Nor weak ties, nor strong ties: Personal support networks and relations between autistic peers
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
The aim of this study is to analyze egocentric social networks of 31 autistic adults in Québec (Canada). We examined the composition of their proximal personal support network and the role of support shared among autistic peers. A mixed method analysis was used. An egocentric network questionnaire that included qualitative prompts was conducted to gather participants’ interpretations and reference systems, facilitating an understanding of networks’ multidimensional aspect. A reflexive thematic analysis was conducted with a subset of the data from the qualitative prompts. Three main themes were identified: (1) interference in social interactions, (2) mutual acknowledgment, and (3) social engagement in the community. Most participants ( n = 21) mentioned autistic peers, but although these peers may have provided support, participants rarely identified them as being part of their proximal personal support network. Results nevertheless highlight the importance of peer support for several participants, which can refer to the concept of “weak ties,” but they differ from it by the exchanges of emotional support, which are normally expected from “strong” ties. Lay abstract Social support is recognized as an important predictor of quality of life in autistic and neurodivergent people. However, few studies have explored in detail the composition of support networks in autistic adults. Moreover, research on social networks in the field of autism has mainly focused on the support networks of experts and parents. This article presents the results of a study that analyzed the composition of the support network of 31 autistic adults and examined the role of autistic peer support in their network. Interviews were conducted with the participants. Most of them ( n = 21) mentioned autistic peers in their social network. Although these peers provided unique types of support, participants rarely identified them as close friends or relatives. Nevertheless, the results underline the importance of peer support for participants, which often presented itself as empathetic listening, the sharing of advice to deal with everyday life issues and company for recreational activities. This study shows that we should not underestimate the support that can be provided by people who share a common experience, even if they are not considered close friends. It paves the way to thinking about how communities and professionals, such as social workers and educators, can support opportunities and facilitate spaces that foster peer support.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,003 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,004 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,003 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».