While I consider this to be little more than propaganda in places and making assumptions detached away from the evidence base. Also that some people do not have the expertise to be making such assumptions.
Comparing this compulsion to Newson's descriptions, it would be linked to the "Need for Control" which she describes as their being an coding problem in addition to coding problems of deficits in pride/ shame/ social identity. adc.bmj.com/content/88/7/5…
"Eighty two per cent show little sense of status or identity in others, and 86% show no sense of pride, shame, responsibility, or identity in themselves, in addition to the lack of this sense which is implied by their demand avoidance." p596
I will restate this again, Newson et al (2003) does not link demand avoidance to anxiety, the article does not mention anxiety. Does sometimes mention panic and fear. Newson describes PDA behaviours as being much/ most obsessive in nature
"Obsessive behaviour: Much or most of the behaviour described is carried out in an obsessive way, especially demand avoidance" P597
What this seems to say is that Newson was correct to describe PDA as not being an autism spectrum disorder. For it not to be connected.
That she was incorrect in PDA having coding issues from a "need for control".
That if one critically engages with Newson's work, it would most likely be viewed as an OCD and Related Disorder today.
"Surface Sociability" is a common trait amongst mental disorders, most do not include it in its dx criteria. It does seem an error in judgement to view PDA as autism.
PDA can end up anywhere as Newson set precedent of creating a diagnostic grouping for it.
So I have been briefly looking into how OCD is assessed. I came across this image. Crikey, it just makes me think even more that PDA should be viewed as an OCD & related disorder.
@ekverstania@lynchauthor@NeuroClastic I think it needs more thought being put into to be honest, into exactly how it works. I think that "autistic features", i.e. what many would call ASD, is a smaller component of autism, which is how autistic features interact with each observer's bias.
@ekverstania@lynchauthor@NeuroClastic Thinking aloud, I suspect autistic features themselves cannot be subtyped, but the broader autism phenomena probably can be.
You can have subtypes/ subgroups, but it they routed in observers bias, instead of intrinsic differences between autistic persons.
@ekverstania How I define autism is an interesting question.
@ekverstania I do not have time to do a blog post on this so I will do my best to cover here briefly.
@ekverstania First point is that, I think autism is complex, it is not a simple concept. Any such approach to do so, is going to have issues. At the same time, depending on the situation, I can be happy working with such models, like DSM-5 autism criteria.
So the more I reflect on the assumption that PDA is ASD/ autism subtype/ subgroup/ profile; the more rediculous it seems to me.
I am reflecting on the agenda of O'Nions et al (2016), where they seek to find PDA DISCO questions that can identify what the authors think is, in the autistic population. This is while being mistaken about Newson's PDA research.
Newson was not trying to find PDA in autistic persons, she was trying to show PDA is significantly different to Kanner's autism & Asperger's Syndrome, and thus PDA is needed. Newson included in non-autistic persons in her sample.
Finally got my hands on the Help4Psychology PDA article. Only skimmed over parts of it so far. Seeing they assumed PDA is linked to autism and base hypotheses on that. Still in my mental "pseudoscience" pile with much autism research, like most ABA research.
While it references some critical literature, it does not reference any my own, @milton_damian or @Allison66746425 scholarship. So much for engaging with critique.
Also Conflict of Interest seems not to be disclosed either in how Judy Eaton is a member of PDA Development and how she stands to gain from PDA being accepted as part of ASD & that her clinical practice is based on specialising in PDA.
@ekverstania You can add this response to the list of parallel's to PDA.
I am all for experiencing the validity of lived experience & empathising with other's perspectives.
@ekverstania From a literature perspective, we cannot successfully divide autism. Differences between subtypes break down under scrutiny.
Generally, autistic persons do not want autism to be subdivided too.
@ekverstania So if something is seen differently in any "subgroup" it is often due to something causing the difference. If autism itself, does not cause a behaviour or core feature of then this construct by definition cannot be autism.