Research Note on Special Olympics

Research Note on Special Olympics
Kazuo OGOURA

Background
For the purpose of comparing Special Olympics with the Paralympics, The Nippon
Foundation Paralympic Support Center’s Paralympic Research Group has carried out
research on various aspects of Special Olympics which can be used as a basis both toincrease public knowledge on Special Olympics and to lay the ground in Japan forencouraging further academic studies on this subject.
The research is composed of the following eight parts:
1.

Origin of Special Olympics

2.

Origin of Special Olympics in Japan

3.

The Significance of Special Olympics

4.

Features of Criteria for Participation, Sports, and Competition Rules

5.

Organization and Finance

6.

Effects and Impacts

7.

Special Olympics and Society

8.

Issues and challenges of Special Olympics

1.

Origin of Special Olympics

In her memoir, Kayoko Hosokawa, one of the leading figures in the establishmentof Special Olympics Nippon（SON）in 1994, gives a summary of the origin of Special
Olympics as below.
Special Olympics was established in 1968 by Eunice Kennedy Shriver, the sister ofJohn F. Kennedy. The Kennedys had nine children. Rosemary, their eldest daughter,
127

Journal of Paralympic Research Group vol.10

had intellectual disability. For a long time, her parents concealed this fact from thepublic. After consulting with John F. Kennedy, who had become President in 1961,
Eunice made her sister’s condition public by contributing “Hope for RetardedChildren”１） in the Saturday Evening Post in 1962. In the same year, she started
Camp Shriver, a day camp for children with intellectual disabilities in her home in
Maryland, in the U.S. Expanding her activities with the support of the Joseph
Kennedy Jr. Foundation, she organized the first International Special Olympics Gamesin Chicago in July 1968 and announced the establishment of Special Olympics２）（Note1）.
This implies that there are three key factors in exploring the origin of Special
Olympics: first, Eunice’s personal conviction and initiative in taking action; second,
political support from President Kennedy; and third, the support, including financial
support, of the Kennedy family and the cooperation of the people around them.
What lay behind the first of the three factors, Eunice’s personal conviction andpassion, was the shadow cast by her sister Rosemary. Rosemary’s intellectual
disability was caused by lack of oxygen during birth delivery. Her condition was notsevere at first. She played tennis, was good at swimming, travelled to Europe with
Eunice, and enjoyed mountain climbing in Switzerland. In her early twenties
however, she began to exhibit violent behavior. Her father decided that Rosemary
should have a lobotomy performed, but her condition worsened after the surgery.
Rosemary had to live her life in an institution.３）
What happened to Rosemary must have had a considerable impact on Eunice andprompted her to begin her work with people with intellectual disabilities.
At the same time, Eunice was deeply religious and her faith may have supported
her enthusiasm.４） She also liked sports. It is possible to draw the conclusion that allof these aspects in Eunice played a role in the establishment of Special Olympics.
It was, however, not only Eunice’s personal motivation that transformed her belief
and passion into concrete actions. There was also the trend of public opinion in the
U.S. at that time and the “political” turmoil surrounding the Kennedys.
Already in the 1950s, people such as Congressman John Fogarty of Rhode Island
and Archbishop of Boston Richard Cushing, who was close to the Kennedys, hadpromoted a social and political movement to address issues surrounding people with128

Research Note on Special Olympics

intellectual disability in the U.S. It helped lead to the enactment of a law in 1958 on
the training of teachers for educating and training people with intellectual
disabilities.５）
Against the backdrop of this trend in public opinion and with the urging of Eunice,
President John F. Kennedy announced the establishment of the Panel on Mental
Retardation in October 1961. The following year, the panel set up six task forces tobegin fully deliberating on the issues.６）
In addition to their enthusiasm in supporting people with intellectual disabilities,
these actions by President Kennedy and the people surrounding him may have been
politically motivated. President Kennedy, conscious of the significant contribution
made by Roosevelt in the treatment of polio and by Eisenhower in the treatment ofheart disease and cancer, may have had a political ambition to make a mark in thefield of medicine or welfare as President.７） The Kennedys, including Eunice, may also
have been politically motivated to make the family’s somewhat aristocratic or elitist
image less prominent by showing to the public their ardent efforts in addressing theissues of people with intellectual disabilities.８）
We should, however, not overlook the conflict between the Kennedys’ conscience,and the political considerations and public image, behind the Kennedys’ actions.
To begin with, for a long time, the Kennedys publicly “disguised” Rosemary’s
condition, saying that Rosemary was taking care of children with intellectual
disabilities in an institution. However, from around the time of the inauguration ofJohn F. Kennedy as President, the Kennedy family began to explain that Rosemary
was suffering from cerebral palsy.９） Considering the circumstances and timing ofthese announcements, Eunice’s contribution to the Saturday Evening Post in
September 1962 that called for improvement in the conditions of people withintellectual disabilities and that disclosed the truth about Rosemary’s condition, may
have been intended to avert criticism that it was politically inconsistent for the
President to be working in earnest on the issues of people with intellectual disabilities,
while trying to “conceal” the fact that he had a family member who had intellectual
disability. In other words, the Kennedy family may have taken action based on therealization that eliminating the tendency of families to “conceal” the existence of afamily member with intellectual disability was actually the first step in socially andpolitically addressing the issues of people with intellectual disabilities.
129

Journal of Paralympic Research Group vol.10

Furthermore, in looking at the developments that led from the Kennedy
administration’s work on issues of people with intellectual disability to theestablishment of Special Olympics, we cannot deny the role that President Kennedy’s
tragic death played in pushing Eunice in her efforts.10）
We must next turn to financial support and the cooperation of the people
surrounding the Kennedys. Against the backdrop of a boom in establishing familyfoundations in the U.S., Joseph Kennedy（the father of President Kennedy）, who had
made a fortune from real estate investment, set up the Mercié Foundation in May
1945 for charitable work for the education and protection of those suffering frompoverty and ill health, and for supporting the political and social activities of his
family members. In October of the same year, the foundation became the Joseph P.
Kennedy Jr. Foundation.11） From around 1947, Joseph Kennedy, who was in effect thehead of the foundation, decided partly with the influence of Archbishop Cushing of
Boston, that the foundation would start to provide support for people with intellectual
disabilities.12） However, the foundation’s support for projects related to people withintellectual disabilities seems to have made up only about 17% of all of the foundationʼs
expenditure in 1957.13） That percentage rose to 66% by 1960, which may have been
due to the expansion in the political activities of John F. Kennedy and Robert
Kennedy（Note 2）. The more active involvement of the U.S. Congress in issues ofpeople with intellectual disabilities from the latter half of the 1950s may also haveinfluenced the Kennedys’ stance.
Moreover, new initiatives were being launched in Connecticut and other places in
the U.S., based on the concept that rather than isolate people with intellectual
disabilities in institutions, it was important to build communities where people withintellectual disabilities could participate in activities, as noted by Eunice in her
contribution in the Saturday Evening Post. These developments may also haveinfluenced the Shrivers.
On the other hand, as support for people with intellectual disabilities expanded
beyond institutions and small local communities and developed into the Special
Olympics movement on a national scale, there was strong opposition that maintainedthat such an approach was unrealistic.14） In the face of such opposition, by 1962, theShrivers and a number of others had the idea of organizing a sporting event forpeople with intellectual disabilities with rules that were as rigorous as those of the130Research Note on Special Olympics

Olympics. The idea originated from the growing awareness among Eunice and others
like her, that people with intellectual disabilities can be encouraged to participate insports, but if it remained at the level of leisure or recreation, they would only beengaging in sports “passively.” For people with intellectual disability to adopt a more
active attitude and participate in sports with motivation, there was a need forsporting activities that introduced the principle of competition based on measurementof physical fitness and ability. Against this backdrop, the first International Special
Olympics Games was organized in Chicago in July 1968.15）

2.

