The DOI matches its Crossref record; 95 of the 96 references it cites were found in a registry or an index; 10 of the 91 sources its claims cite were checked for support.
Neurodiversity, epistemic injustice, and the good human life
Open accessAbstract
Epistemic injustice refers to harms that relate specifically to our status as epistemic agents, whereby our status as knowers, interpreters, and providers of information, is unduly diminished or stifled in a way that undermines the agent's agency and dignity.The concept was defined by Miranda Fricker (2007), who identifies two key forms of epistemic injustice.The first is testimonial injustice, which refers to cases where testimony is unduly dismissed because of prejudiced beliefs regarding minority groups.Hermeneutical injustice refers to cases where a community's shared vocabularies have been structured in a way that unfairly distorts or stifles understanding for, and of, a minority group.In each case, there is an instance of people being harmed specifically in their capacity as knowers: individuals capable of knowing or providing knowledge.Much work on epistemic injustice has identified the operation of negative stereotypes relating to gender and race; for instance, when someone's testimony is dismissed, doubted, or accorded low credibility due to racist or sexist prejudices on the part of the listener (Dotson, 2011;Fricker, 2007; Kidd et al., 2017;Medina, 2013).But in recent years research has drawn attention to epistemic injustice in healthcare generally, and more specifically within psychiatry, pediatrics, and among people with disabilities (Blease et al., 2016;Carel & Kidd, 2014;Crichton et al., 2016; Kidd & Carel, 2016, 2019;Potter, 2015).What has been revealed is the systematic stifling of the voices and interpretive tools available to both ill and disabled persons: in particular, their information providing, testimonies, and interpretations.These types of epistemic injustice have been associated with the medical deficit model that dominates much of medical and psychiatric discourse (Kidd & Carel, 2018, 2019).Moreover, physically disabled persons' claims that they are happy and living good lives have also been dismissed due to prejudices about the possibility of living well whilst disabled (Blease et al., 2016;
Overview
AI snapshot
Written from the paper’s full text.
TL;DR
The paper argues that autistic people face interlocking testimonial and hermeneutical epistemic injustices that make it difficult or impossible to recognize them as both autistic and living a good life. It proposes neurodiversity-informed reforms to conceptions of flourishing and to clinical and everyday epistemic practice.
Key findings
- Autistic testimony about happiness and wellbeing is subject to pathocentric testimonial injustice: credibility is dismissed through stereotypes such as “mindblindness,” limited social understanding, and the assumption that autism and happiness are inherently at odds. The paper cites Dinah Murray’s claim that autism disclosure is “likely to precipitate a negative judgment of capacity involving permanent loss of credibility” and discusses accusations that Naoki Higashida’s articulate voice could not be “genuine.”
- Hermeneutical injustice operates through species-norm conceptions of flourishing: neo-Aristotelian and objective-list views, including Nussbaum, Furman and Tuminello, and Barnbaum, treat autistic cognition as not “truly human” or as at odds with flourishing unless therapy erases defining autistic traits. This excludes neurodivergent modes of flourishing from shared interpretive resources.
- These injustices combine into “autism’s catch-22”: if an autistic person is living a good life, they are denied recognition of their autism; if they are not living a good life, their autism is recognized and their suffering is presumed to be caused by autism. The paper states that “I am autistic and I am flourishing” is not intelligible under this framing.
- The paper proposes four ameliorative approaches: dismantling the medical deficit approach to autism; relativizing value judgments about the good life; cultivating autistic self-understanding and autistic epistemic communities; and fostering neurotypical epistemic humility and cross-cultural communication.
Methods
- Conceptual and philosophical analysis in philosophy of disability and philosophy of medicine; no empirical study, sample, or original quantitative data are reported.
- The argument draws on Miranda Fricker’s testimonial and hermeneutical injustice, the neurodiversity paradigm, social and relational models of disability, and critiques of species-norm accounts of flourishing.
- Evidence used includes cited empirical literature and first-person autistic accounts; the paper’s main analysis is normative and theoretical, culminating in proposed ameliorative strategies.
Limitations
- Stated: the paper brackets debates about how far the neurodiversity paradigm applies across the autism spectrum, supposing it applies “to some extent at least”; it does not commit to a single alternative model of disability; and it says its arguments do not automatically apply to other groups.
- Evident: there is no new empirical data, systematic review, or tested intervention; the argument relies on selected cited studies and testimony.
