Search

We, an international group of autistic scholars of autism and neurodiversity, discuss recent findings on the origins of the concept and theorising of neurodiversity. For some time, the coinage and theorising of the concept of 'neurodiversity' has been attributed to Judy Singer. Singer wrote an Honours thesis on the subject in 1998, focused on autistic activists and allies in the autistic community email list Independent Living (InLv). This was revised into a briefer book chapter, published in 1999. Despite the widespread attribution to Singer, the terms 'neurological diversity' and 'neurodiversity' were first printed in 1997 and 1998, respectively, in the work of the journalist Harvey Blume, who himself attributed them not to Singer but rather to the online community of autistic people, such as the 'Institute for the Study of the Neurologically Typical'. Recently, Martijn Dekker reported a 1996 discussion in which one InLv poster, Tony Langdon, writes of the 'neurological diversity of people. i.e. the atypical among a society provide the different perspectives needed to generate new ideas and advances, whether they be technological, cultural, artistic or otherwise'. Going forward, we should recognise the multiple, collective origins of the neurodiversity concept rather than attributing it to any single author. This letter discusses the origins of the concept and theory of neurodiversity. It is important to correctly attribute concept and theories to the people who developed them. For some time, the concept of neurodiversity has primarily been attributed to one person, Judy Singer. We consider the available evidence and show that the concept and theory in fact has multiple origins. We draw particular attention to recent archival findings that show the concept of 'neurological diversity' was being used years earlier than previously thought. 'Neurodiversity' means the same thing as 'neurological diversity' and does not change the theory in any way. We conclude that both the concept of neurological diversity or neurodiversity, and the body of theory surrounding it, should be understood as having been collectively developed by neurodivergent people. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Increasingly, neurodivergent people are sharing their own narratives and conducting their own research. Prominent individuals have integrated the 'nothing about us without us' slogan, used by neurodivergent and other disabled social activists, into academia. This article imagines a neuromixed academia. We consider how to work through challenges present in neuromixed encounters; to support cross-neurotype communication and pave the way for an ethos of community and collaboration. We explore how we might create a space in which neurodivergent experiences are seen as just one part of our complex and multifaceted identities. We do this through the process of 'cutting our own keys', to try out new possibilities of neurodivergent storying aimed at finding ourselves in our own stories about neurodivergence. This involves borrowing and developing methodological approaches formulated outside of research on different forms of neurodivergence, and to invent our own concepts based on our own embodied experiences and the social worlds we inhabit. Throughout, we mingle our own autoethnographic accounts in relation to research accounts and theories, as a way of illustrating the work with the text as a thinking about neurodivergence with each other in itself. A lot of people who do research are also neurodivergent (such as being autistic or attention deficit hyperactivity disorder), but neurodivergent people do not always feel welcome in research spaces which are often shaped around neurotypical people. Some neurotypical researchers lack confidence in talking to neurodivergent people, and others feel like neurodivergent people might not be able to do good research about other people who are like them without being biased. We think it is important that all researchers are able to work well together, regardless of whether they are neurotypical, autistic, or attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (or any other neurotype) – in truly 'neurodiverse' teams. In this article we talk about how to create better spaces for all researchers, where we feel valued for who we are and take each others' needs into account. We do this using some approaches from other areas of research and talking about how they relate to our personal experiences of being neurodivergent researchers with our own personal stories. This article adds to a growing work on how we can work with people who are different from us, in more respectful and kind ways. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The neurodiversity movement is a social movement that emerged among autistic self‐advocates. It has since spread and has been joined by many with diagnoses of attention‐deficit/hyperactivity disorder, dyslexia, and developmental coordination disorder among others. By reconceptualizing neurodiversity as part of biodiversity, neurodiversity proponents emphasize the need to develop an 'ecological' society that supports the conservation of neurological minorities through the construction of ecological niches—that is, making space for all. This is an alternative to the drive to eliminate diversity through attempts to 'treat' or 'cure' neurodivergence. So far, neurodiversity theory has not been formally adapted for psychotherapeutic frameworks, and it is not the role of the therapist to make systemic changes to societal organization. Still, there is room for fruitfully drawing on a neurodiversity perspective for therapists working with neurodivergent people in clinical settings. Here, we draw on the example of autism and synthesize three key themes to propose the concept of neurodivergence‐informed therapy. First, the reconceptualization of dysfunction as relational rather than individual. Second, the importance of neurodivergence acceptance and pride, and disability community and culture to emancipate neurodivergent people from neuro‐normativity. Third, the need for therapists to cultivate a relational epistemic humility regarding different experiences of neurodivergence and disablement. