{"id":{"repo_id":"exeter","oai_identifier":"oai:figshare.com:article/31796281"},"canonical_url":"https://search.dev.ndltd.org/etd/exeter/oai:figshare.com:article/31796281","repository":{"repo_id":"exeter","name":"University of Exeter","base_url":"https://api.figshare.com/v2/oai"},"display":{"title":"Under Pressure: A Joint Analysis of Disability Inclusion in Clinical Psychology Training","abstract":"Introduction: While the inclusion of trainees with disabilities (TwDs) is a stated priority for UK Clinical Psychology (CP) programmes, TwDs often report access barriers and stigma. There is little understanding of the experiences of TwDs in the UK or effective strategies to enhance their inclusion. While their views and those of their trainers are often absent from discussions on inclusion changes. Methods: A mixed-methods survey, involving both closed and open-ended questions, was developed to collect experiences of disabled trainees. Adopting a critical realist approach, the study examined these experiences through a participatory process. Joint Analysis (JA) sessions brought together trainers, TwDs and the research team as co-researchers to jointly interpret the survey data. Analytic foci were collaboratively selected for each group, with three iterative sessions facilitating collaborative meaning-making of preselected data. This process enabled the co-production of outcomes and robust best-practice recommendations. Results: Co-researchers identified delays and inconsistencies in implementing reasonable adjustments, that necessitated repeated disclosures and self-advocacy from TwDs. Findings indicated inconsistent national processes or structural support for embedding disability inclusion in CP programmes. Analysts co-developed evidence-based recommendations to address these challenges. JA sessions demonstrated the value of participatory research and co-production, enhancing the credibility of outcomes by including stakeholders in the generation of recommendations. Conclusion: The study highlights inequities faced by TwDs and offers evidence-based recommendations for more inclusive CP training delivery. Participatory JA generated actionable insights, and this success demonstrated the potential of collaborative approaches to inform systemic reforms in the future that require the careful integration of diverse perspectives, such as co-producing inclusive curricula.<p></p>","abstract_html":"Introduction: While the inclusion of trainees with disabilities (TwDs) is a stated priority for UK Clinical Psychology (CP) programmes, TwDs often report access barriers and stigma. There is little understanding of the experiences of TwDs in the UK or effective strategies to enhance their inclusion. While their views and those of their trainers are often absent from discussions on inclusion changes. Methods: A mixed-methods survey, involving both closed and open-ended questions, was developed to collect experiences of disabled trainees. Adopting a critical realist approach, the study examined these experiences through a participatory process. Joint Analysis (JA) sessions brought together trainers, TwDs and the research team as co-researchers to jointly interpret the survey data. Analytic foci were collaboratively selected for each group, with three iterative sessions facilitating collaborative meaning-making of preselected data. This process enabled the co-production of outcomes and robust best-practice recommendations. Results: Co-researchers identified delays and inconsistencies in implementing reasonable adjustments, that necessitated repeated disclosures and self-advocacy from TwDs. Findings indicated inconsistent national processes or structural support for embedding disability inclusion in CP programmes. Analysts co-developed evidence-based recommendations to address these challenges. JA sessions demonstrated the value of participatory research and co-production, enhancing the credibility of outcomes by including stakeholders in the generation of recommendations. Conclusion: The study highlights inequities faced by TwDs and offers evidence-based recommendations for more inclusive CP training delivery. Participatory JA generated actionable insights, and this success demonstrated the potential of collaborative approaches to inform systemic reforms in the future that require the careful integration of diverse perspectives, such as co-producing inclusive curricula.&lt;p&gt;&lt;/p&gt;","abstract_has_math":false,"creators":["Ronja Doerbecker (21041882)"],"institution":null,"degree_name":null,"degree_level":null,"degree_discipline":null,"degree_department":null,"school":null,"contributors":[],"advisors":[],"committee_chairs":[],"committee_members":[],"year":2026,"date_issued":"2026-03-16T00:00:00Z","date_published":"2026-03-16T00:00:00Z","updated_at":"2026-07-27T19:33:56Z","subjects":["Disability","Inclusion","Clinical Psychology Training"],"languages":[],"rights":["All rights reserved","Open Access after 2027-09-17"],"rights_urls":[],"identifier_entries":[{"key":"dc:identifier","label":"Identifier","values":["10779/exe.31796281.v1"],"render_values":[{"text":"10779/exe.31796281.v1","href":null,"code":true}]}]},"links":{"outbound_url":null,"outbound_label":null,"outbound_source":null},"metadata_groups":[{"id":"people","label":"People","entries":[{"key":"dc:creator","label":"Author","values":["Ronja Doerbecker (21041882)"]}]},{"id":"academic_context","label":"Academic Context","entries":[{"key":"dc:date","label":"Dc Date","values":["2026-03-16T00:00:00Z"]},{"key":"dc:relation","label":"Dc