- Evident: the focus is autism, with extension to other neurocognitive disabilities presented as a question for future research rather than a demonstrated conclusion.
Model-written summary. Check it against the paper before relying on it.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
55 Own interpretation · 25 No full text of the sources · 20 Not checked yet · 13 Sources not found · 10 No basis given · 3 Supported · 3 Partly supported · 2 Couldn’t confirm · 1 Supported so far · accuracy not yet measured
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“What has been revealed is the systematic stifling of the voices and interpretive tools available to both ill and disabled persons: in particular, their information providing, testimonies, and interpretations.”
§ Neurodiversity, epistemic injustice, and the good human life > Abstract
What the sources say
- Supportedcites Blease et al., 2016 source
The Testimonial injustice section (p. 3) describes how stereotyping of illness or disability can constrain patients’ contributions to consultations. The Hermeneutical injustice section (p. 4) describes exclusion from shared interpretive resources, and the Evidence from patients section (p. 7) explains how patients’ testimony and interpretations can be minimised or disregarded. (LLM, conf=0.87)
- Partly supportedcites Carel & Kidd, 2014 sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
Section 1, “Testimonial and hermeneutical injustice” (page unavailable), describes how ill people’s testimony and interpretations can be ignored, downgraded, or treated merely as information. Section 2 gives an example involving a disabled person, but the paper does not establish systematic stifling across disabled people as a group; its broader analysis focuses on ill people. (LLM, conf=0.82)
- Not matchedcites Crichton et al., 2016
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
boosteddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Supported
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“Moreover, physically disabled persons' claims that they are happy and living good lives have also been dismissed due to prejudices about the possibility of living well whilst disabled (Blease et al., 2016;”
§ Neurodiversity, epistemic injustice, and the good human life > Abstract
What the sources say
- Partly supportedcites Blease et al., 2016 sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Testimonial injustice section (p. 3) says that negative stereotyping of an illness or disability can constrain a patient's contribution to consultations. The Summary (p. 7) reports that stereotypes can lead to patients with CFS/ME having their testimony discounted. Neither passage addresses physically disabled people’s claims that they are happy or living good lives, or prejudice about whether living well with a disability is possible. (LLM, conf=0.84)
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Partly supported
The cited sources that could be checked couldn’t confirm or dispute this claim.
In the paper
“as well as the widespread assumption noted by researchers (e.g., Bovell, 2015, p. 265;Verhoeff, 2012, p. 429) that autism causes autistic distress to the extent that autistic individuals are inherently disposed to lower wellbeing when compared to a neurotypical norm.”
§ Neurodiversity, epistemic injustice, and the good human life > 2 | THE CHALLENGE FROM NEURODIVERSITY
What the sources say
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- The authors state this as an assumption: The neurodiversity framing can be applied to the autism spectrum to some extent at least.
Every source the paper cites for this claim was checked and supports it.
In the paper
“This is reflected in the DSM-5, where the notion of”
§ Neurodiversity, epistemic injustice, and the good human life > 2 | THE CHALLENGE FROM NEURODIVERSITY
What the sources say
- Supportedcites Aftab & Rashed, 2020 source
The Dysfunction section (p. 5) says DSM does not formally define dysfunction. The Etiological View of Dysfunction section (p. 6) says DSM criteria often infer dysfunction from folk intuitions and normative comparisons, while the validity of that inference remains to be demonstrated. Together, these support the paraphrase that DSM-5’s notion of dysfunction rests more on value judgments than established scientific findings. (LLM, conf=0.87)
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Supported
Every source the paper cites for this claim was checked and supports it.
In the paper
“For instance, Milton and Sims found that a key reason autistic people attributed to hindering their wellbeing was barriers to belonging, rather than simply their being autistic (Milton & Sims, 2016).”
§ Neurodiversity, epistemic injustice, and the good human life > 3 | AUTISTIC HAPPINESS AND TESTIMONIAL INJUSTICE
What the sources say
- Supportedcites Milton & Sims, 2016 source
The Discussion of key points (pp. 19–20) identifies barriers to wellbeing and belonging and says that treating autistic people's challenges purely as deficits is limited and potentially counterproductive. The Conclusion (pp. 21–22) calls for less focus on remediation and more on reducing social isolation, supporting the paraphrase's contrast with autism itself as the cause. (LLM, conf=0.91)
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Supported
Every source the paper cites for this claim was checked and supports it.