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In response to Vivanti's 'Ask The Editor...' paper [Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 50(2), 691–693], we argue that the use of language in autism research has material consequences for autistic people including stigmatisation, dehumanisation, and violence. Further, that the debate in the use of person-first language versus identity-first language should centre first and foremost on the needs, autonomy, and rights of autistic people, so in to preserve their rights to self-determination. Lastly, we provide directions for future research. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Autistic people report greater comfort socialising and easier communication with each other. Despite autism being stereotypically associated with lack of social motivation, an autistic community has been described briefly in the literature but is not well understood. Autistic community connectedness may play a role in promoting wellbeing for autistic people. This qualitative study involved interviewing autistic individuals (N = 20) in-person, via a video-based platform, a text-based platform or over email to investigate autistic community connectedness. Critical grounded theory tools were used to collect and analyse the data. There were three elements of autistic community connectedness: belongingness, social connectedness and political connectedness. Belongingness referred to the sense of similarity that autistic people experienced with each other. Social connectedness referred to specific friendship participants formed with other autistic people. Political connectedness referred to a connectedness to the political or social equality goals of the autistic community. Participants described the benefits of autistic community connectedness as being increased self-esteem, a sense of direction and a sense of community not experienced elsewhere. Lack of connectedness involved ambivalence with an autistic identity and/or feelings of internalised stigma. Experiences of autistic community connectedness may have implications for autistic people's wellbeing, as well as how they cope with minority stress. A sense of being connected to other autistic people has been reported anecdotally. Friendships and connectedness may be important to autistic people and beneficial for their wellbeing. Our research aimed to understand the autistic community by interviewing 20 autistic people about their experiences of being connected to other autistic people. Participants were interviewed in person, over video, using a text-based software to type or over email. Participants detailed three parts of autistic community connectedness: a sense of belonging, social connection with autistic friends and political connectedness. The friendships autistic people had with one another were deemed to be very important to participants because it gave them confidence, provided companionship and made them happy. Some participants did not experience connectedness to the autistic community. These participants also found autism to be less important to their identity and had fewer positive feelings about being autistic. This research is important as it raises awareness that community connectedness is viewed as important to this group. It is possible that community connectedness may help protect the mental health of autistic people when they face stigma or negative life experiences in society. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

There are many different perspectives for understanding autism. These perspectives may each convey different levels of stigma for autistic individuals. This qualitative study aimed to understand how autistic individuals make sense of their own autism and experience the stigma attached to autism. The study used critical grounded theory tools. Participants (N = 20) discussed autism as central to their identity, and integral to who they are. While participants thought of autism as value neutral, they expressed how society confers negative meanings onto autism, and thus, them. The findings also indicate that different understandings of autism confer different levels of stigma. Participants expressed constant exposure to stigma and managed this stigma in different ways. Such methods included reframing to more positive understandings of autism, the reclamation of language, and using concealment and disclosure strategically. The implications of these findings are discussed further in the article. Autistic research participants consider their autism to be value neutral – akin to any other feature like race or hair colour. Participants feel that society sees their autism as being a bad trait to have. Participants struggled with the tension in how they see themselves, versus how they believe society sees them. Participants are caught between disclosing that they are autistic and concealing it, but feel they are treated negatively either way. Participants use the word "autistic" to reclaim autism from stigma, and to reframe peoples understandings of autism to be less negative. