Episode 8: Autism & Relationships
This is the transcript of the episode. To listen to the episode please click on your preferred podcast button.
No AI is used at any point in this podcast.
This podcast explores recently published research on a number of different neurodivergent types. This season I am talking about autism, and in this episode I will go over some recent research on autism in relation to social relationships.
A quick note to mention I will be chairing a panel at the AHEAD conference in Dublin, “Panorama: Widening the Lens for Systemic Inclusion in Tertiary Education”, which will take place on the 20th and 21st of March. It will be a hybrid event and I will add a link to the show notes if you’d like to know more. I’ll be speaking about supports, services, and social engagement for neurodivergent and disabled students in my university.
Unless otherwise specified, the research I have done for this and all episodes do not include those with intellectual challenges in conjunction with autism characteristics. While I will describe autistic characteristics in this episode, I also recognise that every autistic person will experience autism differently, and these are not specific to every person who identifies as autistic.
Masking and socialising
Researchers Field and others (2024) suggest in their paper that socialising, in general, can be difficult for autistic people, who can use techniques such as masking, to camouflage their true feelings in order to fit in with other people’s expectations. Examples include forcing eye contact, suppressing ‘autistic’ body movements and using conversational ‘scripts’ involving asking questions about others. Social camouflaging has been identified in both autistic males and females, although there is a suggestion that it is more prevalent in girls and women due to gendered social constructions. These camouflaging strategies are suggested to come at a cost to mental wellbeing, and higher levels of camouflaging have been associated with generalised anxiety, social anxiety and depression in autistic adults. It can cause psychological distress and suicidal thoughts and behaviours for autistic adults. The relationship between autistic people and the need to mask is complex, and it may be an individual’s self-perceived need to camouflage that impacts mental health more so than ability to camouflage, and further research is needed in this area. It may be that camouflaging helps autistic people cope with avoiding harassment by doing so in particular contexts, while this negatively impacts mental health through self-monitoring and vigilance to signs of perceived failure to mask effectively. If an autistic person camouflages too well they receive less supports which also impacts mental health, as does the exhaustion of having to keep up the camouflaging behaviour that contributed to feelings of burnout. When camouflaging becomes highly automatic or habitual it was linked to a greater sense of inauthenticity which negatively affected participants’ sense of identity and mental health. In this study from Field and others (2024), autistic participants described socialising as inherently stressful due to the social stigma attached to autism, and another reason for masking to be employed which contributed to identity-based minority stress. This concept of minority stress was suggested by Botha and Frost in their excellent 2018 paper “Extending the Minority Stress Model to Understand Mental Health Problems Experienced by the Autistic Population”. They found that minority stressors, such as experiences of discrimination, significantly predicted poor mental health in autistic adults. Social identity theory has also been used to understand social camouflaging in autism. Social identity theory suggests members of a stigmatised group may attempt to gain a more positive identity by ‘passing’ in a group with higher status. Individuals might attempt to avoid stigma by monitoring how they appear to others. This is similar to descriptions of social camouflaging in the study from Field and others (2024), where camouflaging could be considered an attempt to avoid stigma by ‘passing’ as non-autistic. Many studies do not go into how camouflaging is impacted by other minority identities, such as sexuality, ethnicity, and other cultural contexts, and I will uncover research that does in a future episode, although this remains an area that few have researched in conjunction with autism characteristics.
When an autistic person is masking it is more difficult to engage in social situations which exacerbates feelings of fear of failure to mask effectively, which is a circular self-reinforcing behaviour. It reinforces the sense of the situation as stressful and the need for increased masking, and in Field and others’ (2024) study their participants reported the need to closely monitor the reactions of others while masking to ensure their success. Autistic people are more likely to be bullied, and experience more rejection and harassment that non-autistic people, which suggests their fear of failure may be based on lived experience rather than a fear of something that may happen (ibid). This makes the autistic experience of socialising different from non-autistic social anxiety. For researchers, it is important to examine more complex mechanisms that may be occurring as autistic people are both monitoring others’ reactions and experiencing stress in ambiguous social situations that they may find challenging to interpret. In Field and others’ study (2024), participants reported they felt more at ease with close friends or other autistic people, indicating the possibility that if neurotypical ways of socialising were not so widely accepted as the gold standard, other ways of socialising would become less stressful for neurodivergent people. If autism had less stigma surrounding it and was perceived less as a deficit, as the medical model continues to frame it, and more as another way of processing the world and its contexts, social contexts could be improved for autistic people. Spaces could become autism-friendly by generally accepting different forms of socialising, and through environmental factors such as reducing noise levels, creating a space for autistic people to feel they can drop the mask and be themselves.
