An Analysis of Twitter Discourse Regarding Identifying Language for People on the Autism Spectrum

Autism-Related Language Preferences of French-Speaking Autistic Adults: An Online Survey

Background

In recent years, there have been increasing discussions surrounding the appropriate terminology to talk about autism. Initially, this debate revolved around the use of person-first language (e.g., person with autism) versus identity-first language (IFL; e.g., autistic person) but has recently expanded to other autism-related terms (e.g., deficits). However, to date, studies investigating autism-related language preferences have been limited to English-speaking countries, and little is known about preferences in other languages. This study addresses this gap by investigating the language preferences of French-speaking autistic adults.

Methods

Five hundred and forty-one French-speaking autistic adults (formal diagnosis and self-identified) completed an online survey where they selected terms they preferred to use to talk about: (1) the nomenclature of autism; (2) an autistic person; (3) someone's autistic identity; (4) autism more broadly; (5) the abilities of autistic people; and (6) people without a diagnosis of autism. Participants also revealed more about their language preferences via an open-text response.

Results

The most preferred terms were "Autisme," "Personne autiste," "Autiste," "Est Autiste," "Différence neurologique/cérébrale," "Différences," "Difficultés," "Personne neurotypique," "Neurotypique," and "Personne non-autiste." To better understand these preferences, participants' open comments were analyzed, revealing further support for IFL and the social model of disability, and a preference for simple, precise, and validated terms.

Conclusions

These results are consistent with autism terminology preferences in English-speaking countries and provide additional insight into the reasons underlying these preferences. Such work has implications for informing the language of researchers, clinicians, and other professionals in the field, as well as the general public.

A full semantic toolbox is essential for autism research and practice to thrive

Individuals diagnosed with autism spectrum disorder (ASD) present with a highly diverse set of challenges, disabilities, impairments and strengths. Recently, it has been suggested that researchers and practitioners avoid using certain words to describe the difficulties and impairments experienced by individuals with ASD to reduce stigma. The proposed limitations on terminology were developed by only a subset of the autism community, and the recommendations are already causing negative consequences that may be harmful to future scientific and clinical endeavors and, ultimately, to people with ASD. No one should have the power to censor language to exclude the observable realities of autism. Scientists and clinicians must be able to use any scientifically accurate terms necessary to describe the wide range of autistic people they study and support, without fear of censure or retribution.

Understanding language preference: Autism knowledge, experience of stigma and autism identity

LAY ABSTRACT

There is ongoing discussion around what language is acceptable when talking about someone with an autism diagnosis, especially regarding person-first (e.g. person with autism) or identity-first (e.g. autistic person) language. We asked 198 Australian adults with an autism diagnosis what terminology they prefer and what they find offensive. We also asked questions to understand their experience of stigma, their autism knowledge and how much they endorse an autism identity, to investigate if these factors were associated with their language preferences. Overall, there was no significant association between these three factors and person-first terminology. For identity-first terms, those who endorse a stronger autism identity tended to find identity-first terms more preferable and less offensive, whereas those who reported greater experiences and internalisation of stigma tended to find identity-first terms less preferable and more offensive. Previous research has tended to ask what language participants prefer. The findings of this work help provide some context as to why people prefer or find offensive specific terms, at least for identity-first language.

'Autistic person' or 'person with autism'? Person-first language preference in Dutch adults with autism and parents

LAY ABSTRACT

There are different words to describe people with an autism diagnosis. For instance, we can put the person before autism (e.g. 'person with autism'), or we can put autism before the person (e.g. 'autistic person'). Previous research showed that autistic adults in English-speaking countries generally liked it better when autism is placed before the person. Yet, people also greatly differ in the words they like and dislike. In this study, we examined word preference in Dutch autistic adults (n = 1026; 16-84 years; 57% women) and parents of autistic children (n = 286). Via an online questionnaire, we asked our participants to select one term for autistic people that they liked best. The results showed that most adults with autism (68.3%) and parents (82.5%) preferred to put the person before autism. Younger adults, with a higher intelligence, and with more autistic traits, were a bit more likely to put autism before the person. We conclude that there are large differences in the words that people prefer. Because we found different results in our Dutch participants compared to participants in English-speaking countries, we think that the Dutch language or culture may also play a role in word preference. For now, we advise autism researchers to use both person-first and autism-first language.

