research review

Welcome back to Reading the Research, where I trawl the Internet to find noteworthy research on autism and related subjects, then discuss it in brief with bits from my own life, research, and observations.

Today\’s article is some long overdue pushback against the Autism $peaks style catastrophizing of autistic lives and outcomes.  

For decades, studies on autistic people and our lives have typically focused on what we can\’t do, and what things we struggle in.  This is because of the history of the diagnosis and the medical field overall.  Things are labeled as illnesses, a treatment (typically just one, like for a broken leg) is prescribed, the patient does the treatment and gets better.  

This is simplistic, but it works for many physical ailments.  The thing is, autism is not that.  There is no broken bone.  Autism is a neurodevelopmental condition.  There is no one-size-fits-all treatment, and there never will be.  We are simply too different from each other.  Those individual differences have to be accounted for.

This study differs from those of the past by having a much broader focus.  Instead of starting and stopping the narrative with, \”well, your kid is autistic, and they\’re always going to be autistic, so it\’s time to give up any dreams and hopes you had for your kid and prepare for a life of suffering,\” this study instead chose to see whether autistic children learn and grow in understanding and ability.  

Unsurprisingly, I hope, to anyone who\’s met an autistic person, the answer is yes.  While not every autistic kid will necessarily reach all milestones for \”normal\” communication or independent living, we do continue learning throughout our lifetimes.  Recognizing those successes is an important part of support for autistic people and our families.  It also goes a long way toward undermining the doom and gloom that medical professionals and even some parents project onto 

The study also examined what factors contributed to autistic growth and development of skills.  Unsurprisingly, it helped to have a certain amount of income.  Adequate income takes a significant amount of stress off the family, and allows for more options for family and singleton therapy, as well as support services, better schooling options, and their choice of doctors and medical professionals.  

I\’ll be interested to see what this group\’s research on adolescents shows.  This study only went up to age 10, which is definitely sufficient to prove that autistic people aren\’t magically stuck at the developmental age they\’re diagnosed at.  But the teenage years are distinctly more demanding and difficult than the years before them, and so that data would be exceptionally useful as well.  

For further information on this learning and growing (also called neuroplasticity), please also consult this podcast episode.

(Pst! If you like seeing the latest autism-relevant research, visit my Twitter, which has links and brief comments on studies that were interesting, but didn\’t get a whole Reading the Research article about them.)

Welcome back to Reading the Research, where I trawl the Internet to find noteworthy research on autism and related subjects, then discuss it in brief with bits from my own life, research, and observations.

Today\’s article helps show that the miscommunication issue between autistic people and neurotypical people is not simply an autistic failure, but a failure on neurotypical peoples\’ parts as well.  

There\’s a few stereotypes you can see in the presentation of autistic people mentioned here.  Things like avoiding looking people in the eyes (can be overwhelming), literalist thinking, and repetitive movements (often used to calm ourselves in stressful situations) are all factors.  It\’s gotten to the point where I can, in some circumstances, interact with a person and be able to tell almost immediately that they\’re neurodiverse.  

Apparently, this article says, these behaviors look like the actions of a person being deceptive.  Oddly enough, these behaviors are actually not particularly indicative of a person being deceptive… we as a culture simply think they are.  

The implications go much, much further than the article suggests.  In court, autistic people receive harsher sentences than our typically developing peers.  But I\’ll bet dollars to doughnuts the same effect holds true in other arenas of life, such as job interviews and first impressions.  

When we talk about autistic people being disabled, this is a major part of it: the way others see and react to us.  Others\’ prejudices and failures are not our fault, but we\’re expected to bend over backwards to compensate for them.  That\’s neither fair nor healthy for anyone involved.  

It\’s the same expectation as saying, \”well if women don\’t want to be sexually assaulted, they should wear clothing that hides every inch of skin.\”  Or maybe more accurately, saying, \”Well if black people don\’t want to be murdered by the police, they should act like they\’re white as much as possible and be as nonthreatening as possible at all times.\”

Because of this prejudice effect, autistic people are denied the chance for friendships, the ability to participate in our communities, job and volunteer opportunities, promotions, and general human consideration.  We deserve better.  

(Pst! If you like seeing the latest autism-relevant research, visit my Twitter, which has links and brief comments on studies that were interesting, but didn\’t get a whole Reading the Research article about them.)

