The Association Between Self-Reported Camouflaging of Autistic Traits and Social Competence in Nonautistic Young Adults
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Autistic individuals often experience difficulties in social settings. Although autistic individuals may not intuitively know the "typical" way to behave in social settings, many autistic individuals have a desire to fit in so they develop techniques to "camouflage" their autistic traits. Although camouflaging may help individuals to navigate social environments, camouflaging has also been shown to produce negative psychological outcomes. This study aims to explore whether this "camouflaging" strategy is associated with poor social competence, an aspect of the autism diagnosis. Methods: In this study, 247 nonautistic adults completed the Multidimensional Social Competence Scale (MSCS) to assess their social competence, and the Camouflaging Autistic Traits Questionnaire (CAT-Q) to assess the extent to which they used strategies to compensate or mask behaviors characteristic of autism in social settings. Results: We found that over and above IQ, gender, and executive functioning scores, social competence (MSCS) scores reliably predicted the extent to which nonautistic individuals camouflaged, accounting for 25% of the variance in CAT-Q scores. Importantly, even when autistic traits were controlled for, social competence was still able to account for additional variance in CAT-Q scores. Conclusion: These results suggest that low social competency in nonautistic adults predicts camouflaging as a strategy in social situations. Given these camouflaging behaviors are being performed in an attempt to comply with an environmental demand to behave in a particular manner, these results also highlight the importance of conceptualizing the social challenges that autistic and nonautistic individuals face in a bidirectional manner, where the onus is not solely on the individual to comply with social conventions but also on society to accommodate diverse behavioral traits. Lay summary: By comparing what is shared and what is unique with nonautistic people who share traits with autistic people, a more precise definition and study of camouflaging behavior are possible. Rather than see camouflaging as a phenomenon that occurs exclusively in autistic people because of their disability, it may be that both autistic and nonautistic people use camouflaging when they perceive themselves to lack the necessary social competencies that are expected within their social contexts. Because both autistic traits and social competency are related to camouflaging behavior, we can begin to think about how to tease apart which characteristics are more likely to evoke camouflaging in autistic individuals and how this may be similar or different in nonautistic individuals. This knowledge will ultimately contribute to the development of more tailored approaches to prevent and/or reduce the negative impact of camouflaging behaviors for autistic adults.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".