Origin of Special Olympics in JapanThe origin of Special Olympics in Japan dates back to 1979. That year, Sadaaki
Yamamoto, an Anglican priest in Japan who was dedicated to the care and educationof people with intellectual disabilities and children with Down syndrome, and who ran
the St. Michael’s School as well as the Trainable School for early treatment andtraining of children with Down syndrome in Kamakura, visited the U.S., where hemet Eunice, who recommended Japan’s membership in Special Olympics.16） As
Yamamoto was launching activities for joining Special Olympics, Hideo Suzuki, who
had studied in the U.S. in 1974 and who had been deeply impressed with the Special
Olympics movement before returning to Japan to teach at Kanto Gakuin University,offered to support Yamamoto.17）
With the support of Suzuki, Yamamoto established the Japan Special Olympics
Committee （JSOC） in April 1980. In the following year, the first Japan Special
Olympics National Games were organized for the first time in Japan（Note 3）, and in
1983, JSOC sent 68 Japanese athletes to the sixth International Special Olympics
Summer Games in Louisiana, USA.18） The national games in Japan were organized in
1982, 1983, 1986, and 1987, but then were not organized for several years. In 1990 and
1991, the national games were organized under the banner of Japan Special Olympics
and Sports for the Mentally Retarded. We can conjecture that several factors were
responsible for this, including the site of the venue, which had to alternate between
Tokyo and Osaka（with the exception of the first national games which were held in
Fujisawa, Kanagawa）, the coordination between local and national organizations, the131Journal of Paralympic Research Group vol.10

relationship between supporters of Special Olympics and supporters of people withintellectual disabilities, conflicting views on the games’ orientation towards
competition, and issues related to securing funding and human resources19）（Note 4）.
Partly due to these complicated circumstances, JSOC decided to dissolve in May
1992. The national games for people with intellectual disabilities were organized in
November of the same year, as the National Sports Games for the Mentally Retarded
Yuaipic Tokyo.20）
Following the dissolution of JSOC, Katsuko Nakamura, a former physical educationteacher who had been deeply impressed with the spirit of Special Olympics througha meeting with Yamamoto in 1982, and who had organized the Special Olympics
Kumamoto Preparatory Committee for the 1983 International Games in Louisiana,
relaunched the movement in 1992, trying to win the support of local influential
figures.21） Nakamura contacted Kayoko Hosokawa and asked her for support.
Hosokawa responded and moved to revive JSOC and establish Special Olympics
Nippon（SON）.22）
It should be noted that this movement in Japan showed that there was a closer linkwith Special Olympics International （SOI） than before. This is apparent in theparticipation of a member of the Board of Directors of SOI at a briefing session on
Special Olympics held in October 199223） and the launch of the national organization
moving forward in step with sending athletes to the fifth Special Olympics World
Winter Games in March 1993 in Salzburg, Austria. At that time, Hosokawa’s husband
Morihiro（the 79th Prime Minister of Japan）had formed a new political party andwas becoming a central figure in the realignment of the national political landscape.
In her memoir, Kayoko recounts that she took care not to give the impression that
the Special Olympics movement was part of her husband’s political movement.24）
While that may be accurate, there is no doubt that the remarkable rise of Morihiro inpolitics indirectly provided a substantial backing to broaden support, within for
instance the business world and the mass media, for the movement that Kayoko waspromoting.25）
As a result, SON was established in November 1994（following the establishment ofSpecial Olympics Kumamoto in March 1993）and the first Special Olympics Nippon
Summer National Games were organized in Kumamoto in 1995.26）
In addition, the growing national interest and participation in volunteer activities in132

Research Note on Special Olympics

the wake of the Great Hanshin-Awaji Earthquake of January 1995, and the rising
corporate trend in strengthening corporate social responsibility may also havecontributed to the subsequent expansion of the Special Olympics movement.

3.

The Significance of Special Olympics

While the significance of Special Olympics can be deduced from its origin andhistory, we should to be precise, separate the meaning of Special Olympics in its roleas sports activities for people with intellectual disabilities, from its role as an eventwith an Olympics-like format.
In the significance of Special Olympics in its work in sports activities for people
with intellectual disabilities, one of its functions is improving and maintaining thehealth of people with intellectual disabilities.
A survey conducted not on people with intellectual disabilities but on those who
support them - families, volunteers, coaches, and sporting organizations, for example showed that “health and physical fitness” was one of the five factors identified asreasons for people with intellectual disabilities to participate in sports activities, in
responses such as “sports activities help to maintain health” and “sports activities leadto improved physical fitness.”27） It has also been noted that people with intellectual
disabilities generally tend to be more overweight than those without suchdisabilities,28） and there is much support for the view that exercise, particularly
intense exercise such as competitive sports, helps to reduce obesity and maintain
good health.
In addition to subjective motives, there are also objective factors that make sports
activities particularly important for the improvement and maintenance of health forpeople with intellectual disabilities. This is connected to the life expectancy of people
with intellectual disabilities, which is shorter than those without such disabilities, anda high mortality rate particularly among young people with intellectual disabilities.29）
It remains to be verified whether the short life expectancy and high mortality rate
are directly related to lack of exercise. It should be also examined what type of
exercise, including competitive sports, has any additional benefits beyond recreation
or basic physical exercise. A survey has shown improvement in physical fitness andskills among athletes who participate in regular training,30） but the results cannot be133

Journal of Paralympic Research Group vol.10

generalized, considering that the survey covers a limited number of events and asmall sample of athletes （Note 5）. It is also unclear whether improvement incompetitive performance can be linked directly with improvement in physical fitness
and health. Results of research conducted in Japan and abroad have shown that ingeneral, people with intellectual disabilities have a lower level of muscle strength anda smaller range of hip joint movement compared to those who do not have intellectual
disabilities,31） but it is debatable whether such a fact could be regarded as evidence oflack of exercise among people with intellectual disabilities and the need for exercise.
The cause and effect relationship could be seen as being the opposite.
Nevertheless, improvement of health of people with intellectual disabilities iscentral to the objectives of Special Olympics. This is reflected in the statement on
SOI’s official website: “Our goal is to bring better fitness, nutrition and healthierlifestyles to everyone involved in Special Olympics - from athletes and their families,
to coaches and volunteers.”32）
The effect that the adoption of a competitive game format has on the minds ofparticipating athletes, is described in many anecdotes that point to the elevatedemotions of the athletes and the confidence the athletes gain through their
participation in the games, but most of these anecdotes are limited to the observationsof families, friends, and those who support the games.
A change in the self-awareness of people with intellectual disabilities, however, isan objective of Special Olympics as reflected in the words of Hosokawa: “What wevalue most in Special Olympics is not to defeat others but to ‘better oneself over one’s
performance the day before,’ and to ‘not necessarily become the world’s number one
but to become uniquely oneself, the only one in the world.’”33） Although theexpressions are slightly different, a common thread runs through Eunice Shriver’s
following words, “The most important thing in Special Olympics is not who is thestrongest or most vigorous. It is the spirit to overcome individual barriers. Winning
medals lose their significance without this spirit. However, there is no defeat if thisspirit is there.”34） The meaning of Special Olympics for athletes with intellectual
disabilities, in other words, can also be described as change in self-awareness frombeing a person with intellectual disability to being an athlete.
In addition to the effect that Special Olympics has on the athletes, the significanceof Special Olympics is also apparent in its effect on families, friends, and others who
134Research Note on Special Olympics

