1. Michael C. Is Being Othered a Co-Occurring Condition of Autism?. Autism in Adulthood;2021 (2021/06/01);3(2):118-119.

Lien vers le texte intégral (Open Access ou abonnement)

2. Rubenstein E, Furnier S. #Bias: The Opportunities and Challenges of Surveys That Recruit and Collect Data of Autistic Adults Online. Autism in Adulthood;2020 (2021/06/01);3(2):120-128.

Internet-based online surveys are a crucial tool for researchers to learn about the understudied and often overlooked population of autistic adults. The recruitment and administration of online surveys can be cheaper, quicker, and have a wider reach compared with more traditional in-person methods. As online surveys become more prevalent, it is important to place strengths in the context of limitations and biases that can arise when recruiting and administering surveys online. In this perspective, we discuss two common issues that often appear in studies that use online tools to recruit and administer surveys to autistic adults and nonautistic volunteers: selection bias and sample identifiability. Selection bias is the distortion in effect estimates (e.g., relative risk, risk ratio, incidence rate) resulting from the factors that influence why a person chose to participate or how the researcher recruits and selects participants in a study. Sampling identifiability is the ability (or inability) to quantify and define the population of interest. We use a case example of an online survey study of suicidal ideation in autistic adults and describe how issues in selection bias and sample identifiability arise and may lead to challenges unique to studying autistic adults. We conclude with recommendations to improve the quality and utility of online survey research in autistic adults. Using online resources to recruit and collect data on autistic adults is an incredible tool with great potential; yet, authors need to consider the limitations, potential biases, and tools to overcome systematic error at each stage of the study. Lay summary What is the purpose of this article? Our purpose was to describe challenges in conducting and analyzing data from surveys of autistic adults, recruited and completed online. What is already known on the topic? Health outcomes for autistic adults are understudied by crucial areas of autism research. While researchers are interested in the outcomes of autistic adults, this type of research is difficult because many autistic adults are not formally diagnosed, so not available to recruit for studies through clinic registries. Furthermore, study participation can be a long, inconvenient, and stressful process. It is not surprising then that we are seeing internet surveys of autistic adults become a popular tool to reach this population. We wanted to offer an overview and recommendations of these issues to researchers and people who read research about topics pertaining to autistic adults. What are the perspectives of the authors? We are epidemiologists at Boston University and the University of Wisconsin-Madison. We both conduct research centered in improving health and well-being for autistic people across the life span. As people who study research methods, we have seen a lot of new research using survey methods. This research is intriguing, but all too often the articles need more information so we can be sure that the research is high quality. We want to share ways to improve this type of research and to help people in understanding the strengths and limitations of online survey research. What do the authors recommend? We offer a few considerations for researchers working in this area. (1) Make the steps you took to do the research as clear as possible. (2) Be specific about who you intend to study and who you ended up studying. (3) Present the demographics and characteristics of the participants. (4) If possible, consider using data analysis methods to account for selection bias and sample identifiability issues. (5) Do not make statements that are not supported for your study results. (6) Acknowledge that we are at the beginning of studying autistic adults. (7) Advocate for more funding for research in autistic adults. How will these recommendations help autistic adults now or in the future? Online surveys are an important tool for researchers to generate hypotheses and connect with a wider range of participants. However, online surveys have unique methodological challenges. We hope that his perspective raises the topic of bias and misinterpretation in online surveys and researchers continue to produce valid and meaningful work that is crucial to improving lives of autistic adults.

Lien vers le texte intégral (Open Access ou abonnement)

3. Chew XY, Leong D-j, Khor KM, Tan GMY, Wei K-C, Magiati I. Clarifying Self-Report Measures of Social Anxiety and Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder to Improve Reporting for Autistic Adults. Autism in Adulthood;2020 (2021/06/01);3(2):129-146.