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Singer intended for neurodiversity to be a new category of intersectionality. However, intersectionality has been neglected in autism research and practice. This paper aims to inform an intersectional approach to autism by exploring autistic identity development in relation to other marginalized identities. We reviewed literature about neurodiversity, intersectionality, discrimination, and the identity development of autistic people, racial/ethnic minorities, and gender and sexual minorities. We discuss minority stress and evidence that cultural traditions alleviate it. Autistic culture can reframe personal difficulties as a politicized struggle. While the stereotype of autism is one of withdrawal, the history of autistic people coming together for justice defies this notion. Intersectionality teaches us that we must understand differences within the autistic community if we wish to help all autistic people experience the dignity they deserve. Using an intersectional lens, we can become more flexible in our understanding of positive autistic identity development and strategies to promote it. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Autistic people diagnosed in adulthood often report that the experience can be life-changing, but there are issues with the diagnostic pathway. Few studies consider the views of people currently seeking diagnosis or contextualise the experience of diagnosis around developing an autistic identity. In this qualitative participatory study, we explored experiences of navigating an autism diagnosis in adulthood in the UK. We recruited six women (aged 21–46 years) who were seeking diagnosis, who worked with the academic researchers across four sessions to develop the study, share their experiences and analyse the themes. In one session, they completed a semi-structured interview alongside photovoice, a community-based action method, to explain and reflect on their experiences. We used reflexive thematic analysis to identify patterns, with four key themes identified: (1) ‘everything shattered’, (2) ‘being seen’, (3) ‘understanding not judgement, please’ and (4) ‘here’s a leaflet, off you go’. The themes reflected a desire for change and improved support for both diagnosis and developing autistic identity. Following photovoice methodology, together we identified actions to improve adult diagnosis, including involving autistic people in making improvements to the diagnostic criteria, for key professional and community groups to listen more to autistic people and for diagnostic support services to be flexible and appreciative of wider neurodivergence and intersectionality.Lots of people seek an autism diagnosis as an adult, and they often say that being diagnosed can be positively life-changing, but the experience of getting a diagnosis can be difficult. We often do not hear the views of people currently looking for a diagnosis, or talk to them about how diagnosis relates to their identity. In our study, we looked at experiences of people currently seeking an autism diagnosis in the UK. We used participatory methods, where six people seeking diagnosis were included as collaborators in the research. They took part in four different sessions, where they helped to shape the research, took part in interviews about their experiences and helped to analyse the patterns in all the interviews. We also used something called photovoice during the interviews, where they could use photos to show how they felt about navigating a diagnosis. We identified four common themes: (1) everyone had experienced some form of crisis before seeking diagnosis; (2) when they realised they were autistic, they felt seen; (3) the diagnostic process and criteria were not working, and they felt judged by clinicians and (4) there was limited support available after diagnosis. In another session, we identified actions that need to be taken which have implications for policy and practice, including improving the diagnostic process and criteria with autistic people, autistic people being listened to more by people like general practitioners and clinicians and diagnosis services needing to be more flexible and appreciate different aspects of someone’s identity and neurodivergence. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Consistent with a “double empathy” framework, autistic adults often experience better interaction with autistic compared with non-autistic partners. Here, we examined whether non-autistic observers detect differences in autistic interactions relative to non-autistic and mixed ones. Non-autistic adults (N = 102) rated the interaction quality and traits of 42 autistic and 44 non-autistic male participants interacting in same or mixed-neurotype dyads. Non-autistic interactions and participants were evaluated most positively, with participants rated more favorably when interacting with non-autistic partners and rated as less intelligent and awkward when interacting with autistic partners. Observers perceived mixed interactions as the least successful overall. Whereas non-autistic interactions were rated as smoother and more enjoyable than mixed interactions, they were not rated differently from autistic interactions on any measure of interaction quality. Observers also perceived that non-autistic participants but not autistic participants disclosed more to non-autistic partners. However, they evaluated autistic participants more negatively than their partners in the interaction evaluated them; they disproportionately underestimated trust and intelligence ratings made by autistic participants; and they and reported lower social