support the athletes
Interaction with people with intellectual disabilities produces two-way “benefits”
between the supporter and the assisted, and can remind those who support people
with intellectual disabilities of what often becomes “forgotten” in contemporarysociety. People have described these qualities as purity, friendliness, and theimportance of taking the time to wait.35）
This is a result of interaction with people with intellectual disabilities, and notinherent to supporting sports activities for people with intellectual disabilities. If
Special Olympics can provide people who normally have few opportunities to interact
with people with intellectual disabilities the opportunity to interact, then asignificance of Special Olympics is in providing that opportunity to a large number ofpeople. It is a result not of sports, but of organizing a large event with theparticipation of a large number of people with intellectual disabilities. It needs to be
examined whether the effects of such interaction can be felt more easily throughsports activities as compared with other types of activities.

4.

 eatures of Criteria for Participation, Sports, andF
Competition Rules⑴

Criteria for Participation

People with intellectual disabilities can participate in Special Olympics, but how is“people with intellectual disabilities” defined, and what qualification is needed toparticipate?
The Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare, on its “e-health net” website,36） defines
intellectual disability as “1. clear delay in the development of general intellectual
functions compared with children of the same age（IQ test score of 70 or under in an
intelligence test）,” “2. with clear limitations in adaptive functions,” and “3. occurringby the age of 18.”
The Special Olympics Official General Rules37） provide that those who meet thefollowing qualification criteria can participate in Special Olympics:⑴

The person has been identified by an agency or professional as having an

intellectual disability;⑵

The person has a cognitive delay, as determined by standardized

measures such as IQ testing or other measures which are generally accepted
135

Journal of Paralympic Research Group vol.10

within an agency in the accredited nation as being a reliable measurement of
the existence of a cognitive delay; or⑶

The person has a closely related developmental disability.

A “closely related developmental disability” means having functional limitations
in both general learning （such as IQ） and in adaptive skills （such as inrecreation, work, independent living, self-direction, or self-care）. However,people whose functional limitations are based solely on a physical, behavioral,
or emotional disability, or a specific learning or sensory disability, are noteligible to participate as Special Olympics athletes, but may be eligible tovolunteer for Special Olympics.
Therefore, the definition of a person with intellectual disability in Special Olympics
includes not only the medical conditions but also the person’s relationship withsociety. In that respect, the term “mental disabilities” is better suited to this definition
than the medical term “mental retardation.”38） The minimum age for participation iseight, but accredited programs may permit children from the age of six toparticipate.39）
The procedures for participating in Special Olympics are as set forth below. First, aperson who has registered with an accredited program（local organization）registers
as a Special Olympic athlete after undergoing physical examination and obtaining
approval from his or her family, after which the athlete will participate in training, fora minimum of eight weeks, for an official or semi-official event and then participate ina local competition to record performance. The athlete then participates in thenational games, and based on the records at the national games, a decision is made onwhether the athlete can take part in the world games（Notes 6 and 7）.
As these participation procedures show, Special Olympics places an emphasis onpractice and training （often called a “Program”） before actually entering acompetition. Such Programs focus on practice for a particular event as well as
warming up and jogging.40） The Programs are intended not only to improve thephysical fitness and performance of athletes, but also to invigorate the Special
Olympics movement locally, and particularly to train volunteers.41）

136Research Note on Special Olympics⑵

Sports

According to the official SOI website, four events（athletics, swimming, water polo,
and floor hockey） were held at the first International Special Olympics Summer
Games （Chicago） in 1968,42） and 10 events （basketball, bowling, floor hockey,
gymnastics, pentathlon, softball throw, athletics, swimming, diving, and volleyball）atthe fourth International Special Olympics Games（Mount Pleasant）in 1975.43） At the2015 Special Olympics World Summer Games（Los Angeles）,44） 26 sports（swimming,
athletics, badminton, basketball, beach volleyball, bocce, bowling, cycling, equestrian,football, golf, gymnastics, rhythmic gymnastics, half-marathon, handball, judo,
kayaking, open water swimming, powerlifting, roller skating, sailing, softball, table
tennis, tennis, triathlon, and volleyball）were recorded.
As shown above, Special Olympics has adopted highly competitive sports as well asrecreational sports, sports that aim to enhance one’s fitness levels, and sports that arelinked with everyday exercise. It also includes sports such as bocce that were
specifically developed for people with physical disabilities. The Special Olympics
events are truly wide ranging. Moreover, unlike the Olympics and Paralympics,
efforts are not made to restrict the number of sports. It appears that there is more
flexibility（and fluctuation）in Special Olympics in the number of sports comparedwith the Olympics and Paralympics.
⑶

Competition Rules

A distinguishing characteristic of Special Olympics is the rules of competition.
Special Olympics differs from the Olympic and Paralympic Games in the way it
introduces competitiveness. One aspect is grouping athletes by “divisioning.” Athletes
are grouped by gender as well as age. For example, at the 2005 World Winter Gamesin Nagano（hereafter referred to as the “Nagano Games”）, athletes were divided into
the age groups of 8-11, 12-15, 16-21, 22-29, and over 30 for each individual event, andfor each team event into the age groups of under 15, 16-21, and over 22, based on theage of the oldest competing athlete（if there was a particularly large age group, thatgroup was further subdivided）.45）
After the athletes are divided into age groups, they are further divided into smallergroups based on their records at the preliminary events so that athletes of similar
ability are grouped together. The number of athletes in each group must be more
137