Background: Phenotypic similarities exist between autism-related experiences and anxiety (especially social anxiety and obsessive-compulsive disorder [OCD]), making it difficult for autistic people to self-report their experiences using existing measures developed for nonautistic adults. We examined whether clarifications aiming to tease out autism-related experiences from social anxiety or OCD in self-report questionnaires would influence autistic and nonautistic participants’ ratings. Methods: Two autistic consultants and two experienced clinicians were consulted to develop item clarifications aiming to disentangle autistic from anxiety experiences for two questionnaires: the Social Anxiety Questionnaire (SAQ) and the Padua Inventory (PI) for OCD. Autistic adults (n?=?50) and nonautistic university students with higher (n?=?81) and lower autistic traits (ATs; n?=?104) completed the original questionnaire followed by the clarified questionnaire items online. Results: For social anxiety, there were few significant differences between the original and clarified item and total SAQ scores. For OCD, participants reported significantly lower scores for the OCD-clarified PI items than for the original items and the autism-clarified items. Larger original?clarified PI mean item differences were noted in items describing repetitive behaviors, ?obsessional? thoughts, and contamination fears. Similar patterns of differences were found in autistic and nonautistic participants with higher and lower ATs, but differences were often larger in the autistic group. Conclusion: The SAQ in its original form appears to be an appropriate measure for autistic people to self-report social anxiety. However, autistic people appeared to complete the original PI items to reflect, to some extent, their autism-related experiences, rather than the originally intended OCD symptoms. Thus, the original OCD self-report ratings were inflated using the PI. Professionals should therefore clarify the intended meanings of different items of the PI to ensure more accurate and relevant ratings of OCD symptoms in autistic people. Lay summary Why was this study done? Autistic people and people with higher autistic traits (ATs) often experience higher rates of anxiety. Anxiety measures developed for the general population may not be appropriate or accurate for measuring anxiety in autistic people. We investigated whether clarifying items in existing self-report questionnaires to tease out anxiety from autistic experiences would influence the way autistic adults self-report their social anxiety and obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD) symptoms, and if so in what ways. We also wanted to know whether providing these item clarifications would affect the ratings of nonautistic individuals with varying rates of ATs to the same extent. What did the researchers do? We initially consulted two autistic adults and two clinicians with experience working with autistic adults and co-occurring mental health difficulties. We selected two measures: the Social Anxiety Questionnaire (SAQ) for social anxiety symptoms and the Padua Inventory for OCD symptoms. The consultants identified social anxiety and OCD items that could be interpreted or experienced differently by autistic people and proposed ways to clarify them to make their meaning clearer. Next, 50 autistic people and 185 nonautistic university students participated in our online study. The nonautistic participants were grouped into those with higher or lower ATs. Participants completed the original social anxiety and OCD questionnaires first, followed by the clarified versions of the two questionnaires. What were the results of the study? For social anxiety, we only found small differences in ratings when participants used measures with or without clarifications. This was true in both autistic and nonautistic participants. For OCD symptoms, autistic people’s OCD ratings were significantly lower for many items after we provided clarifications, especially for items describing repetitive behaviors, ?obsessional? thoughts, a d contamination fears. This finding suggests that in the original questionnaire, autistic people may have also been rating their autism-related experiences, not just the OCD experiences or symptoms the questionnaire was trying to measure. We found similar differences between the original and clarified item ratings in nonautistic participants with higher and lower ATs. However, the differences were more common and pronounced with the autistic participants. What do these findings add to what was already known? These findings suggest that original self-report measures of anxiety may need to be clarified so that autistic adults can better capture and rate their anxiety, rather than their autism-related experiences. What are potential weaknesses in the study? We used only two anxiety questionnaires, so these findings may or may not be applicable to other OCD or social anxiety questionnaires available. Also, the clarifications we provided may not be representative of all autistic people’s experiences, and it is possible that there are other and better ways to clarify the items. We also conducted many item comparisons in this study, so there is a possibility that some findings were due to chance. How will these findings help autistic adults now or in the future? Our findings can help improve clinical interviews and use of anxiety questionnaires by making them more accurate. They can also help clinicians appreciate the importance of asking clarifying questions to ensure they better capture autistic adults’ anxiety experiences.

Lien vers le texte intégral (Open Access ou abonnement)

4. Lodi-Smith J, Rodgers JD, Marquez Luna V, Khan S, Long CJ, Kozlowski KF, Donnelly JP, Lopata C, Thomeer ML. The Relationship of Age with the Autism-Spectrum Quotient Scale in a Large Sample of Adults. Autism in Adulthood;2021 (2021/06/01);3(2):147-156.