Neurotypical-centred autism research
Tillett, Shivers and Apple (2023), who we will meet again in a moment in their research on sibling relationships, reported that historically, autism has been pathologised by popular and clinical understandings to teach the public to view autism as a disease separable from personhood. As a result, most people are socialised to believe that non-autistic relational practices are normal and healthy, to assume that autistic relational practices are inherently pathological and inferior, and to confer blame for any relationship problems onto the autistic parties involved. In other words, non-autistic ways of being relational are socially privileged and autistic ones are oppressed (ibid). Walker, in her magnificent 2021 book ‘Neuroqueer Heresies: Notes on the neurodiversity paradigm, autistic empowerment, and post normal possibilities’ has dubbed the resulting social bias against autistic ways of being ‘autistiphobia,’ similar in conceptualisation to terms such as transphobia or xenophobia. In particular, most people are heavily exposed to the idea that autistic people are ‘bad’ at relationships by nature, and this reinforces the prioritisation of the behaviours and beliefs typically associated with non-autistic perspectives, and are what constitute ‘good’ relationships (Tillett, Shivers and Apple, 2023). An irony inherent to this system is that - while autistic people become characterised as unempathetic, deficient at perspective-taking, and devoid of theories of others’ minds, non-autistic people are repeatedly centred, rather than being encouraged to empathise with autistic people (ibid). Thus, an inordinate burden of empathy is placed on autistic individuals to understand and navigate the rules of a non-autistic-privileging social world, while even the smallest non-autistic efforts to empathise with autistics are hailed as generous and heroic endeavours (ibid).
Friendship
While Yew and others (2021) found a study that showed autistic individuals reported similar levels of friendship quality to non-autistic individuals, it was suggested that these involve one or two strong relationships rather than the widespread social networks often found in non-autistic peers. It may be that there is a narrower group of receptive “friends/partners” for autistic individuals, and/or greater investment in friendships once initiated by autistic individuals (ibid).
Chan, Doran and Galobardi (2023) began their study with a comment on the meanings of loneliness, solitude, and isolation. Loneliness is a negative emotional state that arises from the observation that the quality or amount of social interaction desired does not match one’s actual social experience. This is different from solitude, which may be preferred and important (ibid). Social isolation examines one’s amount of social contact. Studies of social participation in autistic adults have previously been measured by assessing the number of friendships, and frequency of contact or activities with friends, within a defined period, such as the past month or past year (ibid). These measures may not accurately capture social participation, or the perceived size and quality of social contacts in autistic participants, as not all autistic people have the same requirements for satisfying social interaction. Chan, Doran and Galobardi (2023) refer to a study of 38 autistic adults that examined factors influencing quality of life, finding that some participants described difficulty with engaging in social interactions, while others described a lack of desire for friendships altogether, representing a range of social participation preferences (ibid). With this perspective in mind, friendships and social participation looks different for each autistic individual. For example, autistic adults may plan their social interactions to include less face-to-face contact to meet their social needs without being overwhelmed (ibid). Attending concerts, movies, or sporting events may be preferred activities because these activities are more scripted and require less verbal communication. In other cases, individuals may appear to others to be on the periphery of social interactions and not involved, but still themselves consider the activity as social and participating with others (ibid). Additionally, online social networking platforms may serve as an important facilitator of friendship development for autistic individuals (ibid). These online friendships may appear to be of lower quality when assessed using a neurotypical model of friendship, but autistic individuals may engage in meaningful and important relationships through the online setting (ibid). Research on neurotypical healthy aging in adulthood stresses the importance of making social connections and forming these connections in a variety of ways that are personally meaningful (ibid). Within the autism community, there is a call to research the strengths and unique perspectives of