Journal of Paralympic Research Group vol.10

than three, but not more than eight. The element of competition would be diminished
if there are fewer than three athletes, and a group of more than eight athletes would
create a wide disparity in performance between the most and least competitive
athletes so that the least able will have little chance of ranking at the top no matter
how hard they tried. In other words, it appears that this rule, by dividing athletes ofsimilar ability into small groups, is intended to promote competition among athletes
as well as to give all athletes a chance to reach the top.
As a result, in comparison with the Winter Paralympic Games in Sochi（2014）andthe Winter Deaflympics in Khanty-Mansiysk （2015）, which had 72 and 31 finals
respectively, the Nagano Games（2005）had the equivalent of 661 finals.46）47）48）
The implications from the unique concept of divisioning in Special Olympics arethat the objective of the games is not necessarily in having athletes perform well incomparison with other athletes, but rather in comparison with their past performance.
This system, however, is open to “cheating” whereby an athlete could intentionallyperform poorly in preliminary events to be grouped with athletes with a lower ability
and win the competition in the final. To prevent this from happening, the Maximum
Effort Rule（formerly called the Honest Effort Rule）is adopted at Special Olympics
Games. This rule prescribes that an athlete who exceeds his or her performance
either in preliminary events or in records submitted in advance by 15% or more in
the final, will be disqualified（in events such as skiing in which the weather may havea significant effect on performance, a jury review is adopted and the threshold of 15%
does not seem to be strictly adhered to）.49）
Another prominent feature of Special Olympics is that it has introduced Unified（Note 8）in which athletes with intellectual disabilities participate together
Sports®50）
with athletes who do not have disabilities as teammates. For example, at the Nagano
Games, athletes with and without intellectual disabilities participated together aspairs in figure skating and as teams in cross-country skiing relays（two athletes withand two athletes without intellectual disabilities）.51）⑷

AwardsSpecial Olympics’s distinctive approach to competition is also apparent in theawards given to athletes.
First, based on the notion that the athletes do not represent their home countries,
138

Research Note on Special Olympics

there is apparently no raising of the national flag.52） Ranking is announced based on
performance. Medals are presented to the first, second and third-place winners, andribbons are presented to athletes who finish in fourth through eighth place so that all
athletes are awarded. In addition, there is a prize for special recognition for athletes
who have made a significant effort. For example, a Japanese athlete who entered askating event at the Salzburg Games in 1993 was disqualified when he failed to standup from his chair after his name was called three times at the preliminary event, but
was allowed to take part in the final, and even though he finished last, was awarded
the prize for special recognition.53）
Furthermore, there are events in which athletes do not compete for ranking, suchas the Motor Activity Training Program（MATP）. MATP is a special program forathletes with severe or profound intellectual disabilities who cannot participate instandard training programs or games. Athletes in MATP take part in a combinationof exercises such as going over obstacles and putting balls in a basket. There is noranking based on performance, and MATP challenge awards are given in recognitionof athletes who took on the challenge of participating in MATP.54）55）

5.

Organization and Finance

Organizations in 172 countries around the world support the Special Olympics（Note 9）, and each country has local chapters57）（Note 10）. The SOI
movement56）
headquarters is the world’s governing body and undertakes management of thegames, organizes the environment to enable athletes to participate in the games, andalso works to train and mobilize local volunteers.
In terms of funding, approx. $319 million was donated in 2014 to programs
accredited by SOI, of which approx. $82 million was donated in the form of products
or services. This is another distinguishing feature of Special Olympics.
SOI had an income of some $110 million, and the Games Organizing Committees（GOCs）have an income of some $36 million. The figure below illustrates this income
with a breakdown by cash and in-kind income.

139

Journal of Paralympic Research Group vol.10

Figure 1. Breakdown of the Total Income of Special Olympics Movement in 2014

Total Revenue (CASH and IN-KIND)$350,000,000$300,000,000$250,000,000$200,000,000$237,175,319$150,000,000$100,000,000$50,000,000$0$82,223,434$83,093,710$29,020,649

Programms

SOI
IN-KIND$19,443,449$16,791,819
GOCs

CASH

Special Olympics International, 2015 Reach Report, https://media.specialolympics.org/resources/
reports/reach-reports/2015_Special_Olympics_Reach-Report.pdf,（January 16, 2018）,26.

The financial structure above shows that the implementation of programs in eachcountry and region, and not the organizing of the World Games, is central to theSpecial Olympics movement. The fact that 77% of all income is generated in North
America58） also shows that the movement is centered in the U.S.

6.

Effects and Impacts

Various types of studies and research have been conducted in the U.S. and othercountries on the effect or impact of Special Olympics in relation to government
policies for people with intellectual disabilities, its meaning as sports activities for
improving physical abilities and social adaptation, and its effect in promoting
volunteer activities and donations from corporations.
When we consider the effect or impact of Special Olympics, we need to first clarify
the perspective from which to approach this issue.
First, we can analyze the effect that sports, and particularly competitive sports, hason people with intellectual disabilities. Second, we must look at the effect that theSpecial Olympics Games has as a large-scale sporting event that differs significantly
in experience from the participants’ everyday lives. The latter, moreover, should
consider the effect not only on the athletes, but also on the families who provide
support for the athletes as well as the effect on society at large.
140

Research Note on Special Olympics⑴

Effect of Sports Activities on Athletes

It is generally accepted, partly due to the high youth mortality rate among people
with intellectual disabilities mentioned above, that exercise is meaningful for thehealth of people with intellectual disabilities. In fact, there is notable research thatsuggests that exercise is the single most effective way of improving the health of 500
people with intellectual disabilities living in different residential conditions in the
UK.59） There is also multiple research that, although limited in scope to young people
with Down syndrome, has verified the mental and physical effects that physicalexercise can have.
Bartlo et al.60） have reviewed related studies and summarized what kind of exercise
was effective in improving which type of physical ability in people with intellectual
disabilities.61） The main points of the studies are as follows.
The age of people with intellectual disabilities who were the subjects of theresearch ranged from 18 to 65, the types of exercise ranged from aerobic exercise to
stretching and balance training, the duration of exercise was from 10 to 45 minutes,
the frequency of exercise was about three times a week, and the period of engaging
in the exercise ranged from three to six months. The benefits of exercise werereduced anxiety, improved body balance, better quality of life （QOL）, overall
improvement in physical ability, longer walking distance, increased satisfaction in life,
greater endurance, and improvement in performance, as outlined in several separate
papers（with some overlap）.
These and other research results prove that exercise helps to improve physicalability and increase the mental satisfaction of people with intellectual disabilities.
However, most of the research focuses only on recreational sports and moderate
exercise, and does not fully cover the benefits of competitive sports. Moreover, mostof the research does not provide a comparison with people without intellectual
disabilities, and the number of subjects is limited to between 10 and 50, and there arequestions regarding how much the results can be generalized. In addition, many
athletes who participate in the Special Olympics World Games undergo for many
years of training. Assessing the multi-year effect on such athletes would be evenmore difficult since a greater number of factors, such as changes in the environment
surrounding the athletes over time, will need to be considered.
Considering that the pressing issue for people with intellectual disabilities is less141

Journal of Paralympic Research Group vol.10

about insufficiency in physical ability but more about the lack of opportunity toengage in sports, it will be meaningful to examine the effects of Special Olympics
from a more indirect, and completely different angle. For example, it is possible toargue that we should examine whether the Special Olympics Games are increasing
opportunities for people with intellectual disabilities in countries that provided few
opportunities to participate in sports, to participate in sports and in regional andnational games. The comparatively large increase in the number of Special Olympics
athletes from Africa and Asia （excluding East Asia） over the U.S. and Europe（excluding the Middle East, which is affected by political instability and prolonged
conflicts）, as shown in the statistical table 1 below, indirectly points to the effect thatSpecial Olympics is having in developing countries （in terms of providing
opportunities to participate in the Special Olympics movement）.
Table 1. Increase in the Number of Athletes（%）（from 2011 to 2015）
Africa14.9

Asia Pacific

9.1

East Asia

2.2

Europe−1.4

South America
Middle East and North Africa
North America

2.3
−0.5
0.2

出典：S pecial Olympics International, 2015 Reach Report, https://media.
specialolympics.org/resources/reports/reach-reports/2015_Special_Olympics_
Reach-Report.pdf,（January 16, 2018）, 6.

