The Neurodiversity Approach(es): What Are They and What Do They Mean for Researchers?

Abstract

This paper presents the concepts of “neurodiversity” and the “neurodiversity approaches” towards disability. This paper discusses how confusion regarding the meaning of these concepts exacerbates debate and conflict surrounding the neurodiversity approaches. For example, some claim the neurodiversity approaches focus solely on society and denies contributions of individual characteristics to disability (a controversial stance), whereas this paper joins other literature in acknowledging the contributions of both individual and society to disability. This paper also addresses other controversies related to neurodiversity, such as uncertainty regarding the scope of the approaches – to whom do they apply? – and their implications for diagnostic categories. Finally, this paper provides recommendations for developmental researchers who wish to carry out neurodiversity-aligned research: scholars are urged to study both individual neurodivergent people and the contexts around them; to consider both strengths and weaknesses; to recognize their own biases; and to listen to and learn from neurodivergent people.

Bridging Neurodiversity and Open Scholarship: How Shared Values Can Guide Best Practices for Research Integrity, Social Justice, and Principled Education

“…Supported by the growth of the inclusive post-secondary education movement (Raynor et al, 2016) and participatory research (e.g., Chapko et al, 2020;Tilley et al, 2021), people with intellectual disabilities increasingly contribute to higher education and participatory research. The issue of the scope or boundaries of neurodivergence is important but relatively unexplored and demands future research on the views of people with neurological conditions (see Dwyer, 2022;Ne'eman & Pellicano 2022 for discussions on ethical considerations).…”

Naturalistic Developmental Behavioral Interventions as Value-Based and Culturally Adapted EBPs for Autistic Individuals

“…Everybody's brain is different, which by default implies that there is diversity in human neurology (hence, neuro-diversity). The second way "neurodiversity" is often used refers to the ways this biological fact is utilized in everyday life (known as the neurodiversity paradigm (Walker [34] or neurodiversity approach [36]). According to Walker [34], there are three fundamental aspects of the neurodiversity paradigm/approach: neurodiversity is a beneficial form of diversity; there is no "average" or "normal" brain; and social dynamics affecting other forms of diversity (such as gender and race) are also at play when it comes to neurodiversity.…”

“…Dwyer's [37] breakdown of the neurodiversity paradigm/approach is similar: there are no ideal minds; neurodivergent people should be accepted, not normalized; and society plays a large role in disabling neurodivergent individuals. Dwyer [36] also highlights that many advocates have adopted their own personal definitions of neurodiversity. For example, Bailin's [38] definition of the neurodiversity approach is inherently political: "primarily a call to include and respect people whose brains work in atypical ways, regardless of their level of disability."…”

Reframing neurodiversity in engineering education

“…The concept of neurodiversity is not always clearly defined, and sometimes, definitions are contradictory in nature, given that the neurodiversity paradigm rejects the medical model for its pathologizing of naturally occurring neurological difference, but also may rely on medical diagnosis for access to support and inclusion in the neurodiversity community (Russell, 2020). Even today, the concept of neurodiversity has been critiqued by some for creating a narrative that sugarcoats the challenges that come with neurological differences (Dwyer, 2022).…”