Welcome back to Reading the Research, where I trawl the Internet to find noteworthy research on autism and related subjects, then discuss it in brief with bits from my own life, research, and observations.

Today\’s article is one of various articles I\’ve seen about companion animals and autistic people.  

The research is pretty simple here.  Owning a compatible pet can be a very positive experience for autistic people.  Many studies focused on dogs, since dogs display their affection more.  As a bonus, they need to be walked, which can mean built-in exercise for the family or individual.  

There\’s something to be said for cats, though, and that\’s that if you get the right one, they\’re comparatively low-maintenance while still being affectionate and supportive.  They\’re typically quieter than dogs, which is a bonus for humans with sensory sensitivities.  

In both cases (or other, less common pets, like rats, snakes, birds, gerbils, hamsters, etc), the fact that the animal doesn\’t judge by human criteria is incredibly valuable.  Their needs are simpler, and they\’re often more forgiving than human peers.  A good pet can be a support and a joy to any household, not merely ones with autistic people.  

I\’d tend to say furred and affectionate animals might be a better match for most autistic people, given that petting the animal can be a pleasing sensory experience.  Particularly with a purring cat, indicating the petting is making both you and the cat happy.  

As with any support for autistic people, careful consideration of the specific person and their needs is required.  Immediately rushing out to buy the cutest cat or dog you can find is not kind to the autistic person or the animal.  Keeping noise considerations, specific human and animal temperaments, required responsibility, and other relevant factors in mind is important in these decisions.

It\’s also relevant to consider whether adopting a grown cat or dog might be worthwhile.  A pet bought while it\’s still a puppy or kitten may not have sufficient socialization to be a proper support animal.  Older pets, on the other hand, have settled personalities.  They also have a harder time being adopted, so you can be a good person and change a pet\’s life for the better, while also being a good person and change your loved one\’s life for the better.  

(Pst! If you like seeing the latest autism-relevant research, visit my Twitter, which has links and brief comments on studies that were interesting, but didn\’t get a whole Reading the Research article about them.)

Welcome back to Reading the Research, where I trawl the Internet to find noteworthy research on autism and related subjects, then discuss it in brief with bits from my own life, research, and observations.

Today\’s article touches on a sore spot for many unemployed and underemployed autistic people (hi!).

The fact is, the hiring process in most companies is extremely discriminatory.  Not in some cartoonish way, with an evil HR person twirling his mustache and leeringly stating, \”we don\’t hire black people/women/neurodiverse people here.\”  And yet, it might as well happen like that, because that\’s more or less the results, repeated over and over across thousands of companies worldwide.  

As far as I\’ve seen and heard, there isn\’t really a standard set of practices for hiring.  As a result, hiring managers are pretty much given criteria for what skills the job requires, which lets them sort resumes…  but after that, and sometimes even during that, is when things go wrong.  

Hiring managers tend to hire people they personally like.  Their gut tells them this person or that would do a good job, and so they hire that person.  The problem is the criteria used.  Humans tend to shorthand \”this person is like me\” to \”this person is competent and will fit well into the company.\”  Which puts neurodiverse people out in the cold unless the company is already mainly neurodiverse.  So effectively the hiring process is gatekeeping, and on a massive scale.  

It\’s during the interview process that many autistic people fall flat on our faces.  It\’s not that we lack the skills necessary.  It\’s that the interview process is an elaborate dance of lies and wordplay.  Is anyone really enthusiastic about a job in retail?  Especially after applying for 20 more positions elsewhere, managing multiple interviews, and being turned down repeatedly.  And yet \”enthusiasm and positivity\” are major hiring criteria for most retail chains, if not most workplaces.  

Autistic people often aren\’t great at lying.  So we\’re more likely to give honest answers, which get us disqualified.  Sometimes even before the interview, since there\’s an increasing movement to use online psychiatric measures with opaque criteria.

The typical path for autistic people to even be considered is for our work to speak for us.  Portfolios and work samples are key.  Or knowing someone in the company, someone who can vouch for your skill and usefulness, and someone who can help mediate issues as they arise, is another path. Not all jobs have a portfolio option, though, and connections to others even more limited in autistic people than they are in neurotypical people.

So it\’s kind of a mess, and a major reason why neurodiverse and autistic people aren\’t well represented in the workforce.  