⑵

Effect of Participation in Special Olympics on Athletes

Also connected is the question of what effect Special Olympics has on athletes not
as sports activities in the broad sense but specifically as international events orgames.
Families, coaches, sports officials, and others in a position to observe athletes’
attitudes have pointed out that by participating in the Special Olympics Games,
athletes were able to gain confidence and self-esteem as well as a sense of satisfaction
and fulfillment.62）
As a way of verifying the above point, the research report “Special Olympics
142Research Note on Special Olympics

Nippon 20 Nen no Kensho” （Observing the Last 20 Years of Special Olympics
Nippon）63） was published to commemorate the 20th anniversary of Special Olympics
Nippon. In this research, Special Olympics was considered as a venue or means for
self-expression by people with intellectual disabilities and based on this assumption, it
conducted a 22-item questionnaire survey of some 1,200 people, including athletes’
families, coaches, and volunteers, on the effect and impact that Special Olympics has
on athletes. The results showed that the benefits can be broadly categorized into
three areas: ⑴ social skills（for example, improvement in conducting daily activities
and in communication skills）; ⑵ emotional and psychological benefits（for example,
increased satisfaction and confidence）; and⑶ physical benefits （for example,

64）

improvement in physical strength）.

And in the U.S., interviews were conducted with parents of athletes who
participated either in sailing or kayaking, to compare their reactions with those of theparents of athletes who did not participate in Special Olympics. The results show aquantitative difference that supports the significance of participating in Special
Olympics in terms of raising one’s sense of fulfillment and self-esteem.65）
On the other hand, other research shows that participation in Special Olympics forlonger than a certain period of time does not greatly help to increase the participants’
self-esteem or confidence.66） In response to the results, some claim that such results
may be because athletes who had already gained a higher level of confidence throughan activity will not show a significant increase in their level of confidence justbecause they participated in Special Olympics, and that there needs to be ameasurement of their original level of confidence. Others point out that the “degree ofachievement,” as measured by whether they received an award or the ranking theyattained, may weigh more heavily in the minds of the athletes than the act of or theduration or frequency of participating in Special Olympics activities.
In Canada, a survey was conducted of 49 athletes registered with regional Special
Olympics chapters across Ontario on the effect of Special Olympics over a period of
42 months. Results showed that the more time athletes spent involved in Special
Olympics and the higher levels of attainment（for example, awards of medals）overthe 42-month period reported, the higher their sense of self-esteem.67）
In a study limited to athletes who won medals at events in the U.S., results showed
improvement in self-esteem and social competence as a result of participating in143

Journal of Paralympic Research Group vol.10

Special Olympics activities, when compared with those who did not participate.68）
The problem with such studies, however, is that even if participation in Special
Olympics activities is beneficial in terms of athletes’ self-esteem and social
competence, few studies go as far as to analyze the true determining factors of such
positive outcomes: whether they are the result of stimulation from participating in an
event that differs significantly from the participants’ everyday lives, the result ofparticipating in sports activities, the result of an increase in social contact, or the
result of stimulation from participating in activities of a competitive nature.
⑶

Special Olympics and Athletes’ Families

People with intellectual disabilities require the support of families and others toparticipate in Special Olympics activities. Moreover, most surveys rely on interviews
with families and other supporters to measure the benefits that participation inSpecial Olympics activities brings to the athletes. For these reasons, efforts have been
made to understand the effect or impact that Special Olympics has on athletes as wellas their family members. In this context, we first need to clarify the motivation withwhich families, and in particular parents, have their children participate in Special
Olympics and what kind of benefits they expect from such participation.
Research was conducted to compare such motivation in several countries, including
Brazil and Argentina. Results from interviews with 130 families in Argentina showedthat 26% considered improved self-esteem and self-confidence as the top-priority
motivator, 36% said improved social skills and relationships with others, 22% said
better health, and 17% said improved sports skills.69） Similar results were obtained in
Brazil.70）
As for family members’ assessment of the actual results of participating in Special
Olympics, results of interviews with 120 family members of athletes in the U.S.（104mothers, 49 fathers, and 38 siblings）show that 69% of the respondents indicate social
skills, 35% indicate impact on self-concept, 34% indicate social participation, while only
29% indicate physical improvement.
These types of studies, however, examine how families assess the impact on
athletes, and families are grouped together with athletes into one identity. In otherwords, the effect or impact on family members is substituted by the effect or impact
on the athletes. To avoid such “identification,” some research has tried to verify 144

Research Note on Special Olympics

based on the assumption that families （mothers, in this case） of people withintellectual disabilities feel stress and a sense of isolation - how effective Special
Olympics is in freeing mothers from stress and related emotions. Results show thatthe less stress mothers are feeling in their relationship with their children, the higher
frequency of mothers having their children participate in Special Olympics
activities.71） It is unclear, however, whether it is linked with the “result” ofparticipation, or with the “motivation or enthusiasm” for participation. Other researchalso shows that it remains unclear whether the stress or sense of isolation felt bymothers decreased when compared with before or at the start of participating inSpecial Olympics.
Special Olympics activities may have a recreational effect on participating parents
over time, as they continue to participate（the level of stress may increase at first）.
They may also provide parents with an opportunity to meet other parents sharing asimilar set of concerns and problems and establish a social support network, and can
extend to having an impact on public opinion. In fact, the true meaning of Special
Olympics for parents may have less to do with having an active impact on mothers
themselves, and more to do with the opportunity that Special Olympics may provide
as a catalyst for stimulating public opinion, and as an inspiration for parents tochange public opinion.72）

7.

 pecial Olympics and Society: its Impact on Changing
S
Perceptions and Attitudes towards People with Intellectual
Disabilities

The issue of Special Olympics’s effect on families, discussed above, shows where its
effect on athletes meets with its effect on society at large.
To begin with, it is clear that the effect on athletes is interrelated with the effect on
their families, and this can extend further to friends and local communities, and tosociety’s views and the attitudes towards people with intellectual disabilities.
Based on this assumption, there are many “anecdotes” that have been told about
the effect that Special Olympics has on the perception of those without intellectual
disability. The example below describes the reaction of a junior high school student
who went to see a sports competition for people with intellectual disabilities that wasorganized as part of Special Olympics activities.73）
145