individuals to add validity and depth to the outcomes measured (ibid). In the research from Chan, Doran and Galobardi (2023), reports of casual encounters with neighbours or acquaintances were meaningful and contributed to individuals feeling part of their communities, however they may not have led to increased friendships. The researchers (ibid) stated that it is possible that autistic adults are socially participating and active in their communities, but it may not extend to the level of a close friendship. Autistic adults may still need some support in finding or developing these closer connections in the community, if desired (ibid). Participants in Chan, Doran and Galobardi (2023) did not exclusively use technology for social connections but merged the use of technology and online platforms to engage in in-person connections with the community. They found evidence for the importance of connecting with other neurodivergent individuals in adulthood, whether through in-person support groups with other autistic adults, close personal friendships, seeking online communities specifically for autistic adults, or creating an autistic task force at work to support neurodivergent co-workers. Past research notes autistic adults are more likely to disclose more about themselves to other autistic adults and prefer to interact with other neurodivergent people, where they can speak freely about interests (ibid). Relationships with others who identify as autistic are very important, especially in fostering feelings of acceptance and safety (ibid). Online forums provided a space for these relationships, however, in-person connections at work or through autism support agencies were also identified as meaningful places of social connection with other autistic adults (ibid). For some of the participants in this study, shared interests in games nights, faith communities, work, volunteer, or educational settings provided important contexts encouraging connections of convenience and interaction with others. Despite previous research that indicated participants sought out predictable social situations, this study noted examples of participants actively seeking out social interactions, through work, volunteer positions, or joining an improvisation class, that were less predictable, to practice and improve their social skills (ibid). Not everyone in the study preferred to engage in social interactions, as clearly stated by one participant who commented, “I don’t like people.” Additionally, there were several participants who responded, “I have no friends,” when asked where they typically see their friends.
Siblings
Tillett, Shivers and Apple (2023), when examining existing research on the sibling relationships of autistic people, found it difficult to find the perspective of the autistic sibling. Studies about the families of autistic people often ignore the bidirectionality of how non-autistic family members impact the autistic ones, and elect to focus only on negative outcomes associated with having a sibling or family member with autistic traits (ibid). Siblings of autistic individuals experience lower levels of perceived intimacy and nurturance, lower levels of social support, and higher levels of negative interchanges, and describe adopting supportive roles (such as helping autistic siblings with school-work), which are described as less expected for a sibling relationship between neurotypical individuals (ibid). Studies on autistic with non-autistic siblings vary greatly in what they find. In this study (Tillett, Shivers and Apple, 2023), where at least one sibling was autistic, the participants reported significantly lower levels of warmth and intimacy. Their findings supported the theory that autistic people socialise in different ways than non-autistic people (ibid). In research, when sibling relationships are measured, they are presented within a positive or negative framework. The presumption, from a non-autistic perspective, is that greater warmth and/or intimacy in the sibling relationship indicates a “better” or “higher” quality relationship. Tillett, Shivers and Apple (2023) rejected this interpretation as overly reductionist; instead suggesting that new, validated measures are needed to incorporate autistic preferences in relationship quality assessment. Specifically, new measures should not rest on neurotypical preferences and then be carelessly applied to autistic ones, as by doing so they risk portraying autistic individuals as deficient in their relationships simply for being different to what is considered normal (ibid). Previous research has shown that autistic people place less value on intimacy in relationships than non-autistic individuals, so the mainstream methods of assessing relationships are already biased against autistic people (ibid). Only by gauging what autistic participants regard as intimacy and warmth can researchers interpret their findings from relationship data (ibid).
