Stigma associated with autism among college students in Japan and the United States: An online training study
Abstract
Misconceptions and stigma associated with autism vary across cultures and may be influenced by various factors. Undergraduates in Japan (N = 212) and the United States (US) (N = 365) completed an online autism training, with pre- and posttest surveys assessing autism-related stigma (i.e., social distance) and knowledge. Aims were to examine differences in autism stigma and knowledge in Japan and the US, while extending prior research demonstrating benefits of an online autism training in the US and Lebanon to Japan. The results revealed that Japanese students indicated greater autism-related stigma than US students, which was not attributable to differences in autism knowledge, prior experience with autism, or college major. In both countries, students majoring in "helping professions" exhibited greater willingness to engage with people with autism. Japanese and US students varied in their misconceptions about autism, with significant differences on about half of the knowledge items. Japanese students showed decreased stigma after completing the autism training, yet continued to exhibit greater social distance towards people with autism relative to US students. Future research should focus on identifying specific cultural factors (e.g., conformity to social norms and homogeneity within communities) that contribute to fear and exclusion of people with autism in different societies.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
There are cross-cultural differences in attitudes and stigma towards autism and disability.
“given the existence of cross-cultural differences in attitudes and stigma towards autism and disability (de Vries et al., 2020; Gillespie-Lynch et al., 2019; Someki et al., 2018)”
From Neurodiversity and Autism Intervention: Reconciling Perspectives Through a Naturalistic Developmental Behavioral Intervention Framework (2022) · cites this paper as Someki et al., 2018
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 47 · Cited by 121
- Authors
- Someki, F., Torii, M., Brooks, P. J., Koeda, T., & Gillespie-Lynch, K.
- Affiliations
- College of Staten Island (US)
- Kobe University (JP)
- The Graduate Center, CUNY (US)
- National Center For Child Health and Development (JP)
- Corresponding author
- Someki, Fumio
- Venue
- Research in Developmental Disabilities
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2018-05
- Volume
- 76
- Pages
- 88-98
- ISSN
- 0891-4222 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2795294239
- Cited by
- 121
- References
- 47
- Citations by year
- 2026: 10 · 2025: 23 · 2024: 25 · 2023: 20 · 2022: 11 · 2021: 15 · 2020: 12 · 2019: 5
- FWCI
- 4.69
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Research in Developmental Disabilities (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- PSC-CUNY Research Award (67240-00 45)
- REACH
- FAR Fund
- Topics
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Autism Spectrum Disorder Research
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Mental Health Treatment and Access
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Inclusion and Disability in Education and Sport
- Keywords
- autism stigma, autism knowledge, social distance, university students, cross-cultural comparison, Japan, United States, helping professions, misconceptions about autism, social exclusion
- MeSH terms
- Adult, Autistic Disorder, Cross-Cultural Comparison, Education, Female, Humans, Japan, Health Knowledge, Attitudes, Practice, Male, Surveys and Questionnaires, Psychological Distance, Students, United States, Universities, Social Stigma
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review