Challenging Empathic Deficit Models of Autism Through Responses to Serious Literature

Abstract

Dominant theoretical models of autism and resultant research enquiries have long centered upon an assumed autism-specific empathy deficit. Associated empirical research has largely relied upon cognitive tests that lack ecological validity and associate empathic skill with heuristic-based judgments from limited snapshots of social information. This artificial separation of thought and feeling fails to replicate the complexity of real-world empathy, and places socially tentative individuals at a relative disadvantage. The present study aimed to qualitatively explore how serious literary fiction, through its ability to simulate real-world empathic response, could therefore enable more ecologically valid insights into the comparative empathic experiences of autistic and non-autistic individuals. Eight autistic and seven non-autistic participants read Of Mice and Men for six days while completing a semi-structured reflective diary. On finishing the book, participants were asked to engage in three creative writing tasks that encouraged reflective thinking across the novel. Thematic and literary analysis of the diary reflections and writing tasks revealed three main themes (1) Distance from the Novel; (2) Mobility of Response; (3) Re-Creating Literature. Findings demonstrated the usefulness of serious literature as a research tool for comparing the empathic experiences of autistic and non-autistic individuals. Specifically, autistic individuals often showed enhanced socio-empathic understandings of the literature with no empathy deficits when compared to non-autistic participants.

Integrating autistic perspectives into autism science: A role for autistic autobiographies

“…These important studies have inspired recent interventions designed to improve both autistic and non-autistic individuals’ understandings of each other. One such successful intervention involved autistic and non-autistic individuals discussing a novel together (Chapple et al, 2021, 2022). We hypothesize that reading and reflecting on autistic autobiographies in particular, by exposing non-autistic readers to autistic perspectives, may lead to even greater reductions in the double empathy problem.…”

Exploring the different cognitive, emotional and imaginative experiences of autistic and non-autistic adult readers when contemplating serious literature as compared to non-fiction

“…Findings then lack ecological validity as a result of the research failing to mirror everyday socio-emotional experiences which often allow for and benefit from more careful, complex considerations ( Fletcher-Watson and Bird, 2020 ). These slower and more careful empathic assessments may be more common amongst autistic people ( Chapple et al, 2022 ), putting them at a disadvantage when tested with the standardized cognitive tests available ( Fletcher-Watson and Bird, 2020 ).…”

“…Conversely, autistic people are more likely to have to navigate a lack of mutuality in their daily lives as a result of belonging to a neurominority ( Milton, 2012 ; Chown, 2014 ; Botha, 2021 ). As a result, autistic people may be less likely to assume pre-set norms, taking more time to identify common ground and to develop shared social understandings ( Milton, 2012 ; Chown, 2014 ; DeBrabander et al, 2019 ; Chapple et al, 2021a , 2022 ). Research has supported this, showing that autistic people interacting together can achieve mutuality ( Milton, 2012 ; Heasman and Gillespie, 2018 ; Crompton et al, 2020a , c ; Morrison et al, 2020 ) even after initial negative impressions ( DeBrabander et al, 2019 ).…”

“…To move understandings of autistic people away from deficit-focused views, research methods that involve more open, empathic thinking about autistic people are needed ( Ida, 2020 ; Chapple et al, 2021a ). One ecologically valid method that can offer this type of exploration is the contemplation of fiction ( Chapple et al, 2021a , 2022 ). This is because fiction provides social simulations that mirror the real social world, making the experience feel like a live reality ( Mar and Oatley, 2008 ; Mumper and Gerrig, 2019 ).…”

“…This powerful language encourages readers to hold onto feelings of being moved ( O’Sullivan et al, 2015 ; Davis, 2020 ). The result is that readers explore the uncertainties and complexities of imagined social realities more carefully, holding onto ambiguity in a way that makes room for deeper empathic feelings ( O’Sullivan et al, 2015 ; Chapple et al, 2022 ). Although serious literature does not necessarily refer to classic texts, older literature can be particularly powerful due to its ability to “regenerate” modern contexts through representations of core human feelings that transcend time ( Farrington et al, 2019 ).…”