Journal of Paralympic Research Group vol.10“I noticed something today,” said Izumi. “It’s about what happened on the
train just now.” She was talking about a boy with intellectual disability making
a lot of noise on the train.
“The boy was making noise but his mother looked calm, which made me
think at first that she might be waiting for someone to stop him.” Izumi took a
sip of her tea bottle and continued, “But I realized that wasn’t so. Making noise
like that is nothing unusual for the boy. He was trying to express himself. If
his mother got upset, he wouldn’t know what to do. That’s why she wasbehaving that way.”
Izumi was imagining that his mother needed to show, through her attitude,that she trusted the boy.
This was an anecdote about the reaction of a young woman who went to see the
1st Floor Hockey Games held in Tokyo in June 2004. It shows that she realized what
those without intellectual disability should respect when they are around people withintellectual disabilities and their families. This anecdote has implications for the social
significance of organizing events related to Special Olympics.
A more complicated social reaction is related to volunteerism in Special Olympics.
One of the features of Special Olympics is the participation of a large number ofvolunteers, and the following comment by a physician who has for many years
participated in the Special Olympics movement is noteworthy:74） “Today, Special
Olympics volunteers are acquiring a good, professional attitude. What concerns me
about this, is that they tend to become a bit critical against other volunteers who areless active or efficient. There is a risk that we will stray from the principle that‘anyone should be allowed to take part as volunteers.’ I think volunteers should be
amateurs and not professionals.” This is an example of how participating in Special
Olympics activities resulted in a deeper insight. This may have implications for thevalue, or the potential value, that Special Olympics has in shaping sports
volunteerism.
As a standard of measuring the social impact of Special Olympics, we also need toanalyze the results of questionnaire surveys on whether there has been a change inthe way people without intellectual disability see people with intellectual disabilities,
146

Research Note on Special Olympics

making a comparison of before and after training or participation in Special Olympics
Games. Such questionnaire surveys have been aimed either at people with intellectual
disabilities and their families, or people without intellectual disability. An example ofthe former is a survey conducted by Weiss et al.75） According to this survey, those
who won medals at the Ontario Special Olympics（in the competition and the training
leading up to the competition） felt that they experienced a higher level of social
acceptance.76）
This result may indicate that the Special Olympics contributes to the social
acceptance of people with intellectual disabilities. However, it can also be argued thatthe achievement of winning medals became a basis for socially evaluating the athletes
for the athletes themselves and for others, and that it does not lead to a clear
conclusion that Special Olympics, as a sporting event, contributed to increasing thesocial acceptance of people with intellectual disabilities. In fact, there is research that
concludes, from interviews of athletes who participated in Special Olympics activities
for two months and their families, that there is no clear indication of a positivechange in perceived social acceptance of the athletes before and after their
participation in the activities.77）
On the perception of those without intellectual disability, research was conducted
to examine changes in the perception of students without intellectual disability after
they took part in a Special Olympics Schools Partnership Program. The research,which examined changes in perception on several aspects including the physicalability of people with intellectual disabilities and inclusion, concluded that there was
hardly any increase in the students’ willingness to actively promote inclusion ofpeople with intellectual disabilities.78） The research, like other studies, concluded thatconversation with people with intellectual disabilities was the most important factor
in promoting perception change among the participating students.79） It is possible tosuggest that the social significance of Special Olympics activities lies in providing
opportunities for direct contact between people with and without intellectual
disabilities and as such, sports activities are merely a catalyst for such contact.
Changes in perception about social acceptance of people with intellectual disabilities
are derived not from Special Olympics per se, but from various factors such asprofessional contact and involvement within the local community with people withintellectual disabilities. It is even plausible that in countries and regions with147

Journal of Paralympic Research Group vol.10

advanced levels of social acceptance of people with intellectual disabilities, theadditional effect that Special Olympics may have on their social acceptance will besmall. This suggests that Special Olympics does not necessarily play a direct role inbringing about change in society, but plays a role as a catalyst in stimulating other
determining factors.

8.

Issues and Challenges of Special Olympics

Although there are elements that make their results less conclusive, most researchconcludes that the Special Olympics Games and the succession of activities leading up
to the Games have a positive effect or impact on the athletes, their families, and, byextension, society at large. However, we cannot overlook the negative or potentiallynegative aspects of Special Olympics that have been pointed out in terms of how it ismanaged and in the social significance of its activities.
These can be broadly divided into two areas. The first involves the effect of Special
Olympics on the participants or athletes in the sports activities.
Secondly, there are concerns that the Special Olympics Games and training for the
Games places emphasis on improving skills for a specific sport（for example, the ability
to throw a ball at a faster speed）, at the cost acquiring social adaptation skills.80）
The negative effect of Special Olympics on people without intellectual disability isbased on a criticism of having children and adults participate in the same Special
Olympics games or events, even though they are divided into different age groups.
When combined with social stereotypes about people with intellectual disabilities, thishas been criticized as perpetuating the tendency to treat people with intellectual
disabilities as if they are children.81）
Regarding the effect of Special Olympics on society, it has been pointed out that bytreating people with intellectual disabilities as special, Special Olympics may embedmore deeply in people without intellectual disability a sense that people withintellectual disabilities are different.82） A similar criticism exists that Special Olympics
may be contributing to seeing people with their disabilities before regarding them as
individual human beings.83）
These views and criticisms, however, are equally applicable to almost every
disability sports event and activities leading up to those events, and will be met with148

Research Note on Special Olympics

a counterargument based on a more realistic perspective and question: can sports
activities for people with disabilities only be promoted when people without disability
are participating side by side with people with disabilities?
At any rate, to systematically identify issues and challenges associated with Special
Olympics, there is a need for further study and research on the following: ⑴ acomparison with the significance of sports activities for people with other forms of
disabilities, and if there is a distinctive significance for people with intellectual
disabilities, and analysis of that significance; ⑵ factor analysis of the content andaspects of Special Olympics activities （such as increasing opportunities for social
contact with a large number of people, establishing a habit of enjoying sports, thesignificance of having opportunities for enjoying sports, and the significance ofexperiencing a “sense of achievement” through winning competitions, receiving
awards, and improving one’s record）; ⑶ a comparison of sports activities withactivities in fine arts and crafts to analyze similarities and differences in promoting a
sense of independence and social inclusion, based on many examples of fine arts andcrafts becoming a context for many people with intellectual disabilities to express
extraordinary talent; ⑷ an analysis of the benefits of integrating as much as possible
or merging Special Olympics, Deaflympics, and Paralympics, as well as the benefits ofstrengthening their separate identities, and the pros and cons of linking or working
together with sports activities for people without disabilities; and ⑸ research onwhether there is any bias arising from the fact that Special Olympics, partly forhistorical reasons, is based on American elements and principles and if so, the pros
and cons and the degree of such bias.
Many researchers seem to criticize the fact that in contrast with the Paralympics
and Deaflympics, in which people with disabilities are members of the senior
executive teams of the organizations, all of the executive members of the Special
Olympics organization are people without intellectual disability.84） However, this is an
issue that exists in many other disability sports organizations, although in varying
degrees. It is also related to the issue of how to incorporate training coaches andsupervisors, and employing or actively involving people with disabilities, and simply
criticizing the status quo is unproductive. This is particularly the case with people
with intellectual disabilities, as they depend more on their families and friends to havetheir voices heard in society.
149

Journal of Paralympic Research Group vol.10

In conclusion, this shows that many of the issues and challenges associated with
Special Olympics are, in varying degrees, also closely connected to the Paralympics
and Deaflympics.
Notes⑴

In her contribution to the Saturday Evening Post, Eunice wrote that Rosemary was born
through normal delivery and that the other children of the Kennedy family tried to include
Rosemary in everything they did.