This article offers a solution to the problem, in the form of changing the hiring criteria, and changing workplaces so they actively invite and support neurodiverse people.  I agree with the suggestion that doing so would lead to businesses being more successful and competitive.  

As the Hollywood movie industry has shown us in recent years, you can only get so many interesting stories out of older white male Americans. If you want new ideas, you need to look new places.  Women, people of color, neurodiverse humans of all stripes, our ideas will differ.  To continue improving and growing businesses, those different ideas are necessary.   

For all of our sakes, I hope people listen.

(Pst! If you like seeing the latest autism-relevant research, visit my Twitter, which has links and brief comments on studies that were interesting, but didn\’t get a whole Reading the Research article about them.)

Welcome back to Reading the Research, where I trawl the Internet to find noteworthy research on autism and related subjects, then discuss it in brief with bits from my own life, research, and observations.

Today\’s article is one in a lot of very long overdue research on autistic women.  The scientific term is \”sex differences\” which might weird out a more general audience.  In biology, \”sex\” can refer to the physical organs and characteristics.  In psychology and sociology, this differs from \”gender\” which is the person\’s experience of their masculinity, femininity, both-ness, or neither-ness.  

In this research, the focus is just specifically on the physical, which makes me wonder if they\’ve accidentally thrown monkey wrenches into their work.  The transgender and autistic communities overlap quite a bit (hi, that includes me!).  Since transgender people also tend to have different brain scan readouts than cisgender folks, I\’d kind of assume this would complicate any potential findings…

At any rate, potential flaws in the researchers\’ methods aside, they did find differences between male and female autistic brains. This is maybe not surprising if you\’ve met a decent number of male and female autistics.  The latter tend to learn more camouflaging behaviors and to be quieter due to societal expectations, while the former aren\’t expected to manage such nuances and can thusly be far more visible.

If I\’m reading this summary I linked, and the main research paper correctly, the data shows autistic brains are more similar to each other, regardless of maleness or femaleness, than they are to neurotypical brains.  There were differences based in maleness or femaleness, such as how well the visual parts of the brain communicated (wonder what that corresponds to in actual life? Poorer imagination skills?).  

Mostly, I\’m just glad to see research prioritizing figuring out what differences there are between male and female autistics.  In the very recent past, the focus has pretty much exclusively been on male autistics, to the point that the autism criteria was written around them.  Thusly, to \”qualify\” as autistic medically, you were judged on \”how male you are\” to quote a fellow autistic from the show Love on the Spectrum.  

This isn\’t the first research to examine female autistics, but it might be important in establishing a more generally applicable autism diagnosis.  And it\’s definitely relevant to recognize that distinctive challenges and differences exist between the sexes.  

(Pst! If you like seeing the latest autism-relevant research, visit my Twitter, which has links and brief comments on studies that were interesting, but didn\’t get a whole Reading the Research article about them.)

Welcome back to Reading the Research, where I trawl the Internet to find noteworthy research on autism and related subjects, then discuss it in brief with bits from my own life, research, and observations.

Today\’s article describes how treating anxiety can change a person\’s personality positively, making them able to be more warm, friendly, and open to new experiences.  Kind of exactly what many autistic people struggle with, at least stereotypically.  

In some ways, this is a \”no, duh\” research study.  Kind of like how people say \”oh, my child\’s autism was cured when we started treating their chronic pain!\”  Did the child actually stop being autistic?  Doubtful.  Did their ability to empathize, communicate, and express themselves emotionally increase?  Absolutely, because now all the energy they were spending on suffering through the chronic pain can be put toward doing those things.  

In broadest brush strokes, this is more or less what\’s happened to me over the course of the last six years.  I had to look it up, and yeah, it\’s been six years.  Prior to therapy (LENS, a form of neurofeedback, as well as talk therapy), I would describe my past self as \”focused, pragmatic, non-emotive, and a little cold.\”  Also definitely more depressed.  I was always interested in others to some extent, but it wasn\’t well-expressed.  Typically I\’d simply observe, rather than interact directly.  

Over the six years, I\’ve been able to begin working on my body language more.  I have more brainpower and energy to devote to reading others\’ body language.  I\’ve learned (mostly) how to smile on command, which is an important social skill in the US (especially if you appear to be female).  And I\’ve been able to use some of my energy to invest in being emotionally supportive and kind to others.  Outwardly and inwardly.  

