with ASD. Journal of Intellectual Disability Research, 54 (7), 611 – 619. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2788.2010.01289.x</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Gardner, T. M., Krägeloh, C. U., & Henning, M. A. (2014). Religious coping, stress, and quality of life of Muslim university students in New Zealand. Mental Health, Religion & Culture, 17 (4), 327 – 338. https://doi.org/10.1080/13674676.2013.804044</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Groden, J., Baron, M. G., & Groden, G. (2006). Assessment and coping strategies. In M. G. Baron, J. Groden, G. Groden & L. P. Lipsitt (Eds.), Stress and coping in austism (pp. 15 – 41). Oxford University Press.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Guisan, M. C., & Aguayo, E. (2020). Employment and quality of life of women in Spain: Evolution 1970-2020 and international comparisons. Applied Econometrics and International Development, 20 (2), 57 – 74.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Gujarati, D., & Porter, D. (2009). Basic Econometrics. McGraw-Hill.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Hernández-Mogollón, J. M., DiClemente, E., & Campón-Cerro, A. M. (2020). Culinary travel experiences, quality of life and loyalty. Spanish Journal of Marketing-ESIC, 24 (3), 425 – 446. https://doi.org/10.1108/SJME-11-2019-0094</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Huebner, R., Johnson, K., Bennett, C., & Schneck, C. (2003). Community participation and quality of life outcomes after adult traumatic brain injury. The American Journal of Occupational Therapy, 57 (2), 177 – 185. https://doi.org/10.5014/ajot.57.2.177</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Iwasaki, Y. (2007). Leisure and quality of life in an international and multicultural context: What are major pathways linking leisure to quality of life ?. Social Indicators Research, 82 (2), 233 – 264. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11205-006-9032-z</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Jespersen, L., Michelsen, S., Tjørnhøj-Thomsen, T., Svensson, M., Holstein, B., & Due, P. (2019). Living with a disability: A qualitative study of associations between social relations, social participation and quality of life. Disability and Rehabilitation, 41 (11), 1275 – 1286. https://doi.org/10.1080/09638288.2018.1424949</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Kim, H., Woo, E., & Uysal, M. (2015). Tourism experience and quality of life among elderly tourists. Tourism Management, 46, 465 – 476. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tourman.2014.08.002</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Kober, R., & Eggleton, I. R. (2005). The effect of different types of employment on quality of life. Journal of Intellectual Disability Research, 49 (10), 756 – 760. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2788.2005.00746.x</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Koot, H., & Wallander, J. (2014). Quality of life in child and adolescent illness: Concepts, methods and findings. Routledge.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Lakhani, A., Dema, S., Hose, J., Erdem, N., Wollersheim, D., Grimbeek, P., & Charlifue, S. (2022). What happens post‐lockdown for people with disability? Autonomy, quality of life, service access and health changes for people with spinal cord injury in Victoria, Australia after COVID‐19 social distancing restrictions. Health & Social Care in the Community, 30 (6), e5366 – e5377. https://doi.org/10.1111/hsc.13958</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Levasseur, M., Desrosiers, J., & Noreau, L. (2004). Is social participation associated with quality of life of older adults with physical disabilities? Disability and Rehabilitation, 26 (20), 1206 – 1213. https://doi.org/10.1080/09638280412331270371</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Levasseur, M., Desrosiers, J., & Whiteneck, G. (2010). Accomplishment level and satisfaction with social participation of older adults: Association with quality of life and best correlates. Quality of Life Research, 19 (5), 665 – 675. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-010-9633-5</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Mah, J. K., Thannhauser, J. E., Kolski, H., & Dewey, D. (2008). Parental stress and quality of life in children with neuromuscular disease. Pediatric Neurology, 39 (2), 102 – 107. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pediatrneurol.2008.04.011</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Maruyama, S., & Morimoto, K. (1996). Effects of long workhours on life-style, stress and quality of life among intermediate Japanese managers. Scandinavian Journal of Work, Environment & Health, 22 (5), 353 – 359. https://doi.org/10.5271/sjweh.153</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> McLean, A., Jarus, T., Hubley, A., & Jongbloed, L. (2014). Associations between social participation and subjective quality of life for adults with moderate to severe traumatic brain injury. Disability and Rehabilitation, 36 (17), 1409 – 1418. https://doi.org/10.3109/09638288.2013.834986</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Memisevic, H., Hadzic, S., Ibralic Biscevic, I., & Mujkanovic, E. (2017). Quality of life of people with disabilities in Bosnia and Herzegovina–is there a moderating effect of the health status? Scandinavian Journal of Disability Research, 19 (4), 375 – 382. https://doi.org/10.1080/15017419.2017.1279076</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Moradi, S., Fekrazad, H., Mousavi, M., & Arshi, M. (2013). The study of relationship between social participation and quality of life of old people who are member of senior association of Tehran City in 2011. Iranian Journal of Ageing, 7 (4), 41 – 46.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Neal, J. D., Uysal, M., & Sirgy, M. J. (2007). The effect of tourism services on travelers' quality of life. Journal of Travel Research, 46 (2), 154 – 163. https://doi.org/10.1177/0047287507303977</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Ngamaba, K. H., Webber, M., Xanthopoulou, P., Chevalier, A., & Giacco, D. (2023). Participation in leisure activities and quality of life of people with psychosis in England: A multi-site cross-sectional study. Annals of General Psychiatry, 22 (1), 8. