Autism is not a barrier to effective communication

A new study challenges long-term assumptions about autism and communication, finding that communication among people with autism is as effective as their non-autonomous peers. The surprising results were published Wednesday in Natural Human Behavior and could change our understanding of social dynamics among people with neurotypic and neuroabnormality.

Debunking the myth of “insufficient communication”

For decades, the clinical definition of autism has revolved around what is called a flaw in social communication. However, this comprehensive study involving 311 participants at three study sites suggests that these putative barriers may be more about differences in communication styles than actual validity.

“Autism is often associated with social disorders associated with cheesy and clinical standards. Researchers have spent a lot of time trying to “repair” communication in autism, but this study shows that although autism and non-autonomous people communicate differently, it is just as successful as it.”

Communication via modern “phone” test

The researchers adopted a clever experimental design similar to the children’s game “phone”. Participants are divided into three types:

• All members are autistic groups
• All members are non-autonomous groups
• Mixed groups with autistic and non-autistic participants

The first person in each chain heard a story and had to pass it on to the next person. Each subsequent participant then retells the story to another person until the final participant is reached. The researchers measured the accurate information that these chains were transmitted through these chains.

What did they discover? There was no significant difference in information transmission between the three types, which challenged the basic assumptions about autistic communication skills.

Comfort of similarity: the role of communication preference

Although information transmission proved to be equally effective among groups, participants’ experience of interaction revealed interesting patterns. Involuntary people reported that people with autism would rather learn from people with autism when interacting with other non-self-help groups.

This preference for the same neurotype interaction suggests that communication challenges may stem more from differences in style and methodology than any inherent deficit in autistic communication ability.

Can disclosure improve communication?

Another interesting discovery has emerged around diagnostic disclosure. When participants were told whether they were interacting with autistic or non-automatic characters, the rapport score increased compared to this information being unpublished.

This suggests that understanding only neural differences may help people adjust their communication methods, which may lead to more positive interactions. But how will this translate into a real environment where disclosure of neurotypes in real environments poses potential social risks?

Reimagine the clinical definition

The findings of the study directly challenge the diagnostic criteria for autism spectrum disorders, which include “lifelong disorders in social communication and interaction” as a core feature. If autistic people are as effective as non-self-helpists communicate with each other, then maybe the person we labeled as “damaging” is the difference in how we communicate.

Since the opportunities for people with autism are often limited by misunderstandings about their abilities, this study may lead to meaningful changes in how we understand and support various communication styles in schools, workplaces, and social environments.

Funded by Templeton World Charity Foundation, the study involved researchers at the University of Edinburgh, the University of Texas University of Dallas, the University of Nottingham and the University of Glasgow, and based on early findings, its participant sample was mostly larger and more diverse.