Understanding Camouflaging and Identity in Autistic Children and Adolescents Using Photo-Elicitation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Purpose Camouflaging, or the use of strategies by autistic people to minimize the visibility of their autistic traits in social situations, is associated with stress, autistic burnout, depression, and suicidality among autistic adults. However, little is known about how autistic children and adolescents experience camouflaging, limiting our understanding of its onset and development. The present study filled this knowledge gap by examining camouflaging behaviour among autistic children and adolescents using a photo-elicitation approach.Methods Eight autistic children and adolescents aged 10 to 14 years (M = 11.88, SD = 1.89) attended an orientation session and were given two to three weeks to take photographs on the topic of camouflaging. Individual interviews were conducted with each participant about their photos. Inductive thematic analysis and an interpretive engagement framework were used to identify major themes within participant interviews and images.Results Qualitative analysis identified 12 themes reflecting motivations to camouflage (as a response to negative social experiences, as a learned habit), contexts of camouflaging (e.g., the audience), strategies and behaviours used to camouflage (suppressing autistic stimming behaviour, hiding the self), and perceived consequences of camouflaging (internal conflict, stress, needing time to recharge).Conclusion Results highlight that autistic children and adolescents as young as 10 years old engage in camouflaging behaviour which can be pervasive and automatic, and that this can be a stressful, confusing, and energetically draining experience. Better understanding of the development and experience of camouflaging in childhood can inform prevention of mental health concerns in adulthood.
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 | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".