interest in participants than did the autistic and non-autistic people in the interactions. Collectively, these findings indicate that non-autistic adults both detect and demonstrate the double empathy problem when observing social interactions involving autistic people.The “double empathy problem” refers to breakdowns in communication and understanding that frequently occur between autistic and non-autistic people. Previous studies have shown that autistic people often establish better rapport and connection when interacting with other autistic people compared to when interacting with non-autistic people, but it is unclear whether this is noticeable to non-autistic observers. In this study, 102 non-autistic undergraduate students viewed and rated video recordings of “get to know you” conversations between pairs of autistic and non-autistic adults. Sometimes the pairs were two autistic people, sometimes they were two non-autistic people, and sometimes they were “mixed” interactions of one autistic and one non-autistic person. Observers tended to rate non-autistic participants and their interactions the most favorably, but—consistent with the “double empathy problem”—they rated mixed interactions between autistic and non-autistic people as the least successful. They also perceived that only non-autistic people disclosed more when interacting with a non-autistic conversation partner. Autistic participants’ partners in the conversations tended to evaluate them more favorably than did outside observers, suggesting that personal contact may facilitate more positive evaluations of autistic people. Furthermore, observers expressed less social interest in participants than did the autistic and non-autistic participants in the interactions. Together, these findings suggest that non-autistic observers both detect and demonstrate some aspects of the double empathy problem. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Fire and frost represent two major hurdles for the persistence of trees in open grassy biomes and have both been proposed as drivers of grassland‐forest boundaries in Africa.We assess the response of young tree seedlings, which represent a vulnerable stage in tree recruitment, to traumatic fire and frost disturbances.In a greenhouse experiment, we investigated how seedling traits predicted survival and resprouting ability in response to fire versus frost; we characterized survival strategies of seedlings in response to the two disturbances, and we documented how the architecture of surviving seedlings is affected by fire versus frost injury.Survival rates were similar under both treatments. However, different species displayed different levels of sensitivity to fire and frost. Seedling survival was higher for older seedlings and seedlings with more basal leaves. Survivors of a fire event lost more biomass than the survivors of a frost event. However, the architecture of recovered fire‐ and frost‐treated seedlings was mostly similar. Seedlings that recovered from fire and frost treatments were often shorter than those that had not been exposed to any disturbance, with multiple thin branches, which may increase vulnerability to the next frost or fire event.Synthesis. Fire caused more severe aboveground damage compared with a single frost event, suggesting that fire is an important driver of tree distribution in these open grassland systems. However, the impact of repeated frost events may be equally severe and needs to be investigated. Also, woody species composition may be influenced by phenomena that affect the timing and frequency of seedling exposure to damage, as mortality was found to be dependent on seedling age. Therefore, changes in fire regime and climate are likely to result in changes in the composition and the structure of the woody components of these systems. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: Conservation biological control focuses on enhancing arthropod predator habitats by increasing the natural resources required for survival and reproduction. However, this requires knowledge about the specific requirements of these predators, which can only be acquired from species‐level data. We provide a description of species‐level diversity patterns of the arthropod predator groups Araneae, Coccinellidae, Mantodea and Neuroptera from maize agro‐ecosystems in South Africa. Predators were sampled by sweep‐net at regional and local scales within the Dry Highveld Grassland Bioregion. A list is provided of predators that occurred naturally inside maize agro‐ecosystems, which may be good candidates for the biological control of pests. Diversity indices displayed significantly lower values in maize fields compared with uncultivated vegetation. Marginal and rangeland vegetation had similar diversity levels. Predator diversity of maize was probably dependent on source populations from uncultivated vegetation, highlighting the importance of field margins with respect to maintaining predator diversity in pest management regimes for maize fields. Some predators frequented maize fields, suggesting adaptability to agricultural disturbance. Generalists including Cheilomenes lunata, Chrysoperla congrua and Enoplognatha molesta may be suitable for conservation biocontrol because they can persist in annual agro‐ecosystems year‐round provided that they have access to field margins. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The large-scale cultivation of crops may lead to biodiversity decreases as a result of habitat loss and degradation of natural habitats. A popular strategy for enhancing insect diversity in intensively cultivated habitats involves maintaining plant diversity in field margins by means of sown grass and wildflower strips., Despite extensive cultivation of maize/corn (approximately 3.1 million ha) in the grassy biomes of South Africa, little effort has been made to understand whether plant groups maintain insect biodiversity within these agro-ecosystems., The diversity relationships between three prominent guilds of arthropods (herbivores, parasitoids and predators) and three large plant families ( Asteraceae, Fabaceae and Poaceae) are described at regional scale across the Grassland and Savanna Biomes of South Africa., The results obtained indicate general positive relationships between plant and arthropod diversity of the lower vegetation layers (≤2 m)., An increased abundance of members of the grass family ( Poaceae) led to significantly higher invertebrate numbers in maize fields and adjacent vegetation. This suggests that grasses play a significant role in supporting arthropod diversity within these agro-ecosystems., When considering farm design in maize-agro-ecosystems, our results indicate that maintaining grassy natural vegetation patches adjacent to actively cultivated maize fields may be sufficient to maintain and conserve arthropod diversity within agricultural landscapes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The long-standing tradition of classifying South Africa's biogeographical area into biomes is commonly linked to vegetation structure and climate. Because arthropod communities are often governed by both these factors, it can be expected that arthropod communities would fit the biomes. To test this hypothesis, we considered how well arthropod species assemblages fit South Africa's grassy biomes. Arthropod assemblages were sampled from six localities across the grassland and savanna biomes by means of suction sampling, to determine whether the two biomes have distinctive arthropod assemblages. Arthropod samples of these biomes clustered separately in multidimensional scaling analyses. Within biomes, arthropod assemblages were more distinctive for savanna localities than grassland. Arthropod samples of the two biomes clustered together when trophic groups were considered separately, suggesting some similarity in functional assemblages. Dissimilarity was greatest between biomes for phytophagous and predacious trophic groups, with most pronounced differentiation between biomes at sub-escarpment localities. Our results indicate that different arthropod assemblages do fit the grassy biomes to some extent, but the pattern is not as clear as it is for plant species. Significance: • Provides the first comparison of arthropod composition between grassland and savanna biomes of South Africa. • Explores whether these two biomes show distinct arthropod assemblages. • Documents the characteristics of arthropod assemblages. • Confirms that plant assemblages of biomes are more distinguishable than arthropod assemblages. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Researchers are increasingly relying on online methods for data collection, including for qualitative research involving interviews and focus groups. In this letter, we alert autism researchers to a possible threat to data integrity in such studies: "scammer" participants, who may be posing as autistic people and/or parents of autistic children in research studies, presumably for financial gain. Here, we caution qualitative autism researchers to be vigilant of potential scammer participants in their online studies and invite a broader discussion about the implications of such fraudulent acts. Doing research online, via Zoom, Teams, or live chat, is becoming more and more common. It can help researchers to reach more people, including from different parts of the world. It can also make the research more accessible for participants, especially those with different communication preferences. However, online research can have its downsides too. We have recently been involved in three studies in which we had in-depth discussions with autistic people and/or parents of autistic children about various topics. It turns out, though, that some of these participants were not genuine. Instead, we believe they were "scammer participants": people posing as autistic people or parents of autistic children, possibly to gain money from doing the research. This is a real problem because we need research data that we can trust. In this letter, we encourage autism researchers to be wary of scammer participants in their own research. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

• Many savanna tree seedlings are able to survive topkill at 30 days old. • Buds close to ground level increases the probability of seedling survival. • Vachellia species show signs of root contraction. Disturbances determine the structure of savannas by influencing growth at all stages of a tree's life. Since the seedling stage is such a significant part of a tree's life cycle, greater knowledge of this stage informs woody management and encroachment prevention. In this study, we tested the effect of a suite of seedling functional traits on seedling survival after experimentally-induced disturbance. Twelve mimosoid legume tree species, an important group in African savannas, with different provenances, were grown from seed under experimental conditions. Seedlings were clipped at 1 cm above ground at age 30 days, to simulate disturbance, and their survival recorded. A number of above- and below-ground traits quantifying height, biomass, bud bank and architecture were measured prior to clipping in order to assess what traits could be responsible for post-clipping survival. We also quantified