Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-dk4vv Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-28T01:18:21.377Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Role of Emotions in the Process of Making Choices about Welfare Services: The Experiences of Disabled People in England

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 March 2013

Kate Baxter  and
Caroline Glendinning
Kate Baxter
Affiliation:
Social Policy Research Unit, University of York E-mail: [email protected]
Caroline Glendinning
Affiliation:
Social Policy Research Unit, University of York E-mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Choice is central to developments in many areas of welfare. Making choices, for example about health, social care, employment and housing, can be very emotional. This article draws on theories from experimental psychology and behavioural economics to analyse empirical evidence from a longitudinal, qualitative study of support-related choices. It argues that if people are expected to make emotion-laden choices, and to minimise negative aspects associated with the process of making a choice, they need to be supported in doing so. It contributes to the limited evidence and debate to date about the process costs to individuals of choice.

Keywords

Choicedecision-makingdisabled peopleemotions
Type
Themed Section on Welfare State Reform, Recognition and Emotional Labour
Information
Social Policy and Society , Volume 12 , Issue 3 , July 2013 , pp. 439 - 450
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2013 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Allingham, M. (2002) Choice Theory: A Very Short Introduction, New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Appleby, J., Harrison, A. and Devlin, N. (2003) What Is the Real Cost of More Patient Choice?, London: Kings Fund.Google Scholar
Barnett, J., Ogden, J. and Daniells, E. (2008) ‘The value of choice: a qualitative study’, British Journal of General Practice, 58, 554, 609–13.Google Scholar
Baxter, K. and Glendinning, C. (2011) ‘Making choices about support services: disabled adults’ and older people's use of information’, Health and Social Care in the Community, 19, 3, 272–79.Google Scholar
Beattie, J., Baron, J., Hershey, J. C. and Spranca, M. D. (1994) ‘Psychological determinants of decision attitude’, Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 7, 2, 129–44.Google Scholar
Beresford, B. and Sloper, P. (2008) Understanding the Dynamics of Decision-Making and Choice: A Scoping Study of Key Psychological Theories to Inform the Design and Analysis of the Panel Study, York: Social Policy Research Unit, University of York.Google Scholar
Bettman, J. (1979) An Information Processing Theory of Consumer Choice, Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.Google Scholar
Clarke, J. (2005) ‘New Labour's citizens: activated, empowered, responsibilized, abandoned?’, Critical Social Policy, 25, 4, 447–63.Google Scholar
Clarke, J., Newman, J. and Westmarland, L. (2008) ‘The antagonisms of choice: New Labour and the reform of public services’, Social Policy and Society, 7, 2, 245–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clarke, J., Smith, N. and Vidler, E. (2006) ‘The indeterminacy of choice: political, policy and organisational implications’, Social Policy and Society, 5, 3, 327–36.Google Scholar
Connolly, T. and Reb, J. (2005) ‘Regret in cancer-related decisions’, Health Psychology, 24, 4, S29–S34.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Coulter, A., Le Maistre, N. and Henderson, L. (2005) Patients’ Experience of Choosing where to Undergo Surgical Treatment: Evaluation of London Patient Choice Scheme, Oxford: Picker Institute.Google Scholar
Department of Health (2001) The Expert Patient: A New Approach to Chronic Disease Management for the 21st Century, London: Department of Health.Google Scholar
Ellis, K. (2007) ‘Direct payments and social work practice: the significance of “street-level bureaucracy” in determining eligibility’, British Journal of Social Work, 37, 3, 405–22.Google Scholar
Ferguson, I. (2007) ‘Increasing user choice or privatizing risk? The antinomies of personalization’, British Journal of Social Work, 37, 3, 387–403.Google Scholar
Folkman, S. and Lazarus, R. (1988) ‘Coping as a mediator of emotion’, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54, 3, 466–75.Google Scholar
Glendinning, C. (2008) ‘Increasing choice and control for older and disabled people: a critical review of new developments in England’, Social Policy and Administration, 42, 3, 451–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Greve, B. (2009) ‘Editorial introduction’, Social Policy and Administration, 43, 6, 539–42.Google Scholar
Hochschild, A. R. (2005) ‘Rent a mom and other services: markets, meanings and emotions’, International Journal of Work Organisation and Emotion, 1, 1, 74–86.Google Scholar
Hudson, B. (2009) ‘Captives of bureaucracy’, Community Care, 1765, 9 April, 30–1.Google Scholar
Kahneman, D. and Tversky, A. (1984) ‘Choices, values, and frames’, American Psychologist, 39, 4, 341–50.Google Scholar
Lemerise, E. A. and Arsenio, W. F. (2000) ‘An integrated model of emotion processes and cognition in social information processing’, Child Development, 71, 1, 107–18.Google Scholar
Lundsgaard, J. (2005) Consumer Direction and Choice in Long-Term Care for Older Persons, Including Payments for Informal Care: How Can it Help Improve Care Outcomes, Employment and Fiscal Sustainability? OECD Health Working Papers, No. 20, Paris: OECD Publishing, doi:10.1787/616882407515.Google Scholar
Maddison, J. and Beresford, B. (2012) ‘The development of satisfaction with service-related choices for disabled young people with degenerative conditions: evidence from parents’ accounts’, Health and Social Care in the Community, 20, 4, 388–99.Google Scholar
Miles, M. B. and Huberman, A. M. (1994) Qualitative Data Analysis: An Expanded Sourcebook, London: Sage.Google Scholar
Morris, J. (2006) ‘Independent living: the role of the disability movement in the development of government policy’, in Glendinning, C. and Kemp, P. A. (eds.), Cash and Care: Policy Challenges in the Welfare State, Bristol: Policy Press, pp. 235–48.Google Scholar
Murphy, J., Tester, S., Hubbard, G., Downs, M. and MacDonald, C. (2005) ‘Enabling frail older people with a communication difficulty to express their views: the use of Talking Mats™ as an interview tool’, Health and Social Care in the Community, 13, 2, 95–107.Google Scholar
Rabiee, P. (2012) ‘Exploring the relationships between choice and independence: experiences of disabled and older people’, British Journal of Social Work, doi: 10.1093/bjsw/bcs022.Google Scholar
Ritchie, J. and Spencer, L. (1994) ‘Qualitative data analysis for applied policy research’, in Bryman, A. and Burgess, R. G. (eds.), Analysing Qualitative Data, London: Routledge, pp. 173–94.Google Scholar
Schwartz, B. (2004) The Paradox of Choice: Why More Is Less, New York: Harper Collins.Google Scholar
Simon, H. A. (1955) ‘A behavioral model of rational choice’, Quarterly Journal of Economics, 69, 1, 99–118.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Social Policy and Administration (2009) ‘Special issue: Choice – challenges and perspectives for the European welfare states’, Social Policy and Administration, 43, 6, 539–679.Google Scholar
Social Policy and Society (2008) ‘Themed section: choice or voice? The impact of consumerism on public services’, Social Policy and Society, 7, 2, 197–268.Google Scholar
Squire, S. and Hill, P. (2006) ‘The expert patients programme’, Clinical Governance: An International Journal, 11, 17–21.Google Scholar
Tiedens, L. Z. and Linton, S. (2001) ‘Judgment under emotional certainty and uncertainty: the effects of specific emotions on information processing’, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 81, 6, 973–88.Google Scholar