Background: The historical focus on autism as a childhood disorder means that evidence regarding autism in adulthood lags significantly behind research in other age groups. Emerging studies on the relationship of age with autism characteristics do not target older adult samples, which presents a barrier to studying the important variability that exists in life span developmental research. This study aims to further our understanding of the relationship between the Autism-Spectrum Quotient Scale and age in a large adult sample. Methods: The present study examines the relationship of Autism-Spectrum Quotient Scale (AQ) scores with age in 1139 adults, ages 18?97 years. Participants came from three distinct samples?a sample of primarily students, a sample of MTurk participants, and a sample of primarily community dwelling older adults. The majority of the participants did not self-report an autism diagnosis (91%), were female (67%), and identified as White (81%). Participants completed the AQ primarily via online surveys. Researchers scored the AQ following six common scoring practices. Results: Results of preregistered analyses indicate that autism characteristics measured by the AQ are not strongly associated with age (r values from ?0.01 to ?0.11). Further findings indicate that the measurement of autism characteristics is consistent across age into late life using both multiple groups and local structural equation modeling approaches to measurement invariance (comparative fit indices?=?0.82?0.83, root mean square error?=?0.06) as well as reliability analysis. Finally, demographic and autism-related variables (sex, race, self-identified autism spectrum disorder diagnosis, and degree of autism characteristics) did not moderate the relationship between age and autism characteristics. Conclusion: These results suggest that self-reports of autism characteristics using the AQ do not vary strongly by age in this large age-representative sample. Findings suggest that the AQ can potentially serve as a useful tool for future research on autism across the life span. Important limitations on what we can learn from these findings point toward critical avenues for future research in this area. Lay summary Why was this study done? Self-report questionnaires of autism characteristics are a potentially important resource for studying autism in adulthood. This study sought to provide additional information about one of the most commonly used self-report questionnaires, the Autism-Spectrum Quotient Scale (AQ), across adulthood. What was the purpose of this study? This study intended to determine if there is a relationship between scores on the AQ and age. Researchers also worked to identify which of the multiple different ways of scoring the AQ worked best across adulthood. What did the researchers do? Researchers collected data from over a thousand participants aged 18?97 years. Participants from three different age groups completed online surveys to self-report their levels of autism characteristics on the AQ. Researchers tested the relationship between AQ scores and age with six different commonly used ways to calculate AQ scores. Researchers used multiple statistical techniques to evaluate various measurement properties of the AQ. What were the results of the study? The results indicate that autism characteristics measured by the AQ are not strongly associated with age. Along with that, there is evidence that certain approaches to measuring of autism characteristics are consistent across age into late life and do not vary with demographic and autism-related factors. What do these findings add to what was already known? These results add to the growing evidence that self-reports of autism characteristics using the AQ in general samples are not strongly associated with age across adulthood. These findings also provide guidance about ways of scoring the AQ that work well through late life. What are potential weaknesses in the study? While the AQ has a degree of relationship with autism diagnoses, this is far from perfect and has not been evaluated in the context of aging research. Therefore, findings from the present research must be carefully interpreted to be about autism characteristics not diagnoses. The sample was also limited in a number of other ways. As in any studies including a broad age range of individuals, the oldest participants are likely quite healthy, engaged individuals. This may particularly be the case given the higher mortality rates and health challenges seen with autism. Similarly, as with any self-report research, this research is limited to those individuals who could answer questions about their autism characteristics. The sample was also predominantly White and nonautistic. Finally, the research was limited to one point in time and so cannot tell us about how autism characteristics may change across adulthood. How will these findings help autistic adults now or in the future? These findings support the potential for the AQ to be a useful tool for future research on autism in adulthood. For example, researchers can use measures such as the AQ to study how autism characteristics change over time or are associated with aging-related issues such as changes in physical health and memory. Such research may be able to provide a better understanding of how to support autistic individuals across adulthood.

Lien vers le texte intégral (Open Access ou abonnement)

5. Romualdez AM, Heasman B, Walker Z, Davies J, Remington A. “People Might Understand Me Better”: Diagnostic Disclosure Experiences of Autistic Individuals in the Workplace. Autism in Adulthood;2021 (2021/06/01);3(2):157-167.

