Before we get too far into 2021, I thought I’d write a thread recapping some of the research that came out of my lab in 2020. Most of this work was led by my talented team of graduate students, Kerrianne Morrison, @kmdebrabander, and @DesiRJones.
Back in January, a news story was published about Kerrianne’s study showing improved social interaction outcomes for autistic adults when paired with another autistic partner. utdallas.edu/news/health-me…
A detailed thread about the study and a link to the paper can be found here (feel free to DM me your email address if you’d like a copy of the full paper for this study or any of our studies):
Another paper published early in 2020 (it appeared a few months earlier online) showed that traditional standalone tasks of social cognition are less predictive of functional and social skills among autistic adults than commonly assumed in autism research.
Next, @kmdebrabander led and published an innovative study about how well autistic and non-autistic adults can predict their own cognitive and social cognitive performance.
Meanwhile, @DesiRJones was making huge strides highlighting how the woeful underrepresentation of Black scientists and Black autistic people within autism research affects cultural assumptions and clinical practice.
Our lab then published a paper supporting the “double empathy theory” by @milton_damian showing that traditional measures and notions of social skill, social motivation, and social cognition have almost no relation to the real-world social interaction outcomes of autistic adults.
My lab isn’t an island, though! We continue to pursue collaborations with wonderful colleagues around the country (and now internationally as well! @cjcrompton@SueReviews among others). For instance...
I was thrilled to be part of this incisive and righteous paper led by @KristenBott about avoiding ableist language when taking about and researching autism. liebertpub.com/doi/10.1089/au…
I’m also so lucky to continue to work with @ClareHarropPhD and colleagues examining sex differences in social and non-social attention in autistic children. We have a series of papers on this topic. Here’s the latest that came@out this year: onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.100…
We have several other papers coming out soon, including a really important (IMO) study led by @DesiRJones testing how well an autism acceptance “intervention” for non-autistic adults reduces explicit and implicit biases about autism. Stay tuned!
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
A thread about our new open-access paper, just out today. We tested how well standardized measures of social cognition, social skill, and social motivation predict real-world social interaction outcomes for autistic and non-autistic (NA) adults. frontiersin.org/articles/10.33…
First some background: a deficit model of autism assumes that autistic adults often struggle in interactions w/ NA adults because they have poor or less normative social abilities. Surprisingly this assumption is rarely tested. Seems important to do!
Many psychosocial treatments of autism implicitly use a deficit framing, presuming that training autistic adults to mimic more “typical” social behavior will lead to better real-world social success & life outcomes but this seldom happens in practice.
In our new paper out today, autistic adults held a “get to know you” conversation with an unfamiliar autistic or typically-developing (TD) person. We were curious: would social interaction outcomes differ when their partner was also autistic? THREAD journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.11…
Most studies attempting to understand social disability in autism focus exclusively on individual characteristics, like social cognitive ability (e.g., theory of mind). This presumes that social interaction difficulties in autism are driven solely by the autistic person.
But social interaction by definition involves more than one person, and relational dynamics— in which each person influences and is influenced by the other— is key to understanding determinants of partner compatibility and social quality.
Do first impressions of autistic adults differ between neurotypical (NT) and autistic observers? Our new paper led by @kmdebrabander (now out at #AutisminAdulthood) addresses this question & is full of interesting findings. Here are some of the highlights. liebertpub.com/doi/10.1089/au…
Our lab has shown that NTs often form negative 1st impressions of autistic adults and are reluctant to interact with them, which creates barriers to social inclusion. Thankfully, these impressions improve when NTs have high autism knowledge or are made aware of their diagnosis.
Autistic adults, of course, tend to have high familiarity with autism and are often more adept than NTs at inferring autistic intentions and mental states. As a result, their first impressions of other autistic adults might be expected to be more favorable than those made by NTs.
We have a new paper! Led by my student Kerrianne Morrison (w/@kmdebrabander & @DanielFaso) we find that impressions of autistic adults made by neurotypicals (NT) are driven more by characteristics of the NT perceiver than by those of the ASD target. THREAD journals.sagepub.com/eprint/3B4RadK…
Our group (along with Ruth Grossman and @DanKennedyIU ) had previously found that NTs rate autistic adults less favorably than NT controls on many traits, and are less inclined to want to subsequently interact with them. 2/ nature.com/articles/srep4…
In a follow up paper, we found that impressions improve when NTs are informed that the person they are evaluating has a diagnosis of autism, presumably because they have an explanation for behaviors they perceive as atypical. 3/ journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.117…