In the paper
“Their point is that dominant conceptions of the good life, including of flourishing, typically rely on species-typical intuitions regarding what is good or desirable, and so encounter a methodological issue when tasked with accounting for neurodivergent modes of flourishing that may be grounded in atypical intuitions.”
§ Neurodiversity, epistemic injustice, and the good human life > 4 | AUTISTIC FLOURISHING AND HERMENEUTICAL INJUSTICE
What the sources say
- Supportedcites Rodogno et al., 2016 source
Split into 2 atoms — 2 confirmed, 0 partially supported, 0 disputed, 0 misattributed, 0 unverifiable. Expand the claim to see per-atom verdicts.
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Supported
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Indeed, even significant illness and disability, such as cancer, renal failure, and paralysis, have been shown to have a surprisingly small intrinsic effect on levels of wellbeing as such.”
§ Neurodiversity, epistemic injustice, and the good human life > 6 | IMPLICATIONS AND SUGGESTIONS FOR AMELIORATION
What the sources say
boosted- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“People experiencing a wide range of illnesses and disabilities often report paradoxically high levels of [quality of life] and mood”
§ Neurodiversity, epistemic injustice, and the good human life > 6 | IMPLICATIONS AND SUGGESTIONS FOR AMELIORATION
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Ubel et al., 2005 source
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“and moreover that autistic empathic understanding does arise between autistics (Chapman, 2019b;Milton, 2012).”
§ Neurodiversity, epistemic injustice, and the good human life > 6 | IMPLICATIONS AND SUGGESTIONS FOR AMELIORATION
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Chapman, 2019b
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Milton, 2012 source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Not matched
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“a body of evidence has been accumulating which shows that neurotypicals equally struggle to understand autistics”
§ Neurodiversity, epistemic injustice, and the good human life > 6 | IMPLICATIONS AND SUGGESTIONS FOR AMELIORATION
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Chapman, 2019b
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Milton, 2012 source
boosted- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Not matched
- It may state two separate claims as one. 30
- Probably not a substantial claim. 44
The sources with a verdict support this claim; the rest weren’t checked yet, have no full text we could read, or their verdicts aren’t rated yet.
In the paper
“Relatedly, autism is associated with poor mental health.For instance, many autistic persons experience clinical levels of anxiety and depression (Stewart et al., 2006), and suicide rates are strikingly high (Hirvikoski et al., 2016).”
§ Neurodiversity, epistemic injustice, and the good human life > 2 | THE CHALLENGE FROM NEURODIVERSITY
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Stewart et al., 2006 source
- Supportedcites Hirvikoski et al., 2016 source
The citation to Hirvikoski et al. is attached to the statement about suicide rates, not the separately cited statement about anxiety and depression. The section “Specific causes of death in low-functioning v. high-functioning ASD” reports increased suicide risk in both ASD groups compared with controls; the Clinical implications section describes a high risk for suicide in the high-functioning group. Page numbers are unavailable in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.93)
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“Part of this will surely come from recognizing and supporting the emergence of autistic epistemic communities, whereby autistics have been coming together to develop vocabularies, shared practices, and social norms that reflect autistic needs and preferences (Chapman, 2019b;Sinclair, 2010).”
§ Neurodiversity, epistemic injustice, and the good human life > 6 | IMPLICATIONS AND SUGGESTIONS FOR AMELIORATION
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Chapman, 2019b
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Partly supportedcites Sinclair, 2010 sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
In the Introduction (no page provided), Sinclair describes autistic people forming communities and developing social rules, customs, and ways of accommodating autistic needs. This supports the claim about shared practices and norms, but our copy does not establish that these communities developed shared vocabularies. (LLM, conf=0.84)
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Not matched
The cited sources that could be checked couldn’t confirm or dispute this claim.
In the paper
“This distinction clearly separates the harmful pathologization that is inherent to the medical deficit approach and social stigma and prejudice toward autistics from the medicalization which enables individuals to receive a diagnosis and treatment, if they so wish.”
§ Neurodiversity, epistemic injustice, and the good human life > 6 | IMPLICATIONS AND SUGGESTIONS FOR AMELIORATION
What the sources say
- Could not verifycites Spencer & Carel, 2021 sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
Split into 2 atoms — 0 confirmed, 0 partially supported, 0 disputed, 0 misattributed, 2 unverifiable. Expand the claim to see per-atom verdicts.
boosted- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
- Could not verify
In the paper
“Brickman et al. report that paralyzed accident victims are only somewhat less happy than lottery winners (1978).”