Background: Autistic individuals face challenges in the workplace, particularly related to social communication. Diagnostic disclosure may mitigate these challenges, but it also exposes individuals to potential discrimination. This study aimed to share the diagnostic disclosure experiences of autistic adults in the workplace to help employers better understand the process, and help other autistic individuals make an informed decision about disclosure. Methods: The participants in this study were 238 clinically diagnosed, U.K.-based autistic adults with employment experience. Participants completed an online survey, comprising both open-ended and closed-ended questions, that asked about their experiences of disclosure in the workplace. Specifically, questions focused on when in the employment process participants disclosed, to whom the disclosure was made, what factors were involved in the decision to disclose, and what the impacts were of this decision. Results: Our findings suggest that when deciding to disclose, the participants were most concerned about how this might affect the attitudes of others in the workplace. Participants most often only disclosed selectively, while over a third disclosed to everyone. Many participants chose to disclose when completing the application materials or after starting the job, but rarely in the interview process. Many also disclosed after encountering issues at work (i.e., retrospective disclosure). Just over a third of participants rated the impact of disclosing to supervisors and coworkers positively. Subsequent adjustments made were even less positively endorsed. Conclusions: Autistic individuals must weigh the potential benefits of disclosure against the costs. This study highlights the need for organizations, rather than autistic individuals, to take more responsibility for facilitating disclosure and improving outcomes to it. Specific recommendations include the creation of clear pathways for disclosure in workplaces, and an ongoing commitment to organization-wide autism training to reduce stigma and discrimination for autistic employees. Lay summary Why was this study done? Autistic individuals face challenges in the workplace. Telling someone that you have an autism diagnosis (disclosure) might be one way of addressing these challenges (e.g., by increasing the understanding of others). However, the literature on disclosure shows mixed outcomes and rarely gives voice to autistic people. What was the purpose of this study? The purpose of this study was to explore the disclosure experiences of autistic job seekers and employees and gain insight into their decision-making. What did the researchers do? We conducted an online survey with 238 clinically diagnosed autistic adults with employment experience. Our participants answered some questions about their personal information (e.g., age) and their past work experience before completing survey questions about disclosure. We read through everyone’s answers to open-ended questions and put the answers into groups, such as ?Reasons to disclose? and ?Reasons not to disclose.? What were the results of the study? When deciding whether or not to disclose, our participants were most concerned about what other people they worked with would think. Most of our participants only told some people at work about their diagnosis, and many only disclosed after issues arose in the workplace. Over a third, however, disclosed to everyone. Participants said they were most likely to disclose on the application materials or after starting a job, not during a job interview. Just over one-third said that telling their supervisors or coworkers they were autistic had a positive impact, and that the changes made by their supervisors afterward were positive. Over a third said the changes made by their coworkers were neither positive nor negative. What do these findings add to what was already known? This is the first large-scale U.K.-based study on the disclosure experiences of autistic adults in the workplace. Our findings suggest that autistic people f cus most on what other people will think and how others will treat them if they disclose. We found that disclosure during interviews is unlikely?contrary to what previous studies focused on?and that we need to conduct research looking at disclosure in more likely scenarios. What are potential weaknesses in the study? Most of our participants were white and female, but in the wider autistic population that isn’t the case. We had many more participants who had told people at work about their autism diagnosis than those who had not. We also could not ask any follow-up questions about our participants’ experiences because the survey was online. How will these findings help autistic adults now or in the future? Knowing more about the experiences of autistic people can help individuals to make an informed choice about disclosing their diagnosis. This study highlights that we need to involve nonautistic employers, colleagues, and organization leaders in the disclosure process to improve autism knowledge and acceptance, and hopefully improve outcomes for autistic people.

Lien vers le texte intégral (Open Access ou abonnement)

6. Baker-Ericzén MJ, Smith L, Tran A, Scarvie K. A Cognitive Behavioral Intervention for Driving for Autistic Teens and Adults: A Pilot Study. Autism in Adulthood;2020 (2021/06/01);3(2):168-178.

