University Belonging in Autistic Postsecondary Students: The Roles of Interoception, Social Support, and Sensory Responsivity
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Background. Autistic postsecondary education (PSE) students often face significant challenges that negatively impact their belonging within their university community, an essential predictor of well-being, academic success, and persistence. Among these barriers, sensory processing differences are frequently reported but remain underexamined in research. Sensory responsivity refers to the extent to which individuals experience discomfort in response to environmental stimuli (e.g., lights, sounds, textures). Two key factors may influence how sensory challenges affect belonging: interoceptive accuracy, or one’s ability to identify and interpret internal bodily sensations (e.g., hunger, tension), and perceived social support, or the extent to which individuals feel emotionally and socially connected. Objective. This study investigates how sensory responsivity relates to Autistic students’ sense of university belonging and whether this relationship is moderated by subjective interoceptive accuracy and social support. Hypotheses. I hypothesized that university belonging would differ based on racial and gender/sexual minority status (H1); that greater sensory responsivity (i.e., more discomfort from lights, sounds, etc) would be associated with lower university belonging (H2); and that both subjective interoceptive accuracy (i.e. accurately interpreting bodily sensations) (H3) and social support (H4) would moderate this association, such that higher levels of either would buffer against the negative impact of greater sensory responsivity. As an exploratory analysis (H5), I tested a three-way interaction among sensory responsivity, interoceptive accuracy, and social support, allowing for the possibility that the moderators may also interact without assuming a specific interaction structure. Methods. A total of 93 Autistic students enrolled at Canadian PSE institutions (Alberta, Ontario, and B.C.) completed a cross-sectional survey including measures of sensory responsivity (SeSS), interoceptive accuracy (ISQ), social support, and university belonging (UES). Descriptive statistics and group comparisons were conducted using t-tests and ANOVAs. Pearson correlations were calculated to assess bivariate relationships. Moderation analyses were conducted using the PROCESS macro in R (Hayes, 2022), with Model 2 used for two-way interactions and Model 3 for exploratory three-way interactions. Results. Contrary to H1, no significant group differences in university belonging were found based on racial or gender/sexual minority status. Supporting H2, higher sensory responsivity (more sensory discomfort) was significantly associated with lower university belonging. H3 and H4 were not supported. No two-way interactions were found between interoceptive accuracy and sensory responsivity, or between social support and sensory responsivity, in relation to sense of belonging. However, the exploratory three-way interaction (H5) was significant. The negative association between higher sensory responsivity and lower university belonging was strongest among students with both high interoceptive accuracy (i.e., more accurate at interpreting bodily signals) and low social support. When social support was high, this association disappeared. Discussion. These findings extend MacLennan et al.’s (2022) model by demonstrating how internal and external factors interact to shape the experiences of Autistic individuals in specific settings like PSE. They also underscore the importance of socially supportive and sensory-inclusive environments for fostering belonging among Autistic students. Addressing sensory barriers in higher education and strengthening social support may be critical for improving equity, retention, and well-being for Autistic students.
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 | 0,004 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,002 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| 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 ».