root contraction by calculating the change in height of the lowest bud between the ages of 6 and 60 days. Fire regime and browser biomass of the native range of each species were calculated to test whether these factors predicted seedling survival. Seedling survival was primarily predicted by the whether the plant possessed a bud below 1 cm above ground level, i.e. below the height of clipping. For the first time we report that, in several Vachellia species, root contraction occurred, bringing basal buds closer to the ground, and in some cases below the ground, thus increasing seedling survival after clipping. No environmental variables were significant predictors of survival. Our results suggest that, at this young age, buds close to the soil surface are the most important trait predicting seedling survival, while other traits that are important for saplings and adults do not significantly influence the survival of seedlings. At the seedling stage, herbivory and fire are possibly inflicting the same degree of selection pressures and thus little trait differentiation is evident across the environmental gradient. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

There is an increasing focus on research exploring autistic communication and community. In this review, we systematically collate and analyse how autistic adults describe their experiences of other autistic people and the relationship this has with their Quality of Life (QoL). Fifty two qualitative papers were analysed using thematic meta-synthesis. Results found many experiences of other autistic people were positive and were associated with improved QoL across a range of domains. The heterogeneity of the autistic experiences described indicates a need for further research to explore which factors predict a positive impact on QoL. Analysis also highlighted a paucity of data on autistic people with co-occurring intellectual disability in relation to this phenomenon. Implications for research and practice are discussed.Research has suggested that autistic people enjoy spending time with other autistic people and find them easier to talk to. We wanted to find out what autistic people say about spending time with other autistic people and whether this makes their life better. We found 52 papers which described this and reviewed what they found. We found that many autistic people had positive experiences of spending time with other autistic people and these experiences had positive impact on their lives in a range of different ways. The papers did not tell us whether this also happens for autistic people with a learning disability. More research is needed to find out more about why spending time with other autistic people helps some autistic people. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Studies investigating autistic community research priorities indicate a mismatch between what autism research focuses on and what autistic people want to see researched. Furthermore, there has not been a research priority-setting exercise specifically with autistic people in Scotland, where there are unique cultural, political and social contexts. Using a community-based participatory design, we aimed to identify the research priorities of autistic adults living in Scotland. Autistic and non-autistic researchers designed and conducted a survey where 225 autistic adults rated and ranked research topics in order of importance and provided qualitative feedback on issues and questions important to them. The top five research priorities were mental health/well-being, identification and diagnosis of autistic people, support services, knowledge and attitudes towards autistic people and issues impacting autistic women. There were differences in priorities according to different intersections of identity, and qualitative responses indicated a desire for research to focus on support and understanding. The bottom three priorities concerned genetics, treatments and interventions and causes. These findings emphasise the need to address the gap between what autism research focuses on and the everyday lives of autistic people.Although research has the potential to improve autistic people’s lives, lots of funding goes towards research looking at topics which autistic people say has little impact in their everyday lives. Autistic people’s lives can be different depending on where they live, and Scotland is a unique country in many ways. We wanted to find out which topics autistic people in Scotland want to see research on. Our team of autistic and non-autistic researchers (including university-based and community researchers) created a survey where 225 autistic adults rated and ranked the importance of possible research topics and shared their thoughts on what topics mattered to them. The five most important topics were mental health and well-being, identifying and diagnosing autistic people, support services (including healthcare and social care), non-autistic people’s knowledge and attitudes and issues impacting autistic women. The three least important topics were genetics or biological aspects of autism, autism treatments/interventions and causes of autism. Our findings indicate that autistic people in Scotland want research to focus on things that matter to their day-to-day lives. Also, the Scottish government says they will be listening to autistic people in their latest policy plans, and we believe that considering autistic people’s research priorities is an important part of this. Our findings also add to growing calls for change to happen in how and what autism researchers do research on. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]