Background: For many autistic individuals approaching adulthood, interventions to promote skills toward independence are lacking. Driving is an important ability to cultivate as it may be a critical step to attaining independence, securing and maintaining work, and fostering relationships. Only about one third of able autistic individuals drive independently, and fear to drive is a common reason for not driving. Methods: This initial pilot study was a 3-month open trial to investigate the feasibility, acceptability, and initial estimates of outcomes for the newly developed Cognitive Behavioral Intervention for Driving (CBID) intervention, a manualized curriculum to enhance executive functioning (EF) and emotional regulation (ER) skill development for driving, combined with individualized commentary-based driving simulator practice, in autistic teens and adults within a community research environment. Nineteen participants received the CBID intervention in 1.5-hour group sessions for 10 weeks, across two cohorts, with approximately five individualized driving simulator sessions. Data were collected on anxiety symptoms, driving cognitions, driving attitudes, and simulated driving performance at pre- and post-intervention assessments. Results: Program completion rate was 81%. Participants and parents rated both the intervention and simulator practice sessions with high satisfaction. All the participants (100%) reported both a positive attitude change (interest toward driving) and a desire to drive in the future at the post-intervention assessment. Significant changes occurred for driving cognitions, attitudes, and behaviors, and 47% of participants obtained a driver’s permit or license by 2 months post-intervention. Conclusions: For autistic individuals, the CBID intervention appeared to directly impact the pursuit toward driving goals by both increasing driving attitudes and behaviors and reducing anxiety/apprehension. This highlights the need for driving intervention programs designed specific to autistic teens/adults that focus on EF and ER skills coupled with individualized simulator practice. CBID could be provided in community services to increase the number of autistic individuals driving. Lay summary Why was this study done? Driving contributes greatly to independence in many teens and adults. Anxiety can act as a barrier to that independence by affecting driving attitudes, ability and performance. Autistic individuals are often affected by anxiety, executive functioning, and emotion regulation challenges. Previous studies show that virtual reality training and Cognitive Behavioral Therapy (CBT), separately, can reduce driving anxiety in autistic individuals and support driving skills. However, to date, no studies have developed and tested a manualized intervention specific to driving that combines such methods. What was the purpose of this study? The goal of this study was to develop and test a group intervention, called Cognitive Behavioral Intervention for Driving (CBID), combined with individualized, coached driving simulator practice to help reduce fears and increase cognitions, attitudes and performance towards driving. The study examined the following questions: 1) Do autistic individuals actively participate in CBID? 2) Do autistic participants like CBID? and 3) Are autistic participants more prepared to drive after taking part in CBID than they were before they participated in the program? What did the researchers do? After developing the CBID intervention with community member involvement, the researchers ran 2 intervention groups and individualized driving simulator sessions to a total of 19 enrolled participants. The group intervention focused on strengthening executive functioning and emotion regulation skills in 1.5 hour sessions over 10 weeks and 5, 1 hour driving simulator sessions. Researchers compared data on participant anxiety levels, driving cognitions, attitudes, and performance before and after the intervention. What were the results of the study? Most of the participants completed the p ogram (81%) and all (100%) rated satisfaction with the group and simulator practice. All (100%) of the participants changed attitudes towards driving. Participants had higher levels of positive thoughts about driving, better attitudes towards wanting to drive and less driving errors (like speeding, collisions, crossing lanes) on the driving simulator after completing CBID. Almost half (47%) of participants obtained a driver’s permit or license by 2 months after the intervention. What do these findings add to what was already known? This study adds a new option of an integrated approach, CBID, for addressing driving anxiety or apprehension. It provides initial findings of the value of incorporating executive functioning skills with traditional cognitive behavior therapy for enhancing driving readiness. What are the potential weaknesses in the study? This study contained a small sample size that was mostly white male participants. This limits generalizing the results to a representative diverse population. It also did not have a control group or use randomization which means that results can’t be interpreted as causal at this time. There was no information about participants obtaining permit/licensure later than 2 months after CBID so it is unclear if some participants require more time to pursue a license. There was no follow up to understand if participants continued to feel comfortable driving overtime. How will these findings help autistic adults now or in the future? This study showed that it’s possible to combine virtual reality training and Cognitive Behavioral Therapy into one driving readiness program. The new CBID program may help autistic adults by addressing multiple aspects of what they need to be ready to drive. Since the study used previously tested strategies, enrolled a community sample, manualized the program, and used a services approach, it was designed for broad distribution to other community settings.

Lien vers le texte intégral (Open Access ou abonnement)

7. Blagrave AJ, Colombo-Dougovito AM, Healy S. “Just Invite Us”: Autistic Adults’ Recommendations for Developing More Accessible Physical Activity Opportunities. Autism in Adulthood;2021 (2021/06/01);3(2):179-186.