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12991-023-00438-1</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Nordheim, T., Rustøen, T., Solevåg, A. L., Småstuen, M. C., & Nakstad, B. (2018). Hope in parents of very-low birth weight infants and its association with parenting stress and quality of life. Journal of Pediatric Nursing, 38, 53 – 58. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pedn.2017.10.006</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Odden, M. C., Whooley, M. A., & Shlipak, M. G. (2006). Depression, stress, and quality of life in persons with chronic kidney disease: The heart and soul study. Nephron Clinical Practice, 103 (1), 1 – 7. https://doi.org/10.1159/000090112</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Oppermann, M., & Cooper, M. (1999). Outbound travel and quality of life: The effect of airline price wars. Journal of Business Research, 44 (3), 179 – 188. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0148-2963(97)00199-9</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Pettinicchio, D., Maroto, M., Chai, L., & Lukk, M. (2021). Findings from an online survey on the mental health effects of COVID-19 on Canadians with disabilities and chronic health conditions. Disability and Health Journal, 14 (3), 101085. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dhjo.2021.101085</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Ralph, K., Morris, E. A., & Kwon, J. (2022). Disability, access to out-of-home activities, and subjective well-being. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 163, 209 – 227. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tra.2022.06.006</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Reisine, S., Fifield, J., Walsh, S., & Dauser, D. (2004). Employment and quality of life outcomes among women with fibromyalgia compared to healthy controls. Women & Health, 39 (4), 1 – 19. https://doi.org/10.1300/J013v39n04_01</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Ribeiro, Í. J., Pereira, R., Freire, I. V., de Oliveira, B. G., Casotti, C. A., & Boery, E. N. (2018). Stress and quality of life among university students: A systematic literature review. Health Professions Education, 4 (2), 70 – 77. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.hpe.2017.03.002</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Robertson, J., Beyer, S., Emerson, E., Baines, S., & Hatton, C. (2019). The association between employment and the health of people with intellectual disabilities: A systematic review. Journal of Applied Research in Intellectual Disabilities, 32 (6), 1335 – 1348. https://doi.org/10.1111/jar.12632</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Schall, A., Tesky, V. A., Adams, A. K., & Pantel, J. (2018). Art museum-based intervention to promote emotional well-being and improve quality of life in people with dementia: The ARTEMIS project. Dementia (London, England), 17 (6), 728 – 743. https://doi.org/10.1177/1471301217730451</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Scheffers, F., Moonen, X., & van Vugt, E. (2021). Assessing the quality of support and discovering sources of resilience during COVID-19 measures in people with intellectual disabilities by professional carers. Research in Developmental Disabilities, 111, 103889. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ridd.2021.103889</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Schubert, I., Sohre, A., & Ströbel, M. (2020). The role of lifestyle, quality of life preferences and geographical context in personal air travel. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 28 (10), 1519 – 1550. https://doi.org/10.1080/09669582.2020.1745214</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Shikako-Thomas, K., Kolehmainen, N., Ketelaar, M., Bult, M., & Law, M. (2014). Promoting leisure participation as part of health and well-being in children and youth with cerebral palsy. Journal of Child Neurology, 29 (8), 1125 – 1133. https://doi.org/10.1177/0883073814533422</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Sirgy, M. J. (2010). Toward a quality-of-life theory of leisure travel satisfaction. Journal of Travel Research, 49 (2), 246 – 260. https://doi.org/10.1177/0047287509337416</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Tesky, V. A., Schall, A., Schulze, U., Stangier, U., Oswald, F., Knopf, M., König, J., Blettner, M., Aren, E., & Pantel, J. (2019). Depression in the nursing home: A cluster-randomized stepped-wedge study to probe the effectiveness of a novel case management approach to improve treatment (the DAVOS project). Trials, 20, 1 – 8. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13063-0193534-x</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Theis, N., Campbell, N., De Leeuw, J., Owen, M., & Schenke, K. C. (2021). The effects of COVID-19 restrictions on physical activity and mental health of children and young adults with physical and/or intellectual disabilities. Disability and Health Journal, 14 (3), 101064. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dhjo.2021.101064</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Tobin, M., Drager, K., & Richardson, L. (2014). A systematic review of social participation for adults with autism spectrum disorders: Support, social functioning, and quality of life. Research in Autism Spectrum Disorders, 8 (3), 214 – 229. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rasd.2013.12.002</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Urzúa, A., Miranda-Castillo, C., Caqueo-Urízar, A., & Mascayano, F. (2013). Do cultural values affect quality of life evaluation? Social Indicators Research, 114 (3), 1295 – 1313. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11205-012-0203-9</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Wooldridge, J. (2009). Introductory Econometrics: A modern approach. South-Western College Publishing.