MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4398778363 · doi:10.1177/27546330241253696

”Not a trouble”: A mixed-method study of autism-related language preferences by French-Canadian adults from the autism community

2024· article· en· W4398778363 on OpenAlexaffabout
Stéphanie-M. Fecteau, Claude L. Normand, Gabriel Normandeau, Isia Cloutier, Lucila Guerrero, Stéphanie Turgeon, Marie-Hélène Poulin

Bibliographic record

VenueNeurodiversity · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicAutism Spectrum Disorder Research
Canadian institutionsUniversité de SherbrookeUniversité du Québec en Abitibi-TémiscamingueUniversité du Québec en Outaouais
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAutismPsychologyDevelopmental psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Finding a consensual term for persons diagnosed with autism spectrum disorder has recently been debated in the scientific literature. Considering the stigma associated with using terms deemed offensive, it is paramount to address autism respectfully and consensually. As of now, this study is the first to consult French-Canadian participants beyond autistic people themselves. This mixed-method study aimed to document and understand the preference and offensiveness of terms used to refer to persons living with autism. Participants ( N = 327) were adults who self-identified as part of the autism community (i.e., autistic person, family or friends, professionals, or clinicians). By means of an online survey, they rated and ranked six terms used to designate an autistic person. Participants also explained their ranking. Results show no consensus for the use of any one specific term. A clear dichotomy appears between autistic adults’ and professionals’ preferences in terminology. The latter prioritized terms related to the medical model, whereas autistic persons preferred using identity-related language. Among all respondents, Autistic person was the most preferred and least offensive term. Thus, we suggest asking for the concerned person's preference whenever possible or using terminology preferred by the majority when this cannot be done. Lay abstract Recent studies and editorials by autism researchers suggest distancing ourselves from the medical terms used to name autism. Considering the stigma associated with using terms deemed offensive and the influence culture has on language, it is paramount to address autism respectfully and consensually in a culturally sensitive way. As of now, data on the French-Canadian population has yet to be collected. Participants ( N = 327) who self-identified as part of the autism community (i.e., autistic person, family or friends, professionals, or clinicians) completed an online survey. They rated and ranked six terms used to designate an autistic person. Participants also explained their ranking. Among all respondents, Autistic person was the most preferred and least offensive term by most respondents. An apparent dichotomy appears between autistic adults’ and professionals’ preferences in terminology. The latter prioritized terms related to the medical model, whereas autistic persons preferred using identity-related language. However, considering the French syntax, the latter justified their preference based on identity-first and person-first principles. Because results show no consensus for one term, we suggest asking for the concerned person's preference whenever possible or using terminology preferred by the majority when this can’t be done.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.831
Threshold uncertainty score0.854

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0000.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.033
GPT teacher head0.288
Teacher spread0.255 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations15
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNeurodiversitySame topicAutism Spectrum Disorder ResearchFrench-language works237,207