Disability terminology: the use of "disability," "disorder," and "illness" in academic writing.

Purpose: The ways in which words are used to describe and discuss people with disabilities has long been an area of social concern. Previous research has demonstrated that language can overtly and subtly influence cognitions and perceptions of individuals, but there is less research on how language relates to perceptions of individuals with disabilities. Materials and methods: A content analysis of 236 peer-reviewed articles was performed to explore differences in the frequency of the use of "disability," "disorder," and "illness" in academic articles related to eight common conditions: deafness, blindness, multiple sclerosis, quadriplegia, anxiety, depression, schizophrenia, and addiction. Results: Results indicated that there were differences in how disability language was used by academic writers. Specifically, "disability" appeared in the writing more frequently in articles related to physical disabilities, "disorder" appeared most frequently in articles related to anxiety and depression, and "illness" appeared most frequently in articles related to schizophrenia. Conclusions: This observed difference in frequency use could reflect differences in the context and meaning of the use of these conditions. Suggestions for future research are discussed. IMPLICATIONS FOR REHABILITATION: The way individuals write and talk about conditions may indicate the way they think about the conditions. When compared to articles written about physical conditions, the term "disability" is used less by academic writers than when discussing mental conditions. This suggests that academic writers may view mental conditions as less "prototypical" disabilities (compared to physical conditions). Careful consideration should be given to the language used when discussing all types of disabilities. When writers, media professionals, policymakers, and the public are educated on the diverse range of conditions and the unique challenges they present to individuals, only then can rehabilitation be truly comprehensive and effective. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]