Diamond in the rough? An “empty review” of research into “neurodiversity” and a road map for developing the inclusion agenda

Abstract

PurposeThe aims of the paper were to highlight the dearth of applied practitioner research concerning the expression of neurodiversity at work and develop an epistemological framework for a future research agenda.Design/methodology/approachA systematic empty review protocol was employed, with three a priori research questions, inquiring as to the extent of neurodiversity research within mainstream work psychology, psychology in general and lastly within cross-disciplinary academic research. The results of the final search were quality checked and categorized to illustrate where studies relevant to practice are currently located.FindingsThe academic literature was found to be lacking in contextualized, practical advice for employers or employees. The location and foci of extracted studies highlighted a growing science-practitioner gap.Research limitations/implicationsThe research focused on common neurominority conditions such as autism and dyslexia; it is acknowledged that the neurodiversity definition itself is broader and more anthropological in nature. A need for a comprehensive research agenda is articulated, and research questions and frameworks are proposed.Practical implicationsGuidance is given on applying disability accommodation to both individual and organizational targets.Social implicationsThe disability employment gap is unchanged since legislation was introduced. The neurodiversity concept is no longer new, and it is time for multi-disciplinary collaborations across science and practice to address the questions raised in this paper.Originality/valueThis paper offers an original analysis of the neurodiversity paradox, combining systematic inquiry with a narrative synthesis of the extant literature. The conceptual clarification offers clear directions for researchers and practitioners.

Does it work? Using a Meta-Impact score to examine global effects in quasi-experimental intervention studies

“…Our study is thus also intended to inspire a new direction for performance-related research and disability inclusion work. In an aging and increasingly neurodivergent workforce, applied psychological science can no longer afford to ignore the disabled population [ 33 , 79 ]. Our method offers practical guidance to psychological researchers and practitioners alike seeking to improve the evidence-base upon which we can inform the services we offer as a profession.…”

“…These interventions require significant resources (time, effort and expertise, average $1000 for each dyslexic intervention [ 28 ]) from those involved but are rarely evaluated and therefore the implications for employers on how to comply, commission and deliver relevant support activities for dyslexia and other such ‘invisible disabilities’ are unclear [ 29 , 30 ]. Employers, disabled people and psychology practitioners (key stakeholders) continue to ask whether these interventions are working, yet psychological research has heretofore failed to support practice with ecologically valid evaluation [ 23 , 31 – 33 ].…”

Barriers to entry and success in forensic anthropology

“…In social models of disability, the solutions lie in changing society to remove barriers to functioning in daily life. A comprehensive overview of definitions and the need for research is found in Doyle and McDowall (2022), although there are numerous articles in scientific journals and books. Currently, there is too little research on neurodiversity to definitively state a position in forensic anthropology (see Doyle and McDowall 2022).…”

Evaluating the use of reasonable adjustment plans for students with a specific learning difficulty

“…The term ‘specific learning difficulty’ (SpLD) is used to refer to a range of neurodevelopmental conditions that can be defined as the presence of cognitive strengths and weaknesses (Snowling, 2005). While the term ‘neurodiverse’ might be preferred by some as emphasizing naturally occurring differences rather than difficulties (Doyle & McDowall, 2021), the use of SpLD throughout this article reflects the prevalence of the label in sector guidance and reporting, including at University X.…”