Factors affecting university students with SEN's disclosure of their diagnoses to their peers

In recent years, more students with Special Educational Needs (SEN) have been enrolled in universities. These students may have a dilemma of whether to disclose their diagnosis to their peers. Current literature tends to focus on understanding these students’ experiences of disclosing to their peers or educational institutions in a qualitative manner. However, there has been limited quantitative research on understanding the factors influencing the students’ decision to disclose to their peers. Using a mixed-method design, this study aimed to explore the relationship between the seven independent factors (i.e., four demographic factors – age, gender, type of invisible SEN, and years since receiving the formal diagnosis, and three psychological factors – stigma, social desirability, and culture), and the quantity (i.e., number of peers they disclose their diagnosis to) and quality (i.e., how much detail is shared during their disclosure) of the disclosure of their SEN diagnosis to their peers.

Before conducting the main study, we conducted a pilot study with 30 students with SEN (mean age = 24.17 years, SD = 2.74) to seek feedback on the suitability and readability of specifically this newly developed scale: SEN Self-Disclosure Scale (SENDS). The newly developed SENDS was then edited and used for the main study. The main study was administered as an online survey where participants completed questionnaires related to the quality of disclosure, stigma, social desirability, and culture. Participants were also asked to provide their qualitative responses related to reasons for disclosure and non-disclosure. Sample consisted of 102 students (mean age = 23.02 years, SD = 2.58) who were formally diagnosed with Specific Learning Disorder, Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder, and Autism Spectrum Disorder and were enrolled in local autonomous universities in Singapore.

Based on the quantitative responses, the seven predictors were not statistically significant in predicting the number of peers (quantity) to whom the participants disclosed their diagnosis. However, both the demographic predictors, and the psychological predictors (after accounting for the demographic predictors) were statistically significant in predicting the amount of details (quality) that the participants disclosed to their peers. We also found that the type of SEN that the participant was diagnosed with was also an individual predictor that could predict the quality of disclosure.

Based on qualitative responses, we found that themes related to reasons for disclosure of diagnosis included (1) When they trust their peer, (2) For practical reasons, and (3) Part of their identity. Another three themes related to reasons for non-disclosure were (1) Prejudice and Stigma, (2) Don’t see the need to disclose, and (3) Don’t trust their peers. These qualitative responses complemented our quantitative data by providing additional factors or further evidence to the factors we had previously identified.

From the results, several practical implications have been proposed to increase the students’ awareness of the positive outcomes of diagnosis disclosure in higher education setting. By promoting a more inclusive learning environment, students with SEN may feel more comfortable and trusting in their peers, and in turn, may disclose their diagnosis and share their experiences. Possible limitations and future directions for the study were further discussed in this dissertation.