I\’ve also been able to be kinder to myself, which is just as important in some ways.  If the inside of your skull is a horrible, toxic, judgmental, negative place, it\’s going to be harder for you to be kind to others.  

The study suggests a pair of methods to treat anxiety.  One is Cognitive Behavioral Therapy, or CBT, which is pretty standard at this point.  It gives you tools to identify negative and unhelpful thought processes, change them, and embrace relaxation.  The other is new to me, metacognitive therapy, which seems to aim to change your thinking about worry rather than the actual worries.  

These may be promising therapies to look into for any sufferer of anxiety.  I\’m glad to see work continues to be done to improve the lives of people with mental illness, such as myself and many other autistic people.  

(Pst! If you like seeing the latest autism-relevant research, visit my Twitter, which has links and brief comments on studies that were interesting, but didn\’t get a whole Reading the Research article about them.)

Welcome back to Reading the Research, where I trawl the Internet to find noteworthy research on autism and related subjects, then discuss it in brief with bits from my own life, research, and observations.

Today\’s article strikes me as overly optimistic, but presents interesting possibilities for depression and anxiety neurofeedback, TMS, and other brain stimulation treatments of the future.  

Brain stimulation seems like a fairly promising technology for things like traumatic brain injury, mental illness, and sleep issues.  These are pretty new ideas, especially to the public eye, which means there hasn\’t been a ton by way of large scale testing.  This is also due to the fact that the medical industry tends to throw pills at things first and shrug helplessly if that doesn\’t work.  

Because we don\’t have that large scale testing, and because peoples\’ brains differ so much, brain stimulation is a \”we\’ll try this and maybe it\’ll help!\” situation.  Which, it can and has.  But we don\’t really know why something helps or doesn\’t, for the most part.  And like any therapy, doing it incorrectly can hurt as well as heal.  

When I began receiving LENS (Low Energy Neurofeedback System) from my doctor, she was very careful and methodical about it.  We had no map, but she\’s an experienced practitioner.  We tried various types of signal styles, and varying numbers of modifications.  In the end, we settled on a particular style, and 1-2 modifications every two weeks.  We also skip over the spots that would modify my motor strip, because the last time we tried that it put me into road rage.  Fortunately, the modifications can be countered via the same process they\’re induced.  

Even with my doctor\’s expertise, it was still a process to find what worked.  These researchers, it seems, are aiming to remove the guesswork from brain stimulation.  They\’ve developed the keys to making a computer able to predict what changes will occur in the brain when a particular type of stimulation is applied.  

Basically, they\’re trying to make it so a doctor could scan a patient\’s brain, then take that scan, give it to the computer, and have the computer virtually simulate what would happen if various brain stimulation techniques were applied.  The doctor can then return to the patient and administer the one that\’s most likely to work best.  

At present, it looks like they\’re focused on only one kind of brain stimulation, rather than the broad spectrum that includes TMS, LENS, and active neurofeedback.  Still, it\’s a step in the right direction.  Someday, I hope to live in a world where the medication roulette game is only played when other, better options have failed.  If more of this kind of research is funded and published, that day may not be that far in the future.  

(Pst! If you like seeing the latest autism-relevant research, visit my Twitter, which has links and brief comments on studies that were interesting, but didn\’t get a whole Reading the Research article about them.)

Welcome back to Reading the Research, where I trawl the Internet to find noteworthy research on autism and related subjects, then discuss it in brief with bits from my own life, research, and observations.

Today\’s article reaches far beyond the researcher-stated implications.  It, in fact, strongly supports what I find myself telling autism parents frequently: you have to let your kid try, struggle, and even fail.  

The researchers here were interested in finding out how it affected a child\’s motivation to try challenging tasks when a parent swoops in and does it for them.  Perhaps unsurprisingly, if the parents took the task away from the child and finished it for them, the kid mostly stopped trying to finish the puzzle themself.  The motivation and persistence was quashed.  

This is a common tendency I find in parents of autistic people, to be honest.  It\’s not just the tying of shoelaces, which is the example they use in the article.  Or even challenging math problems in this or that class.  