Background: Autistic adults engage in lower levels of physical activity (PA) than their nonautistic peers, and over 60% do not meet national guidelines for PA. In addition, autistic adults face myriad barriers to PA participation that can make accessing activities challenging. To support the inclusion of autistic adults in PA, this study sought to explore first-hand recommendations for PA participation from autistic adults’ perspective. Methods: We interviewed 23 autistic adults aged 18 to 75 years about their PA experiences across their lifespan, including querying the participants’ recommendations for supporting autistic adults in PA. A qualitative descriptive design with a constructivist lens guided the thematic analysis. Results: The analysis resulted in two overarching themes: (1) It’s helpful to have someone there to support; and (2) It’s that sensory thing, it always is. Each theme includes participant-provided recommendations to guide professionals in the field of PA. Conclusions: The autistic adult voice, long absent from conversations about PA, is a valuable and needed addition to understand how to improve PA experiences for this population. Recommendations from this study include (1) listening to the perspectives and insight of autistic adults, (2) consideration of sensory stimulus when planning for PA participation, and (3) encouraging and providing social supports for PA participation. Lay summary Why was this study done? Autistic adults have many health concerns such as anxiety, depression, and obesity. Physical activity can improve these health concerns. Yet, professionals lack knowledge about how to provide optimal physical activity experiences for autistic individuals. Very little research has engaged autistic adults to directly ask their recommendations about their own physical activity needs. What was the purpose of this study? This study wanted recommendations from autistic adults on how to make physical activity more accessible and enjoyable. By doing this, the authors hope to increase the voices of autistic adults in physical activity research. What did the researchers do? The researchers asked 23 autistic adults for their recommendations on how to improve physical activity experiences. What were the results of the study? Participants’ responses were grouped into two categories: (1) It’s helpful to have someone there to support and (2) It’s that sensory thing, it always is. The first theme highlights the social supports that many autistic adults feel they need to be successful. Supports include individuals within the close social circles of the autistic adults, such as parents, friends, and other close people. They can also include professionals, such as teachers or exercise trainers. The second theme highlights the need to address the sensory sensitivities of the individual before activity can take place; if an environment or activity is not ?sensory friendly? or is not accommodating, then autistic adults are less likely to engage. What do these findings add to what was already known? Autistic adults face many barriers to physical activity participation. These findings offer first-hand accounts by autistic adults about how to improve their physical activity experiences. These results also offer ideas on how to increase physical activity engagement for autistic individuals. Other research has focused on improving physical activity in those who are autistic, but this research is rarely from the perspective of the autistic individual. This study is one of a very small number of studies that has done this and is the first to ask autistic adults to give recommendations for physical activity participation. What are potential weaknesses in the study? This study only interviewed autistic adults who prefer to communicate verbally, and so the study sample is not representative of all autistic adults. Many participants in the sample were from the United States, and autistic adults in other countries may have different opinions about physical activity participation. Finally, the researchers may have recr ited individuals with an interest in physical activity?autistic adults who are not interested or dislike physical activity may have different recommendations. How will these findings help autistic adults now or in the future? This study will help professionals provide more appropriate physical activity experiences to autistic adults. Also, this research could help practitioners and researcher make physical activity spaces more welcoming and enjoyable for autistic adults.

Lien vers le texte intégral (Open Access ou abonnement)

8. Trevisan DA, Leach S, Iarocci G, Birmingham E. Evaluation of a Peer Mentorship Program for Autistic College Students. Autism in Adulthood;2020 (2021/06/01);3(2):187-194.

