Anti-ableism and scientific accuracy in autism research: a false dichotomy

Abstract

It was recently argued that autism researchers committed to rejecting ableist frameworks in their research may sacrifice “scientifically accurate” conceptualizations of autism. In this perspective piece, we argue that: (a) anti-ableism vs. scientific accuracy is a false dichotomy, (b) there is no ideology-free science that has claim to scientific accuracy, and (c) autism science has a history of false leads in part because of unexamined ableist ideologies that undergird researcher framings and interpretations of evidence. To illustrate our claims, we discuss several avenues of autism research that were promoted as scientific advances, but were eventually debunked or shown to have much less explanatory value than initially proposed. These research programs have involved claims about autism etiology, the nature of autism and autistic characteristics, and autism intervention. Common to these false leads have been ableist assumptions about autism that inform researcher perspectives. Negative impacts of this work have been mitigated in some areas of autism research, but these perspectives continue to exert influence on the lives of autistic people, including the availability of services, discourses about autism, and sociocultural conceptualizations of autistic people. Examining these false leads may help current researchers better understand how ableism may negatively influence their areas of inquiry. We close with a positive argument that promoting anti-ableism can be done in tandem with increasing scientific accuracy.

Seeking Social Connection and Knowledge as a Minimally Verbal Autistic Male with Intellectual Disability

“…The majority of autism research focuses on the impairments of autistic people relative to nonautistic people and rarely acknowledges their strengths, abilities, and social potential (Bottema-Beutel et al, 2023). Autistic research has also historically lacked ethnically and culturally diverse samples (West et al, 2016).…”

“…The deficit approach is also present in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM) and the International Classification of Disabilities (ICD) (Bottema-Beutel et al, 2023). The deficit model of autism contributes to the dehumanization, pathologization, reductionism, and essentialism of the experiences of autistic individuals (Kapp, 2019), promoting the idea that autism is a condition that needs to be "cured" by scientists and clinicians.…”

“I don’t think they understand the reality of autism”: the lived experiences of late-diagnosed autistic adults in Japan

“…For example, averting gaze helps autistic people to concentrate and regulate their emotions just like for nonautistic people (Jaswal & Akhtar, 2018). Similarly, a large body of conventional research has been conducted without autistic people's input, which has led to research of little relevance to people's everyday lives (Pellicano et al, 2014), a series of 'false leads' (Bottema-Beutel et al, 2023), and potential misinterpretation of findings . This deeply concerning issue can be solved, at least in part, by focusing on autistic testimonyand qualitative methods are a powerful tool to do so (Bölte, 2014).…”