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> World Health Organization. (2021). Disability and health. Retrieved January 12, 2022, from https://<ulink href="http://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/disability-and-health">www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/disability-and-health</ulink></bibtext> </blist> </ref> <aug> <p>By Hyejin Yoon; Jimin Shim; Won Seok Lee and Joonho Moon</p> <p>Reported by Author; Author; Author; Author</p> </aug> <nolink nlid="nl1" bibid="bib44" firstref="ref1"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl2" bibid="bib59" firstref="ref3"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl3" bibid="bib66" firstref="ref4"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl4" bibid="bib62" firstref="ref5"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl5" bibid="bib38" firstref="ref6"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl6" bibid="bib23" firstref="ref7"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl7" bibid="bib51" firstref="ref9"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl8" bibid="bib57" firstref="ref10"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl9" bibid="bib19" firstref="ref15"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl10" bibid="bib47" firstref="ref16"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl11" bibid="bib56" firstref="ref17"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl12" bibid="bib61" firstref="ref18"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl13" bibid="bib37" firstref="ref20"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl14" bibid="bib22" firstref="ref22"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl15" bibid="bib20" firstref="ref24"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl16" bibid="bib39" firstref="ref25"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl17" bibid="bib45" firstref="ref26"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl18" bibid="bib63" firstref="ref27"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl19" bibid="bib32" firstref="ref29"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl20" bibid="bib40" firstref="ref30"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl21" bibid="bib34" firstref="ref33"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl22" bibid="bib43" firstref="ref41"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl23" bibid="bib24" firstref="ref50"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl24" bibid="bib25" firstref="ref51"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl25" bibid="bib64" firstref="ref52"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl26" bibid="bib12" firstref="ref55"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl27" bibid="bib18" firstref="ref57"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl28" bibid="bib50" firstref="ref58"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl29" bibid="bib58" firstref="ref59"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl30" bibid="bib60" firstref="ref60"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl31" bibid="bib46" firstref="ref61"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl32" bibid="bib35" firstref="ref62"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl33" bibid="bib13" firstref="ref64"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl34" bibid="bib31" firstref="ref65"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl35" bibid="bib36" firstref="ref67"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl36" bibid="bib11" firstref="ref69"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl37" bibid="bib10" firstref="ref70"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl38" bibid="bib53" firstref="ref71"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl39" bibid="bib29" firstref="ref72"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl40" bibid="bib14" firstref="ref73"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl41" bibid="bib15" firstref="ref74"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl42" bibid="bib55" firstref="ref75"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl43" bibid="bib16" firstref="ref76"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl44" bibid="bib41" firstref="ref77"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl45" bibid="bib54" firstref="ref78"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl46" bibid="bib17" firstref="ref79"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl47" bibid="bib27" firstref="ref80"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl48" bibid="bib48" firstref="ref81"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl49" bibid="bib42" firstref="ref82"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl50" bibid="bib49" firstref="ref84"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl51" bibid="bib21" firstref="ref85"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl52" bibid="bib65" firstref="ref86"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl53" bibid="bib30" firstref="ref89"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl54" bibid="bib52" firstref="ref101"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl55" bibid="bib26" firstref="ref110"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl56" bibid="bib28" firstref="ref112"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl57" bibid="bib33" firstref="ref113"></nolink>
Header DbId: eric
DbLabel: ERIC
An: EJ1504263
AccessLevel: 3
PubType: Academic Journal
PubTypeId: academicJournal
PreciseRelevancyScore: 0
IllustrationInfo
Items – Name: Title
  Label: Title
  Group: Ti
  Data: Determinants of Quality of Life for People with Disabilities Using Panel Data Analysis
– Name: Language
  Label: Language
  Group: Lang
  Data: English
– Name: Author
  Label: Authors
  Group: Au
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Hyejin+Yoon%22">Hyejin Yoon</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Jimin+Shim%22">Jimin Shim</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Won+Seok+Lee%22">Won Seok Lee</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Joonho+Moon%22">Joonho Moon</searchLink>
– Name: TitleSource
  Label: Source
  Group: Src
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="SO" term="%22International+Journal+of+Disability%2C+Development+and+Education%22"><i>International Journal of Disability, Development and Education</i></searchLink>. 2026 73(1):196-210.