Anthropomorphosis and autism
In 2014, English professor, Ralph Savarese, from Grinnell College in Iowa identified an ‘object-centred empathy’ in the literary contributions (e.g. novels, essays) of autistic writers, and proposed that autistic individuals were acting like personifying poets (White and Remington, 2019). Researchers White and Remington (2019) became interested in the autistic spontaneous coupling of human-like qualities to everyday objects (e.g. furniture, gadgets and clothing). Using an online survey of 87 autistic adults and 263 adults without autism, they tested Savarese’s theory of object-centred empathy. The results indicated that object personification occurred commonly among autistic individuals, and perhaps more often (and later in life) than in the general population (ibid). Autistic individuals reported greater loneliness and social isolation, and ascribing human-like qualities (e.g. free will) to non-human agents, like alarm clocks or pillows, has been shown to reduce loneliness and promote social connection (ibid). They added that personification is used to reduce uncertainty and thus alleviate anxiety in autism. Autistic individuals are often intolerant to uncertainty and experience considerable anxiety in unstructured environments. Ascribing human-like qualities to non-human agents has been shown to make these stimuli more predictable and understandable, thereby reducing uncertainty. Object personification may act as a stabilising bridge for autistic individuals between a perceived lack of structure or environmental control and a release of anxiety and stress.
Theory of Mind is often raised in autism literature and describes the supposed autistic inability to assess the emotions of another person, often a non-autistic person. The success of whether an autistic person can perform Theory of Mind is measured in the accuracy of what they report as being the emotional state of the non-autistic subject, which can be verified by a researcher by simply asking the non-autistic person what they were feeling. Related to the findings of White and Remington (2019) is the study of autism and anthropomorphism, which is the tendency to ascribe human-like attributes, such as mental states, to non-human agents, which is discussed in research from Clutterbuck and others (2022). While researchers have theorised that anthropomorphism requires Theory of Mind, that is, the ability to represent the mental states of other people, the notion that Theory of Mind is a pre-requisite for anthropomorphism is not what autism research has found (ibid). When thinking about non-human objects, autistic people have often shown a similar or greater tendency to attribute human emotions to them when compared to non-autistic people (ibid). Clutterbuck and others (2022) in their research did not find any difference between males and females for reported anthropomorphism, while earlier research from others showed more females reported anthropomorphic tendencies. Clutterbuck and others’ (2022) accepted that anthropomorphising objects may be similar to Theory of Mind in that it is a method of assessing emotion in an outside object or person, while it is not exactly the same. An object is not a person, so instead of being an attempt to assess a human’s emotional state, the process of anthropomorphising objects is an act of compensation: in other words, in the absence of a person to relate to (from availability or preference) an autistic person will relate to an object instead (ibid). The researchers (Clutterbuck et al, 2022) suggest that engagement in pseudo-social interactions with non-human agents may help people with autistic traits to improve social interactions, despite ongoing social-cognitive difficulties. Put another way, by ascribing a social interaction with a non-human object an autistic person can practice socialising on their own terms. A non-human object can include animals, and there are many instances of autistic individuals who describe more positive feelings of social interaction with animals rather than humans. Autistic animal behaviourist, Temple Grandin, and autistic English naturalist, Chris Packham, are examples of this, although to my knowledge neither have come forward to explicitly acknowledge anthropomorphism.
Join me next episode where I will talk about autism, gender-identity, and sexuality. I will be posting these episodes every fortnight to allow more time for my own research and college studies. Please review the podcast on the platform you listen from and share it with someone you think might be interested.
Show Notes:
AHEAD conference, 20-21 March 2024: https://www.ahead.ie/event/ahead-2024/index
Botha, M. and Frost, D. M. (2018) 'Extending the Minority Stress Model to Understand Mental Health Problems Experienced by the Autistic Population', Society and Mental Health, 10(1), pp. 20-34.
Chan, D. V., Doran, J. D. and Galobardi, O. D. (2023) 'Beyond Friendship: The Spectrum of Social Participation of Autistic Adults', Journal of autism and developmental disorders, 53(1), pp. 424-437.
Field, S. L. et al. (2024) 'A meta-ethnography of autistic people’s experiences of social camouflaging and its relationship with mental health', Autism : the international journal of research and practice, pp. 1-16.
Tillett, J. I. S., Shivers, C. M. and Apple, R. (2023) 'Autistic Perspectives of Sibling Relationships: Clinical Implications for the Use of Quantitative Measures in Family Autism Research', Contemporary family therapy.
Yew, R. Y. et al. (2021) 'A systematic review of romantic relationship initiation and maintenance factors in autism', Personal relationships, 28(4), pp. 777-802.