Popular and Scientific Discourse on Autism: Representational Cross-Cultural Analysis of Epistemic Communities to Inform Policy and Practice

Background

Social media provide a window onto the circulation of ideas in everyday folk psychiatry, revealing the themes and issues discussed both by the public and by various scientific communities.

Objective

This study explores the trends in health information about autism spectrum disorder within popular and scientific communities through the systematic semantic exploration of big data gathered from Twitter and PubMed.

Methods

First, we performed a natural language processing by text-mining analysis and with unsupervised (machine learning) topic modeling on a sample of the last 10,000 tweets in English posted with the term #autism (January 2021). We built a network of words to visualize the main dimensions representing these data. Second, we performed precisely the same analysis with all the articles using the term “autism” in PubMed without time restriction. Lastly, we compared the results of the 2 databases.

Results

We retrieved 121,556 terms related to autism in 10,000 tweets and 5.7x109 terms in 57,121 biomedical scientific articles. The 4 main dimensions extracted from Twitter were as follows: integration and social support, understanding and mental health, child welfare, and daily challenges and difficulties. The 4 main dimensions extracted from PubMed were as follows: diagnostic and skills, research challenges, clinical and therapeutical challenges, and neuropsychology and behavior.

Conclusions

This study provides the first systematic and rigorous comparison between 2 corpora of interests, in terms of lay representations and scientific research, regarding the significant increase in information available on autism spectrum disorder and of the difficulty to connect fragments of knowledge from the general population. The results suggest a clear distinction between the focus of topics used in the social media and that of scientific communities. This distinction highlights the importance of knowledge mobilization and exchange to better align research priorities with personal concerns and to address dimensions of well-being, adaptation, and resilience. Health care professionals and researchers can use these dimensions as a framework in their consultations to engage in discussions on issues that matter to beneficiaries and develop clinical approaches and research policies in line with these interests. Finally, our study can inform policy makers on the health and social needs and concerns of individuals with autism and their caregivers, especially to define health indicators based on important issues for beneficiaries.

The role of the NP in primary care of adults with autism spectrum disorder

ABSTRACT

Adults with autism spectrum disorder have poorer physical and psychological health outcomes compared with individuals who are neurotypical and benefit from exceptional primary care. NPs are uniquely positioned to reform primary care and eliminate inequities, and can help influence practice standards and optimize care for these patients through education, advocacy, and health promotion.

Exploring an e-learning community's response to the language and terminology use in autism from two massive open online courses on autism education and technology use

LAY ABSTRACT

Within the neurodiversity movement, one recent divergence is in the semantic choice of language when describing autism, as members of the autism and autistic community preferred to use identity-first language (autistic person), whereas professionals were more likely to use person-first language (person with autism). This study explored 803 e-learners' responses from their comments across two massive open online courses on autism education held between 2017 and 2019. Learners agreed that autistic individuals should guide others on which terminology to use when describing autism, and although identity-first language acknowledges autism as part of an individual's identity, it can also conjure up negative stereotypes and be stigmatising. Although family, friends and professionals highlighted that the diagnostic label is a way to facilitate understanding across stakeholder groups and help autistic individuals gain access to support, autistic self-advocates found the process of disclosing autism as a form of disability to conflict with their sense of identity, and broader terms such as 'autism spectrum' failed to capture individual strengths and weaknesses. Semantic language choices may matter less as long as the person's difficulties are clearly acknowledged, with adaptations made to meet their specific needs. Adding to a growing body of literature on terminology use in autism research and practice, we highlight that language used when describing autism should follow the autistic individual's lead, with the primary focus on communicating an individual's strengths and difficulties, to foster a sense of positive autism identity and inclusivity, and enable access to appropriate support.