– Name: Avail
  Label: Availability
  Group: Avail
  Data: Routledge. Available from: Taylor & Francis, Ltd. 530 Walnut Street Suite 850, Philadelphia, PA 19106. Tel: 800-354-1420; Tel: 215-625-8900; Fax: 215-207-0050; Web site: http://www.tandf.co.uk/journals
– Name: PeerReviewed
  Label: Peer Reviewed
  Group: SrcInfo
  Data: Y
– Name: Pages
  Label: Page Count
  Group: Src
  Data: 15
– Name: DatePubCY
  Label: Publication Date
  Group: Date
  Data: 2026
– Name: TypeDocument
  Label: Document Type
  Group: TypDoc
  Data: Journal Articles<br />Reports - Research
– Name: Subject
  Label: Descriptors
  Group: Su
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Quality+of+Life%22">Quality of Life</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Disabilities%22">Disabilities</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Data+Analysis%22">Data Analysis</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Social+Experience%22">Social Experience</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Participation%22">Participation</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Foreign+Countries%22">Foreign Countries</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Cultural+Activities%22">Cultural Activities</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Travel%22">Travel</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Employment%22">Employment</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Stress+Variables%22">Stress Variables</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Barriers%22">Barriers</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Leisure+Time%22">Leisure Time</searchLink>
– Name: Subject
  Label: Geographic Terms
  Group: Su
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22South+Korea%22">South Korea</searchLink>
– Name: DOI
  Label: DOI
  Group: ID
  Data: 10.1080/1034912X.2024.2361271
– Name: ISSN
  Label: ISSN
  Group: ISSN
  Data: 1034-912X<br />1465-346X
– Name: Abstract
  Label: Abstract
  Group: Ab
  Data: This research aims to examine the determinants of the quality of life for people with disabilities using panel data. Through a review of the extant literature, this research proposes five attributes to account for differences in the quality of life for people with disabilities: social participation, cultural activity participation, travel, employment, and stress. For the data collection, this study employed the Panel Survey of Employment for people with disabilities data from 2016 to 2018, which is published by the Korea employment agency. In total, there are 11,467 valid observations available. This study implemented descriptive statistics, correlation matrix, and econometric analysis for the archival data analysis. The results indicate that the quality of life of a person with a disability is enhanced by participation in social, cultural activities, travel, and employment; meanwhile, the quality of life for people with disabilities is negatively influenced by stress. This study presents relevant implications given the results of the data analysis.
– Name: AbstractInfo
  Label: Abstractor
  Group: Ab
  Data: As Provided
– Name: DateEntry
  Label: Entry Date
  Group: Date
  Data: 2026
– Name: AN
  Label: Accession Number
  Group: ID
  Data: EJ1504263
PLink https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&site=eds-live&db=eric&AN=EJ1504263
RecordInfo BibRecord:
  BibEntity:
    Identifiers:
      – Type: doi
        Value: 10.1080/1034912X.2024.2361271
    Languages:
      – Text: English
    PhysicalDescription:
      Pagination:
        PageCount: 15
        StartPage: 196
    Subjects:
      – SubjectFull: Quality of Life
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Disabilities
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Data Analysis
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Social Experience
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Participation
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Foreign Countries
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Cultural Activities
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Travel
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Employment
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Stress Variables
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Barriers
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Leisure Time
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: South Korea
        Type: general
    Titles:
      – TitleFull: Determinants of Quality of Life for People with Disabilities Using Panel Data Analysis
        Type: main
  BibRelationships:
    HasContributorRelationships:
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Hyejin Yoon
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Jimin Shim
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Won Seok Lee
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Joonho Moon
    IsPartOfRelationships:
      – BibEntity:
          Dates:
            – D: 01
              M: 01
              Type: published
              Y: 2026
          Identifiers:
            – Type: issn-print
              Value: 1034-912X
            – Type: issn-electronic
              Value: 1465-346X
          Numbering:
            – Type: volume
              Value: 73
            – Type: issue
              Value: 1
          Titles:
            – TitleFull: International Journal of Disability, Development and Education
              Type: main
ResultId 1