§ Neurodiversity, epistemic injustice, and the good human life > 6 | IMPLICATIONS AND SUGGESTIONS FOR AMELIORATION
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Brickman et al., 1978
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Not matched
In the paper
“in general the results from comparative studies are meager and do not support the assumption that cancer or cancer treatment lead to a significantly lower quality of life”
§ Neurodiversity, epistemic injustice, and the good human life > 6 | IMPLICATIONS AND SUGGESTIONS FOR AMELIORATION
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites de Haes and van Knippenberg, 1985 source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“A study compared a group of hemodialysis patients with healthy controls and found that both groups overestimated the impact of hemodialysis on wellbeing.In fact, both groups reported a similar level of wellbeing (Riis et al., 2005, p. 6).”
§ Neurodiversity, epistemic injustice, and the good human life > 6 | IMPLICATIONS AND SUGGESTIONS FOR AMELIORATION
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Riis et al., 2005 source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“On the medical model, impairment is the primary cause of disability and also the harm that is taken to stem from it.”
§ Neurodiversity, epistemic injustice, and the good human life > 2 | THE CHALLENGE FROM NEURODIVERSITY
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“By contrast, on models used by neurodiversity proponents, at least a significant part of disablement is societally caused (Oliver, 1990) or the product of complex interactions between individual and society (Shakespeare, 2014).”
§ Neurodiversity, epistemic injustice, and the good human life > 2 | THE CHALLENGE FROM NEURODIVERSITY
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Oliver, 1990 source
- Not matchedcites Shakespeare, 2014
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plainconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“These stereotypes overlook the large diversity within autism and therefore may attribute credibility deficits to autistic individuals who in fact do not have these putative traits.”
§ Neurodiversity, epistemic injustice, and the good human life > 3 | AUTISTIC HAPPINESS AND TESTIMONIAL INJUSTICE
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“It may also-despite there being good reason to think that autistic thriving is viable-block our ability to conceive of a good autistic life, as well as to recognize the testimonies of happy autistics as such.”
§ Neurodiversity, epistemic injustice, and the good human life > Abstract
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“This is practically important since it does not just deny recognition to happy autistics-it also means that the actual chances of autistic flourishing are severely diminished, much as any destination will be harder to find if it has not been included on the map.”
§ Neurodiversity, epistemic injustice, and the good human life > Abstract
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim could be matched to a paper in Crossref, so there is nothing to check it against.
In the paper
“Neurodiversity proponents (Chapman, 2019a;Walker, 2012) have suggested the neurodiversity paradigm as an alternative to the dominant medicalized framing of psychiatric and cognitive disabilities.”
§ Neurodiversity, epistemic injustice, and the good human life > 2 | THE CHALLENGE FROM NEURODIVERSITY
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Chapman, 2019a
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not matchedcites Walker, 2012
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
- Not matched
None of the sources cited for this claim could be matched to a paper in Crossref, so there is nothing to check it against.
In the paper
“This recasts autism as a minority neurocognitive type that is primarily disabled and devalued under current social conditions, instead of it being a medical pathology (Chapman, 2019a;Singer, 1999).”
§ Neurodiversity, epistemic injustice, and the good human life > Abstract
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Chapman, 2019a
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not matchedcites Singer, 1999
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
- Not matched
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Varieties of this framing, which has been argued for in detail in the existing literature (see, e.g., Chapman, 2019bChapman, , 2020;;Robertson, 2010), allows us to see such divergences as”
§ Neurodiversity, epistemic injustice, and the good human life > 2 | THE CHALLENGE FROM NEURODIVERSITY
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Chapman, 2019b
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Chapman, 2020 source
- Not matchedcites Robertson, 2010
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
- Not matched
In the paper
“This follows a typical set of stereotypes widely held about disabled persons, whereby disability is assumed to be incompatible with living good or happy lives (Barnes, 2016).”
§ Neurodiversity, epistemic injustice, and the good human life > 3 | AUTISTIC HAPPINESS AND TESTIMONIAL INJUSTICE
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Barnes, 2016 source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Although this theory has been shown to be untenable (Chapman, 2019b) and rooted in prejudice (Yergeau & Huebner, 2017), it is still systematically used to dismiss the validity of autistic voices (Yergeau, 2018).”
