Bibliographic record
Abstract
The negative stereotypes associated with autism have created many barriers to employment. As a result, the autistic population has some of the lowest workforce participation rates among all types of disability; with about only one-quarter of the working age population actively participating. These low unemployment rates persist despite many autistic people expressing the desire to work and being more than capable to do so. Among successfully employed autistic people, disclosure and effective accommodations appear to be key factors for the maintenance of long-term employment. Thus, the present study aimed to provide a qualitative exploration of autistic perspectives on how managers/organizations can encourage disclosure and accommodation requests. In addition, this project sought to explore how managers and/or organizations can best support their autistic employees following an accommodation request. Results from the thematic analysis revealed four primary themes (i.e., authentic culture of caring and inclusivity; strengths approach; individualization and collaboration; and clear and consistent structure/communication) stratified by two categories (i.e., encouraging disclosure and accommodation requests; and supporting autistic employees). The results from this study provide managers/organizations with a practical framework for encouraging disclosure and informing the accommodation process.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".