Autism and entrepreneurship: An examination of the effectiveness of self-employment as a model to address the economic isolation experienced by individuals with autism spectrum disorder.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Individuals with Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD) are more socially isolated and economically disadvantaged than their peers with other developmental disorders and much greater than the general population (Roux, Shattuck, Rust, Rava, Anderson, 2015, p. 16). Specific data related to the numbers of employed individuals with ASD in Canada are difficult to find. Turcotte’s (2014) study on Persons with disabilities and employment from Statistics Canada did not differentiate disabilities when providing employment levels; it did, however, show that individuals with disabilities are often working at levels significantly lower than their peers not living with a disability. In 2011, Canadians with a disability between the ages of 25 and 64 had an employment rate of 49%, as compared to a rate of 79% for the same age grouping of their peers without a disability (Turcotte, 2014, p. 1). Leading ASD organizations place the unemployment rate for people with ASD at above 80% (Autism Speaks Canada, 2016). \n \nRecent studies have shown that 58% of young adults with autism have been employed in the past, as compared to 74% of those with an intellectual disability and 90% of those with an emotional disturbance, speech impairment, or learning disability (Roux, et al, 2015, p. 15). This represents a significant portion of the population which is economically disadvantaged from their communities. \n \nWhile the known statistics paint a grim reality for the obtainment of some independence, many individuals and organizations across North America are taking a different path in creating a reprieve from economic and social isolation of people living with ASD: they are creating enterprises and self-employment opportunities for people with ASD. In Newfoundland and Labrador there is no program in place to specifically address self-employment development opportunities for people with ASD. This represents a gap in supports that the client, the Autism Society, Newfoundland and Labrador (ASNL) wishes to fill. To fill this gap, this project will seek to understand, through the study of currently available research and the creation of new knowledge, how and if self-employment is a viable option to address this isolation.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".