⑵

Although the influence of Joseph Kennedy’s wife Rose and Eunice Shriver has been
mentioned as the main reason for bringing about this change （Shorter, 2000）, Eunice’s
activities at around this time only seems to have had limited influence, and there is no clear
evidence to substantiate Rose’s influence. It is more likely that the political aims of the
Kennedy family as a whole were leaning towards focusing on supporting people withintellectual disabilities.

⑶

Within Japan, Special Olympics Nippon was first called “Japan Special Olympic Committee,”omitting the s at the end of “Olympics.” The s was later added. This change seems to havebeen made to symbolize the fact that the Special Olympics movement was not just limited
to the World Games, but also included a wide range of activities, such as daily training andvolunteer activities （Inoue, 2016）. However, it should be noted that while the word
“Olympic” in English is usually used as an adjective, when the word “Orinpikku”（without
the s）is used in Japan, it represents the equivalent of the “Olympic Games” or “Olympics”
in English.

⑷

Yamamoto, who was dedicated to Special Olympics activities, was forced to takeresponsibility for deteriorating financial conditions at St. Michael’s School where he wasserving as director of the board, and withdrew from Special Olympics activities （Endo,
2004）. Considering the subsequent developments leading up to the launch of Special
Olympics Nippon（Inoue, 2016）, several factors may have been intricately involved. As the
movement expanded nationally and internationally, there were differences in opinion
between the pioneers, such as Yamamoto and Suzuki, and the politicians and businesspeople who came to support the movement in terms of funding and activities. There wasalso a gap between the strategies of Special Olympics International（SOI）in Washington
D.C. and the organization in Japan. This may be reflected for example in the timing of thevisit to Japan by SOI leadership and its connection with the timing of changes in the
movement in Japan. As Endo’s interview of Suzuki illustrates （Endo, 2004）, thecircumstances surrounding the dissolution of JSOC and leading up to the launch of the neworganization have become extensively apparent as far as the people involved with the
movement on the Japanese side are concerned. There is also a need to take into
consideration the degree and nature of the involvement of people associated with SOI.

⑸

In Special Olympics, people with intellectual disabilities participating in activities are called“athletes.”⑹

In Special Olympics, each competition has a selection process for participation. To participate
in higher level competitions, priority is given to athletes who came first within theirrespective divisions. If the number of first-place athletes exceeds the quota, athletes are
selected randomly among the first-place athletes. If the quota cannot be filled by first-place150

Research Note on Special Olympics
athletes alone, random selection is made from among the second-place athletes, and so on
until the quota is filled. Therefore, unlike the Olympic Games, Special Olympics does not
restrict participation to athletes with the best records.
⑺

The above description of the procedures for participating in Special Olympics has been
compiled by the author from various sources. A summarized diagram of the procedures isalso available（Kiya, 1997）.

⑻

Unified Sports® is a program in which Special Olympics athletes and athletes without
intellectual disability（partners）train and compete on the same team. The Special Olympics
athletes team up with partners of similar age and ability in the sport. The ratio of Special
Olympics athletes to partners is determined for each sport in accordance with sports rules（Special Olympics Nippon Foundation, 2016A）.

⑼

However, because countries, unlike in the Olympic Games, do not compete against eachother in Special Olympics, organizations in “countries” that are not independent and inregions are also recognized, and the number of organizations by country depends on how acountry is defined. Moreover, on the list of country contacts on SOI’s official website, theoffices representing U.S. states are given equal status as the offices of North Americancountries such as Canada.

⑽

The “What is Special Olympics” section of Special Olympics Nippon Foundation’s official
website lists local organizations in 47 prefectures in Japan.

References
１）The Saturday Evening Post, “Hope for Retarded Children,” September 22, 1962.
２）Hosokawa, K., 2009, Hana mo Hana nare Hito mo Hito nare（flowers are flowers and people
are people）, Kadokawa, 119-120.
３）Shorter, E., 2000, The Kennedy Family and the Story of Mental Retardation, Temple
University Press, 32-33.
４）Ibid., 57.
５）Ibid., 41, 94.
６）Ibid., 87.
７）Ibid., 85.
８）Ibid., 137.
９）Ibid., 34.
10）Ibid., 123.
11）Ibid., 35-36.
12）Ibid., 42.
13）Ibid., 45.
14）Ibid., 122.
15）Ibid., 129-131.
16）Komori, A., 2013, Special Olympics ga Social Inclusion ni hatasu yakuwari : gakko renkei
program ni okeru koryu keiken wo chushin ni（Role of Special Olympics in social inclusion focusing on school cooperation program exchange experiences）,Kazamashobo, 82.
17）Endo, M., 2004, Special Olympics, Shueisya, 113-114.
18）Team SOS: Special Olympics Studies, 2014, “Special Olympics Nippon 20 Nen no Kensho（Observing the Last 20 Years of Special Olympics Nippon）,” Special Olympics Nippon, 73.
19）Inoue, A., 2010, “A study for 2009 Special Olympics World Winter Games IDAHO USA and151

Journal of Paralympic Research Group vol.10
prospects for domestic Special Olympics Movement in the future,” Kanazawa Seiryo
University Human Sciences, 3
（2）
, 58.
20）Ibid., 58.
21）Nakamura, K., 2005, Kacchan ga Iku!（Kacchan is going!）, Kumanichi Shuppan, 48-50, 70-77.
22）Hosokawa, 2009, op. cit., 122-124.
23）Kumamto Daily News, “Kumamoto-shi de chiteki hattatsu chitai sha no sports no saiten‘Special Olympics’ no setsumeikai. Kumamoto kaisai wo yobikake（Introductory meeting inKumamoto city on the sports festival ‘Special Olympics’ for people with intellectual
developmental retardation. A call to hold［Special Olympics］in Kumamoto）,” October 24,
1992.
24）Hosokawa, 2009, op. cit., 152.
25）Ibid., 157.
26）Kumamto Daily News, “Kumamoto-shi de ‘Special Olympics Nippon’ zenkoku soshiki no
hossoku shiki. Chiteki shogai sha sports wo shien（Inauguration ceremony of the nationalorganization ‘Special Olympics Nippon’ in Kumamoto city. Supporting sports for people withintellectual disabilities）,” November 28, 1994.
27）Tabiki, T., Matsumoto, K., and Watanabe, H., 2013, “Analysis of Reasons for Participation inSports Activities Targeted at Persons with Intellectual Disabilities,” Memories of Hokuriku
Gakuin University Hokuriku Gakuin Junior College, 6, 141-148.
28）Team SOS: Special Olympics Studies, op. cit., 14.
29）Goto, K., 2003, “‘Chiteki hattatsu shogai’ toiu shogai no rikai（Understanding the disability
called ‘intellectual developmental disability’）,” Dazai, Y.（eds.）, Yukkuri yukkuri egao ni
naritai（I want to smile little by little）, Ski Journal, 61．
30）Team SOS: Special Olympics Studies, op. cit., op. cit., 17.
31）Ibid., 15.
32）Special Olympics International, “What We Do,” https://www.specialolympics.org/Sections/
What_We_Do/What_We_Do.aspx?src=navwhat,（January 16, 2018）.
33）Hosokawa, 2009, op. cit., 130.
34）2005 Special Olympics World Winter Games, Nagano（SONA）, 2005, 2005 Special Olympics
World Winter Games Official Report, 17.
35）Dazai（eds.）, op. cit., 17-18.
36）Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare, “e-health net,” https://www.e-healthnet.mhlw.go.jp/
information/heart/k-04-004.html,（January 25, 2018）.
37）Special Olympics Nippon Foundation, 2016A, Special Olympics Official General Rules 2012,
13.
38）Kiya, H., 1997, “A discussion of the present situation and future orientation of Special
Olympics – Presentation for the activities of Special Olympics and ‘1997 World WinterGames’ in Toronto-1997,” Bulletin of Kyushu Women’s University, 34（1）,11.
39）Special Olympics Nippon Foundation, 2016A, op. cit., 13.
40）Uematsu, J., 2004, Kyo mo dokoka de Special Olympics （Special Olympics somewhere
today）, Kosei Shuppan, 34-36.
41）Hosokawa, K., 2002, “Special Olympics wo shitteimasuka? （Do you know Special
Olympics?）” Shumpusha（eds.）Hana to hito no kokyogaku: Special Olympics kara kyosei
jiritsu no oka e（Symphony of flowers and people: from Special Olympics to a hill of inclusion
and independence）,Shumpusha Publishing, 14-15.
152