Relation","values":["https://figshare.com/articles/thesis/Under_Pressure_A_Joint_Analysis_of_Disability_Inclusion_in_Clinical_Psychology_Training/31796281"]},{"key":"dc:type","label":"Dc Type","values":["Text","Thesis"]}]},{"id":"subjects_keywords","label":"Subjects and Keywords","entries":[{"key":"dc:subject","label":"Dc Subject","values":["Disability","Inclusion","Clinical Psychology Training"]}]},{"id":"language_rights","label":"Language and Rights","entries":[{"key":"dc:rights","label":"Dc Rights","values":["All rights reserved","Open Access after 2027-09-17"]}]},{"id":"identifiers","label":"Identifiers","entries":[{"key":"dc:identifier","label":"Identifier","values":["10779/exe.31796281.v1"]}]},{"id":"additional","label":"Additional Metadata","entries":[{"key":"dc:description","label":"Description","values":["Introduction: While the inclusion of trainees with disabilities (TwDs) is a stated priority for UK Clinical Psychology (CP) programmes, TwDs often report access barriers and stigma. There is little understanding of the experiences of TwDs in the UK or effective strategies to enhance their inclusion. While their views and those of their trainers are often absent from discussions on inclusion changes. Methods: A mixed-methods survey, involving both closed and open-ended questions, was developed to collect experiences of disabled trainees. Adopting a critical realist approach, the study examined these experiences through a participatory process. Joint Analysis (JA) sessions brought together trainers, TwDs and the research team as co-researchers to jointly interpret the survey data. Analytic foci were collaboratively selected for each group, with three iterative sessions facilitating collaborative meaning-making of preselected data. This process enabled the co-production of outcomes and robust best-practice recommendations. Results: Co-researchers identified delays and inconsistencies in implementing reasonable adjustments, that necessitated repeated disclosures and self-advocacy from TwDs. Findings indicated inconsistent national processes or structural support for embedding disability inclusion in CP programmes. Analysts co-developed evidence-based recommendations to address these challenges. JA sessions demonstrated the value of participatory research and co-production, enhancing the credibility of outcomes by including stakeholders in the generation of recommendations. Conclusion: The study highlights inequities faced by TwDs and offers evidence-based recommendations for more inclusive CP training delivery. Participatory JA generated actionable insights, and this success demonstrated the potential of collaborative approaches to inform systemic reforms in the future that require the careful integration of diverse perspectives, such as co-producing inclusive curricula.<p></p>"]},{"key":"dc:title","label":"Title","values":["Under Pressure: A Joint Analysis of Disability Inclusion in Clinical Psychology Training"]}]}],"canonical_facts":{"dc:creator":["Ronja Doerbecker (21041882)"],"dc:date":["2026-03-16T00:00:00Z"],"dc:description":["Introduction: While the inclusion of trainees with disabilities (TwDs) is a stated priority for UK Clinical Psychology (CP) programmes, TwDs often report access barriers and stigma. There is little understanding of the experiences of TwDs in the UK or effective strategies to enhance their inclusion. While their views and those of their trainers are often absent from discussions on inclusion changes. Methods: A mixed-methods survey, involving both closed and open-ended questions, was developed to collect experiences of disabled trainees. Adopting a critical realist approach, the study examined these experiences through a participatory process. Joint Analysis (JA) sessions brought together trainers, TwDs and the research team as co-researchers to jointly interpret the survey data. Analytic foci were collaboratively selected for each group, with three iterative sessions facilitating collaborative meaning-making of preselected data. This process enabled the co-production of outcomes and robust best-practice recommendations. Results: Co-researchers identified delays and inconsistencies in implementing reasonable adjustments, that necessitated repeated disclosures and self-advocacy from TwDs. Findings indicated inconsistent national processes or structural support for embedding disability inclusion in CP programmes. Analysts co-developed evidence-based recommendations to address these challenges. JA sessions demonstrated the value of participatory research and co-production, enhancing the credibility of outcomes by including stakeholders in the generation of recommendations. Conclusion: The study highlights inequities faced by TwDs and offers evidence-based recommendations for more inclusive CP training delivery. Participatory JA generated actionable insights, and this success demonstrated the potential of collaborative approaches to inform systemic reforms in the future that require the careful integration of diverse perspectives, such as co-producing inclusive curricula.<p></p>"],"dc:identifier":["10779/exe.31796281.v1"],"dc:relation":["https://figshare.com/articles/thesis/Under_Pressure_A_Joint_Analysis_of_Disability_Inclusion_in_Clinical_Psychology_Training/31796281"],"dc:rights":["All rights reserved","Open Access after 2027-09-17"],"dc:subject":["Disability","Inclusion","Clinical Psychology Training"],"dc:title":["Under Pressure: A Joint Analysis of Disability Inclusion in Clinical Psychology Training"],"dc:type":["Text","Thesis"]},"updated_at":"2026-07-27T19:33:56Z"}