The Experiences of Stigmatization and Discrimination in Autistic People of Different Genders and Sexualities
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Autistic people that hold other marginalized identities, such as being LGBTQ+, may be especially vulnerable to stigmatization and discrimination, and their experiences may be understood through the lens of intersectionality. This study aimed to explore the differences in the experiences of stigmatization and discrimination between LGBTQ+ and non-LGBTQ+ autistic people. Eighty-seven autistic adults, 41 of whom were LGBTQ+, responded to a survey that measured stigma centrality and salience, stigma consciousness, experiences of everyday discrimination, and awareness of intersectional stigmatization. Results showed that LGBTQ+ autistic participants expected to be stigmatized and discriminated against more often and saw their autism, gender, and sexuality as more important to their identity than non-LGBTQ+ autistic participants. The frequency of everyday discrimination did not differ between LGBTQ+ and non-LGBTQ+ autistic respondents. The findings suggest that further research is needed to fully understand the intersection of autism and LGBTQ+ identities.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".