Environmental Impacts on the Occupational Performance of Non-Binary Individuals

Statement of Purpose: This study proposes to explore the experiences of non-binary individuals in their performance of daily occupations and how environmental factors alter the ability to function in those occupations.

Description of Methods: The present research uses a qualitative case study design. After the initial screening, based on exclusion and inclusion criteria, three to five participants are chosen via chain referral to participate in a two-step, semi-structured interview in order to collect qualitative data. The first interview captures the general impact of the interviewees’ identity on meaningful occupations. The second interview is centered around the use of photo-elicitation; participants provide photographic material of the environment in which they carry out meaningful occupations. The photos are used to elicit a conversation about the participants' environmental experiences, environmental barriers, and facilitators influencing occupational performance and participation. Braun and Clarke’s (2006) thematic analysis will be implemented for data analysis along with Dedoose software for codes and themes taken from transcribed interviews. Methods selected to uphold rigor and trustworthiness include member checking, consensus coding among researchers, audit trails, and monthly reflective meetings to decrease biases.

Report of Results: This IRB approved study is currently underway and scheduled to conclude in August of 2019. The results will be documented in a final paper and poster presentation.

Discussion/Implications Related to Occupational Science: Current research addresses the transgender population, but does not often provide a distinction between binary and non-binary-in occupational science literature, it is severely lacking. This lack of acknowledgment in research could force those wanting to express another gender to fall into binary categories without the fluid choice of a non-binary identity. For example, Darwin’s (2017) research exemplifies the current literature’s focus on “doing gender,” but does not distinguish between the transgender binary and non-binary experiences. When reporting about gender transitions in the workplace, Phoenix and Ghul (2016) use the term transgender without making the distinction between binary and non-binary. In research conducted by Beagan et al. (2012), the study’s one of five 1 participants identified outside of the transgender binary group. This study is taking current research a step further by allowing non-binary individuals to be the center focus and acknowledged as unique individuals while simultaneously addressing the gap in the literature of occupational science.