The number of autistic students in colleges is growing rapidly. However, their needs are not being met, and graduation rates among this population remain low. This article describes the implementation and evaluation of the Autism Mentorship Initiative (AMI) for autistic undergraduates (mentees), who received 1-on-1 support from upper-level undergraduate or graduate students (mentors) at their university. We examined changes in college adjustment (n?=?16) and grade point average among mentees (n?=?19) before and after participation in AMI for two or more semesters. We also examined surveys completed by both mentees (n?=?16) and mentors (n?=?21) evaluating their experiences in AMI. Data from the Student Adaptation to College Questionnaire showed that mentees displayed lower than average social, emotional, and academic adjustment to college compared with neurotypical norms, but participation in AMI resulted in notable gains in all facets of college adjustment. Survey data revealed that both mentors and mentees reported personal, academic, and professional benefits from participating in AMI. However, no improvements in academic achievement of the mentees were found. This study provided preliminary evidence for the benefits of an easily implemented and cost-effective peer mentorship program for autistic students in a college setting. Lay summary Why was this program developed? There are a growing number of autistic students attending college. However, the percentage of autistic students who complete their degree is quite low. We believe that colleges should be offering more support services to address the unique needs of their autistic students. What does the program do? The Autism Mentorship Initiative (AMI) matches incoming autistic undergraduates with upper-level (third or fourth year) neurotypical undergraduates or graduate students who provide 1-on-1 mentorship. The autistic undergraduates meet regularly with their mentors to discuss personal and professional goals, discuss solutions for problems they are experiencing in college, and discuss ideas for increased integration into college campus life (e.g., joining clubs or attending social events). The neurotypical mentors receive ongoing training from program supervisors about autism and meet regularly with program supervisors to discuss progress with their mentees and troubleshoot issues they may be experiencing with their mentees. How did the researchers evaluate the program? We evaluated AMI by administering the Student Adaptation to College Questionnaire at multiple time points to examine whether autistic mentees reported improvements in social, emotional, and academic adjustment to college as a result of participating in AMI. In addition to tracking changes in cumulative grade point average (GPA), we also administered program evaluation surveys to determine whether AMI is meeting its core aims and to assess satisfaction with the program from the perspectives of both mentors and mentees. What are the early findings? While there were no changes in GPA, participation in AMI resulted in notable changes in mentees’ academic, social, and emotional adjustment. Both mentors and mentees reported personal, academic, and professional benefits from their participation in AMI. What were the weaknesses of this project? The sample size was small, so it is questionable whether the findings generalize to a broader autistic student population. In addition, there was no control group, so we cannot be certain that improvements in college adjustment were due to participation in AMI. Moreover, this study only assessed one program at one university in Western Canada, so it is unknown whether this program could be successfully implemented at other universities or in different geographic locations. What are the next steps? As participation in AMI increases each year, follow-up studies will utilize larger sample sizes. We will seek to obtain control data by examining GPA and college adjustment in autistic students who do not participate in AMI. We will aim to conduct multisite trials to examine whether similar programs can be implemented at other universities. How will this work help autistic adults now and in the future? We hope that our research will help faculty members and staff from disability support offices to gain ideas and insights in implementing similar?or better?programs at their respective institutions. Our experience is that mentorship programs can be both cost-effective and easily implemented, while offering an invaluable support system to autistic students that may increase the likelihood of degree completion.

Lien vers le texte intégral (Open Access ou abonnement)

9. Stark E, Ali D, Ayre A, Schneider N, Parveen S, Marais K, Holmes N, Pender R. Coproduction with Autistic Adults: Reflections from the Authentistic Research Collective. Autism in Adulthood;2020 (2021/06/01);3(2):195-203.

This article explores coproduction in relation to autistic people. We reflect on the coproduction process with autistic adults from the Authentistic Research Collective at University College London. We aimed to support the autistic population’s mental health needs by coproducing a document on adapting psychological therapy, and by developing a set of reflective guidelines to guide and encourage future coproduction initiatives between autistic and nonautistic team members. We reflect upon six elements that are of potential importance for future coproduction projects with autistic adults: (1) the meaning of coproduction; (2) ground rules and a traffic light system; (3) environmental adaptations; (4) digital communication tools; (5) encouraging authenticity; and (6) supporting autistic strengths. We conclude by discussing future research avenues into optimizing coproduction with autistic people, and how such research may influence both practice and policy. Lay summary Why is coproduction important? Coproduction means creating things jointly with others. Ideally, autistic people should be involved in research that is about them so that their thoughts and opinions are included. Coproduction allows this to happen. What is the purpose of this article? There is little advice for how autistic and nonautistic people can work together to coproduce useful research. This article hopes to encourage discussion by sharing our reflections on how we used coproduction in our project. What did we do? Our group was made up of autistic and nonautistic people. One of our goals was to gain experience in using coproduction. We created this article containing our reflections?what we found worked well, and what we felt could be done differently in the future. What did we learn? We learnt the importance of five key areas: (1) group rules, and a ?traffic light? system to help group members show how they like to communicate; (2) adapting the environment to suit people’s needs; (3) inclusion of digital communication tools; (4) encouraging group members to feel they are authentic (be fully themselves); and (5) supporting autistic strengths. We hope that the discussion of these themes will be helpful for future coproduction projects.

Lien vers le texte intégral (Open Access ou abonnement)