Research Note on Special Olympics42）Special Olympics International, “What We Do,” https://www.specialolympics.org/Sections/
What_We_Do/History/History_1960s.aspx,（January 17, 2018）.
43）Special Olympics International, “What We Do,” https://www.specialolympics.org/Sections/
What_We_Do/History/History_1970s.aspx,（January 17, 2018）.
44）Special Olympics International, “Sports and Games,” https://www.specialolympics.org/
gms/#/g/269NEG250LG6LVSS/event/sw/AQ25BK,（January 17, 2018）.
45）2005 Special Olympics World Winter Games, Nagano（SONA）,op. cit., 57.
46）International Paralympic Committee, “Results, Rankings & Records,” https://www.
paralympic.org/sdms/hira/web/competition/sochi-2014,（January 18, 2018）.
47）18th Winter Deaflympics games, “Deaflympics Games Medal standings,”
http://ugra2015.com/,（January 18, 2018）.
48）2005 Special Olympics World Winter Games, Nagano（SONA）,op. cit., 57.
49）Special Olympics Nippon Foundation, 2016B, SO Sports Rules 2016, 13.
50）Ibid., 23.
51）2005 Special Olympics World Winter Games, Nagano（SONA）,op. cit., 59.
52）Inoue, op. cit., 60.
53）Hosokawa, 2002, op. cit., 134-138.
54）Dazai（eds.）, op. cit., 12.
55）Special Olympics Nippon Foundation, 2016A, op. cit., 23.
56）Special Olympics International, “What We Do,” https://www.specialolympics.org/Sections/
What_We_Do/What_We_Do.aspx?src=navwhat,（January 19, 2018）.
57）Special Olympics Nippon Foundation, ”about SON,” http://www.son.or.jp/about/organization.
html,（January 16, 2018）.
58）Special Olympics International, 2015 Reach Report, https://media.specialolympics.org/
resources/reports/reach-reports/2015_Special_Olympics_Reach-Report.pdf, （January 16,2018）,26.
59）Robertson, J., Emerson, E., Gregory, N., Hatton, C., Turner, S., Kessissoglou, S., and Hallam, A.,
2000, “Lifestyle Related Risk Factors for Poor Health in Residential Settings for People withIntellectual Disabilities,” Research in Developmental Disabilities, 21, 469–486.
60）Bartlo, P. and Klein, P. J., 2011, “Physical Activity Benefits and Needs in Adults withIntellectual Disabilities,” American Journal on Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities,
116（3）,221.
61）Ibid.，224-227.
62）Dowling, S., Hassan, D., and McConkey, R., 2012, The 2011 Summer World Games Experience
for Special Olympics Athletes and Coaches, Special Olympics International, 43.
63）Team SOS: Special Olympics Studies, op. cit.
64）Ibid., 35-37.
65）Glidden, L. M., Bamberger, K. T., Draheim, A. R., and Kersh, J., 2011, “Parent and Athlete
Perceptions of Special Olympics Participation,” American Journal on Intellectual andDevelopmental Disabilities, 49（1）, 37-45.
66）Ninot, G., Bilard, J., and Sokolowski, M., 2000, “Athletic Competition: a Means of Improving
the Self-Image of the Mentally Retarded Adolescent?” International Journal of Rehabilitation
Research, 23, 111-117.
67）Weiss, J. and Bebko, J., 2008, “Participation in Special Olympics and Change in Athlete SelfConcept Over 42 Months,” Journal on Developmental Disabilities, 14（3）,1-8.
153

Journal of Paralympic Research Group vol.1068）Dykens, E. M. and Cohen, D. J., 1996 “Effects of Special Olympics International on Social
Competence in Persons with Mental Retardation,” Journal of American Academy of Childand Adolescent Psychiatry, 35（2）, 223-229.
69）Harada, C. M., Parker, R. C., and Siperstein, G. N., 2005, A Comprehensive Study of Special
Olympics Programs in Latin America, University of Ulster, https://www.specialolympics.
org/uploadedFiles/LandingPage/WhatWeDo/Research_Studies_Desciption_Pages/A%20
Comprehensive%20Study%20of%20Special%20Olympics%20Programs%20in%20Latin%20
America_web%20version.pdf,（January 16, 2018）,13.
70）Ibid., 26.
71）Weiss, J. A. and Diamond, T., 2005, “Stress in Parents of Adults with Intellectual Disabilities
Attending Special Olympics Competitions,” Journal of Applied Research in Intellectual
Disabilities, 18, 263–270.
72）Weiss, J. A., 2008, “Role of Special Olympics for Mothers of Adult Athletes with Intellectual
Disability,” American Journal of Mental Retardation, 113（4）,241–253.
73）Uematsu, op. cit., 86.
74）Inoue, Seiichi, “Omona shogai to sports ji no chui ten （Major disabilities and points forcaution during sports）,” Dazai（eds.）, op. cit., 134.
75）Weiss, J., Diamond, T., Demark, J., and Lovald, B., 2003, “Involvement in Special Olympics
and its Relations to Self-Concept and Actual Competency in Participants with Developmental
Disabilities,” Research in Developmental Disabilities, 24, 281–305.
76）Ibid., 293.
77）Weiss and Bebko, op. cit., 5.
78）Komori, op. cit., 164.
79）Ibid., 165-166.
80）Storey, K., 2004, “The Case Against the Special Olympics,” Journal of Disability Policy
Studies, 15（1）, 35-42.
81）Fleischer, D. D. and Zames, F., 2011, The Disability Rights Movement: From Charity to
Confrontation, Temple University Press.
82）Johnson, M., 2003, Make Them Go Away: Clint Eastwood, Christopher Reeve and the Case
Against Disability Rights, Advocado Press.
83）Orelove, F. and Moon, M., 1984, “The Special Olympics program: Effects on Retarded Persons
and Society,” Arena Review, 8（1）, 41-45.
84）Storey, op. cit., 39.

154