§ Neurodiversity, epistemic injustice, and the good human life > 3 | AUTISTIC HAPPINESS AND TESTIMONIAL INJUSTICE
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Chapman, 2019b
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Yergeau & Huebner, 2017 source
- Not matchedcites Yergeau, 2018
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“On the medical deficit view autism is also widely taken to be at odds (to varying extents depending on the specifics of the diagnosis) with living a good human life.”
§ Neurodiversity, epistemic injustice, and the good human life > 2 | THE CHALLENGE FROM NEURODIVERSITY
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“As we discuss below, autism is widely taken to be at odds-to varying extents-with both wellbeing and flourishing, and hence incompatible with both objective and subjective conceptions of the good life.”
§ Neurodiversity, epistemic injustice, and the good human life > Abstract
plain- Asserted: fails — The authors may not put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The authors may not put it forward as true. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“On what we call the medical deficit view, autism is classified as a neurodevelopmental disorder, indicating that it is a harmful developmental trajectory that stems from underlying neurological dysfunction.”
§ Neurodiversity, epistemic injustice, and the good human life > 2 | THE CHALLENGE FROM NEURODIVERSITY
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
A claim is checked only against the cited paper’s full text, never its abstract, and none is available for its sources.
In the paper
“On the face of it, this may seem supported by the empirical literature, in which autism is associated with poor outcomes (Howlin, 2000) and low wellbeing (Renty & Roeyers, 2006).”
§ Neurodiversity, epistemic injustice, and the good human life > 2 | THE CHALLENGE FROM NEURODIVERSITY
What the sources say
hedgedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“This relates specifically to the stereotype that autism and happiness are inherently at odds.”
§ Neurodiversity, epistemic injustice, and the good human life > 3 | AUTISTIC HAPPINESS AND TESTIMONIAL INJUSTICE
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
In the paper
“This can be broadly characterized as pathocentric testimonial injustice (Kidd & Carel, 2018) that operates broadly and pervasively, in tandem with the relevant tracker prejudices.”
§ Neurodiversity, epistemic injustice, and the good human life > 3 | AUTISTIC HAPPINESS AND TESTIMONIAL INJUSTICE
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Kidd & Carel, 2018 source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“our argument will serve the further purpose of showing that neurodiversity also challenges us to radically broaden our conceptions of the good human life.”
§ Neurodiversity, epistemic injustice, and the good human life > Abstract
boosteddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim could be matched to a paper in Crossref, so there is nothing to check it against.
In the paper
“On the medicalized framing, there's a relatively restricted species-standard norm in terms of mental functioning (Boorse, 1975): if an individual falls outside of this norm and is also distressed or disabled to a”
§ Neurodiversity, epistemic injustice, and the good human life > 2 | THE CHALLENGE FROM NEURODIVERSITY
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Boorse, 1975
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not matchedcites APA, 2013
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“While this will mean that autistic voices are more likely to be dismissed when they offer a variety of kinds of testimonies, here we want to focus on testimonies about autistic wellbeing or happiness.”
§ Neurodiversity, epistemic injustice, and the good human life > 3 | AUTISTIC HAPPINESS AND TESTIMONIAL INJUSTICE
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A claim is checked only against the cited paper’s full text, never its abstract, and none is available for its sources.
In the paper
“Underlying these empirical findings, moral philosophers have often taken autism to be inherently at odds with living a good life (Barnbaum, 2008;Furman & Tuminello, 2015).”
§ Neurodiversity, epistemic injustice, and the good human life > 2 | THE CHALLENGE FROM NEURODIVERSITY
What the sources say
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“These reframe neurodivergent disablement and distress as, at least in significant part, the product of social exclusion, marginalization, and oppression.”
§ Neurodiversity, epistemic injustice, and the good human life > 2 | THE CHALLENGE FROM NEURODIVERSITY
plainconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“By contrast, the neurodiversity paradigm takes neuro-cognitive diversity itself to be the norm and posits such diversity as desirable and valuable for humanity (or any human group) as such (Chapman, 2021;Singer, 1999).”