No, what I tend to see is that, because autistic people struggle harder for more basic skills, that there\’s this tendency to do things for us.  Either, as the article opines, because it\’s really hard to watch us struggle with simple tasks.  Or, because our skills develop at different rates than neurotypical people, it\’s not as simple for our parents to recognize that \”maybe they can do this themself now.\”  

In the traditional developmental trajectory, there seems to be a sort of accepted \”now this child is 5, so they can begin to help around the house with simple chores\” mentality.  Certain expectations of certain ages.  Obviously every person is different, even in typically developing folks.  But by age 16, it\’s usually more than reasonable to expect the person to know how to do their own laundry, for example.  

But when your autistic 16 year old struggles hard with executive functions and doesn\’t remember they need to do the laundry at the best time in everyone\’s schedule, it can be easy to fall into the habit of just doing it for them.  And then, because inertia is a mighty force, it stays like that.  

The thing about shielding autistic people from struggles is that it also shields us from learning opportunities, and erodes our tolerance for trying new and difficult things.  

Adult life, as I\’ve frustratingly discovered, is just chocked full of new and difficult things.  And while those things can be frustrating and scary, one of the things my parents did right was letting me try them.  I have no doubt that\’s a large part of why I was able to learn to live independently.  I wish it didn\’t seem to be such a rare experience.  

(Pst! If you like seeing the latest autism-relevant research, visit my Twitter, which has links and brief comments on studies that were interesting, but didn\’t get a whole Reading the Research article about them.)

Welcome back to Reading the Research, where I trawl the Internet to find noteworthy research on autism and related subjects, then discuss it in brief with bits from my own life, research, and observations.

Today\’s article shows a troubling trend in exercise for autistic people.  It seems that sometime before age 13, autistic people just sort of taper off doing moderate to vigorous exercise.  

This isn\’t the first exercise-focused study in autism I\’ve seen.  Actually, I participated in one that was focused on adults.  But it\’s not unreasonable to also look at children, because habits built in childhood absolutely affect adulthood.

The study summary has no opinion as to why that particular age would be where physical activity levels diverge.  I have some guesses, but no solid answers.  

First, I am quite certain my personal physical activity level decreased significantly after I learned to read.  As more and more books opened up to me, I spent a very significant amount of time with my nose in a book, rather than outside running around.  Though the measured amounts of screen time between neurotypical and autistic kids didn\’t vary, it\’s possible that other sedentary past times, like board games or reading, took the place of active activities.  

Second, age 13 is, in the US, about when you start getting to choose what activities you want to do.  For an autistic person who\’s suffered socially and perhaps has only a few friends, signing up for a team sport isn\’t usually a really attractive option.  And even if you still do it, as I did with a rowing team, the experience is often not terribly pleasant.  

I think the nicest thing I can say about the rowing team experience is that I was pretty good at it.  I have a naturally strong back and legs, and rowing uses all of that and your arms to boot.  Which was why I was in two boat teams, not one.  For all that I was heavy and absolutely godawful at fitness, I was apparently worth bringing along for that raw power.

The thing is, I was always, always an outcast.  There was no time in my memory where I was \”one of us\” when it wasn\’t race day and it was a matter of convenience.  Most self-respecting children wouldn\’t be satisfied with that.  And I wasn\’t, really.  It was something I was good at, and I was sufficiently miserable all the time that that was enough.  

Finally, there\’s one last factor that combines with the others.  Autism can come with complex medical needs and differences.  We can have significantly worse physical dexterity and hand-eye coordination, simply because our brains are different.  We may need a special diet, or frequent doctor visits.  We may suffer additional allergies that make being outside torturous, or have a histamine buildup issue that makes us utterly miserable after a certain amount of exercise (hi!).  All of these things factor into whether we experience sports and other exercise activities as worthwhile or pleasant.  And whether others value us and invite us to those activities.  

I absolutely agree with the researchers on the importance of physical exercise.  That said, it\’s currently winter and I barely get any exercise myself right now.  Would things be different if I\’d been taught foraging and hiking much younger?  If team sports hadn\’t been a horrible mix of anxiety and impending failure?  If I hadn\’t had this weird histamine issue and the tendency towards being overweight?

Perhaps.  I hope so.  

(Pst! If you like seeing the latest autism-relevant research, visit my Twitter, which has links and brief comments on studies that were interesting, but didn\’t get a whole Reading the Research article about them.)