“It fostered a greater appreciation for my little corner of the world”: A feasibility study of a therapeutic photography intervention for the well-being of autistic youth
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Research and intervention efforts for autistic people have disproportionately focused on negative mental health. This has resulted in a shortage of interventions addressing the promotion of positive emotional (hedonic) and psychological (eudaimonic) states. Therapeutic photography, which refers to self-initiated photo-taking paired with mindful reflections of the photographs, has the potential to provide an accessible and scalable approach to promote positive mental health for autistic people. This study employed a mixed-methods design to investigate the development and feasibility of a novel therapeutic photography intervention intended to promote hedonic and eudaimonic well-being among autistic youth. Forty-one autistic youth between 16 and 25 years of age were recruited. Findings indicated that therapeutic photography was a feasible intervention in terms of demand, implementation, acceptability, and practicality. There was also preliminary evidence suggesting that therapeutic photography may be a promising intervention for the promotion of different aspects of hedonic and eudaimonic well-being. Suggestions for future intervention adaptations to better address the needs of autistic youth are also featured. Lay Abstract Using Photography to Increase the Well-Being in Autistic Youth Past research has mostly focused on the challenges and negative mental health experiences of autistic young people, leading to a lack of strategies aimed at increasing positive emotions and experiences. To address this gap in the literature, we developed a therapeutic photography intervention that aimed to increase positive aspects of well-being for autistic youth. With the help of two autistic advisors, we recruited 41 autistic people, between the ages of 16 and 25 years, and asked them to take photos of positive experiences and write short reflections about their photos, for the duration of 4 weeks. We then asked participants about the benefits and challenges of the intervention. We also asked participants about any challenges they had in engaging with therapeutic photography and any changes and additional supports they would recommend for the intervention. Our results showed that autistic young people found the intervention to be interesting, doable, acceptable, and practical. We also found some evidence for the potential benefits of the intervention for the well-being of autistic youth. Participants had different ideas for adapting the design of the intervention to better meet the needs of autistic youth in the future.
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 | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".