§ Neurodiversity, epistemic injustice, and the good human life > 2 | THE CHALLENGE FROM NEURODIVERSITY
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Chapman, 2021 source
- Not matchedcites Singer, 1999
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Neurodiversity proponents aim to de-pathologize autism and instead politicize neurodivergent disablement and distress, and in doing so mount a challenge to the notion that at least some forms of neurodivergence are inherently harmful and dysfunctional.”
§ Neurodiversity, epistemic injustice, and the good human life > 2 | THE CHALLENGE FROM NEURODIVERSITY
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“This coheres with the neo-Aristotelian notion that what is good for us will depend on what we are like, but also acknowledges that autistic people are different from non-autistic people-and hence that autistic thriving will not look like non-autistic thriving even if both are members of the same species.”
§ Neurodiversity, epistemic injustice, and the good human life > 4 | AUTISTIC FLOURISHING AND HERMENEUTICAL INJUSTICE
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“On the latter interpretation, if that person is happy and articulating clearly their happiness, then the eloquence and rich use of language and their happiness mean that that speaker is not “really autistic.””
§ Neurodiversity, epistemic injustice, and the good human life > 5 | AUTISM'S CATCH-22
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“For although it is true that wellbeing is currently low among the autistic population, evidence points toward this being a result of stigma and societal disablement rather than inherent to being autistic.”
§ Neurodiversity, epistemic injustice, and the good human life > 3 | AUTISTIC HAPPINESS AND TESTIMONIAL INJUSTICE
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Thus it not only prevents the expression of wellness but also impacts upon that wellness itself.”
§ Neurodiversity, epistemic injustice, and the good human life > 4 | AUTISTIC FLOURISHING AND HERMENEUTICAL INJUSTICE
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Our aim here has been to identify and clarify how this catch-22 bifurcation emerges from interlocking biases that go all the way from everyday assumptions, through psychiatric theory and practice, reaching into ancient conceptions of the good human life.”
§ Neurodiversity, epistemic injustice, and the good human life > 6 | IMPLICATIONS AND SUGGESTIONS FOR AMELIORATION
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Interlocking epistemic injustices mean that autistic accounts are taken to mean either that the person is not happy or that they are not autistic.”
§ Neurodiversity, epistemic injustice, and the good human life > 5 | AUTISM'S CATCH-22
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“On the former interpretation, “I am autistic and I am flourishing” is not intelligible; it is not possible to be both.”
§ Neurodiversity, epistemic injustice, and the good human life > 5 | AUTISM'S CATCH-22
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Importantly, both components of this dynamic are reflected not just in everyday responses to autism; they are also embedded in clinical practice.”
§ Neurodiversity, epistemic injustice, and the good human life > 5 | AUTISM'S CATCH-22
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: unclear — It is unclear why the paper says it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“More specifically, it constructs autism so that the very concept is at odds with thriving: you can only be recognized as autistic if your life is not going well.”
§ Neurodiversity, epistemic injustice, and the good human life > 5 | AUTISM'S CATCH-22
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“In saying this, we do not mean to deny that some manifestations of autism can make life inherently harder in important respects; only that life being hard is not the same as it is at odds with happiness as such (Booth, 2016, Chapman, 2020;Carel, 2016).”
§ Neurodiversity, epistemic injustice, and the good human life > 3 | AUTISTIC HAPPINESS AND TESTIMONIAL INJUSTICE
What the sources say
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“If the neurodiversity perspective is seriously entertained or is convincing to an extent, then, given the diversity of preferences that comes with a neurologically diverse species, we should expect there to be a plurality of ways of flourishing within the human species, many of which diverge from species-standard thriving, and some of which may be rendered invisible due to overly restricted concep”
§ Neurodiversity, epistemic injustice, and the good human life > 4 | AUTISTIC FLOURISHING AND HERMENEUTICAL INJUSTICE
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: unclear — It is unclear whether it could be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Rests on an assumption: There are many different, yet equally legitimate, ways of functioning within humanity.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“We've suggested that autistic individuals encounter testimonial injustice, when they claim to be happy or living good lives, and hermeneutical injustice, seen in the exclusion of neurodivergent modes of flourishing.”
§ Neurodiversity, epistemic injustice, and the good human life > 5 | AUTISM'S CATCH-22
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“This allows us to understand virtues as shared but importantly relative to the individual rather than the species.”
