Arielle Silverman self-identifies as “blind and Jewish since birth,” and in this co-authored study, she examines the unintended consequences of disability experience simulations. Generally driven by equity, diversity, and inclusion (EDI) motives, these are brief exercises in which nondisabled people temporarily simulate disabilities (e.g., by using a wheelchair for 30 minutes or wearing a blindfold for 20 minutes while completing a task). The researchers hypothesized that disability simulation exercises would decrease perception of disabled people’s capabilities. Two experiments involving a total of 255 undergraduate students supported this hypothesis.
In the primary experiment, students were randomly assigned to a condition, and told they would be completing tasks with or without an impairment. One condition simulated blindness with blindfolds. Another condition simulated amputation with a sling behind students’ backs. In a control condition, participants completed the tasks without impairment. There were four tasks: walking around the lab, filling a glass with water, sorting coins, and writing on the board. After completing the tasks, participants answered questions about the capabilities of blind people.
Participants who experienced blindness simulation rated blind people as less capable than both the control group and the amputee simulation group. These findings challenge the intended goals of these simulations, which generally include fostering empathy and increasing outreach to disabled people. Instead, findings suggest a need for social interventions to undergo ongoing evaluation so as to make sure they are accomplishing their intended goals and not causing unintended harm.
