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.

Highlights

  • There is currently no agreed consensus for defining ‘autism’ as a concept

  • These experiences of empathic embodiment created complex layers of thought together with feeling in a way that replicated the combination of affective and cognitive empathy as it is experienced within the everyday social world (Fletcher-Watson and Bird, 2020)

  • The present study further demonstrates the advantages of serious literature as an ecologically valid tool within empathy research (Djikic et al, 2013; O’Sullivan et al, 2015; Chapple et al, 2021b)

Read more

Summary

Introduction

There is currently no agreed consensus for defining ‘autism’ as a concept. the term generally refers to a form of human neurocognition that is developmental in nature and which results in divergent socio-cognitive processing styles (Fletcher-Watson and Happé, 2019; Milton, 2020). While there is an increasing move toward understanding autistic people through explorations of their nuanced human experiences (Wright et al, 2014), the medical model of disability continues to largely dominate how society thinks about autism and autistic people (Waltz, 2013; Kapp, 2020; Chapple and Worsley, 2021). Medical categorisations of autism are consistently evolving, the model typically focusses on socio-communicative difficulties, repetitive behavioral patterns and restricted interests (Murray et al, 2005; American Psychiatric Association, 2013; Kapp, 2020). As a result of dominant medical framings, autism research has long over-focused on what autistic people lack (Murray, 2020). In this way, autistic people are positioned as being in need of ‘fixing’ in order to align their behaviors with those typically expected within mainstream cultures (Milton, 2012; Waltz, 2013). Dominant theoretical models and subsequent empirical enquiries often employ and further develop societal understandings of autism that reduce and stereotype the nature of autistic experiences (Chapple and Worsley, 2021)

Results
Discussion
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call