§ Neurodiversity, epistemic injustice, and the good human life > 6 | IMPLICATIONS AND SUGGESTIONS FOR AMELIORATION
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Carel, 2017 source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“On the other hand, if they are autistic and not happy or flourishing, then not only is the autism recognized, but the suffering is automatically taken to stem from the autism.”
§ Neurodiversity, epistemic injustice, and the good human life > 5 | AUTISM'S CATCH-22
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“This time, however, the issue arises from a hermeneutical lacuna, not testimonial injustice, for it stops us from being able to envision minority modes of flourishing, despite, as we have seen, there being reason to think that such modes of flourishing exist.”
§ Neurodiversity, epistemic injustice, and the good human life > 4 | AUTISTIC FLOURISHING AND HERMENEUTICAL INJUSTICE
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“the development of new post-medicalized vocabularies will be necessary for further articulating an accurate and nuanced understanding of autistic forms of flourishing.”
§ Neurodiversity, epistemic injustice, and the good human life > 6 | IMPLICATIONS AND SUGGESTIONS FOR AMELIORATION
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence.
In the paper
“Merriam (2009) has proposed turning away from Aristotle and toward stoic philosophy, to shift the focus onto how well individuals do give their specific limitations instead of measuring them against the species-standard norm.”
§ Neurodiversity, epistemic injustice, and the good human life > 6 | IMPLICATIONS AND SUGGESTIONS FOR AMELIORATION
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Merriam, 2009 source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Given this, it is also feasible that similar dynamics may also emerge for other neuro-cognitive disabilities.”
§ Neurodiversity, epistemic injustice, and the good human life > 6 | IMPLICATIONS AND SUGGESTIONS FOR AMELIORATION
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“our analysis does give good reason to ask whether similar dynamics are also at play in other cases.”
§ Neurodiversity, epistemic injustice, and the good human life > 6 | IMPLICATIONS AND SUGGESTIONS FOR AMELIORATION
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“Carel (2012) developed a phenomenological toolkit meant for use in a healthcare context, to support patients to cultivate new existential relationships to and understandings of their condition, which are bracketed off from purely medical meanings.”
§ Neurodiversity, epistemic injustice, and the good human life > 6 | IMPLICATIONS AND SUGGESTIONS FOR AMELIORATION
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Carel, 2012 source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“For Baron-Cohen, the issue is one of autism “causing [them] to suffer” (2008, p. 11).”
§ Neurodiversity, epistemic injustice, and the good human life > 5 | AUTISM'S CATCH-22
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Baron-Cohen, 2008 source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
In the paper
“Milton (2014b) draws on phenomenology to critique the normalization of autistic “dispositional diversity.””
§ Neurodiversity, epistemic injustice, and the good human life > 6 | IMPLICATIONS AND SUGGESTIONS FOR AMELIORATION
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Milton, 2014b
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Not matched
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“For other neuro-cognitive disabilities are also routinely framed via the species-norm.”
§ Neurodiversity, epistemic injustice, and the good human life > 6 | IMPLICATIONS AND SUGGESTIONS FOR AMELIORATION
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Updating our theories of the good life to reflect the neurodiversity paradigm may therefore be as important as neurodiversity proponents take updating models of disability is, in light of such a paradigm shift.”
§ Neurodiversity, epistemic injustice, and the good human life > 6 | IMPLICATIONS AND SUGGESTIONS FOR AMELIORATION
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“the concept itself is not supposed to be autism-specific”
§ Neurodiversity, epistemic injustice, and the good human life > 6 | IMPLICATIONS AND SUGGESTIONS FOR AMELIORATION
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Armstrong, 2010
- Not matchedcites Chapman, 2019a
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“If autistic distress is extraneous and the result of social conditions under which autistic persons live, it may be that instead of adapting to their condition, autistic persons need to adapt to the barriers, prejudices, and stigma they face throughout their lives as “tracker obstacles,” that track them in education, health, employment, housing, and so on.”
§ Neurodiversity, epistemic injustice, and the good human life > 6 | IMPLICATIONS AND SUGGESTIONS FOR AMELIORATION
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Pantazakos (2019) develops the concept of the autistic “life-world” as expressing a different structure to the neurotypical life-world in order to critique medicalized, behavioral understandings”
§ Neurodiversity, epistemic injustice, and the good human life > 6 | IMPLICATIONS AND SUGGESTIONS FOR AMELIORATION
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Pantazakos, 2019 source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Disabled people also face similar forms of discrimination and epistemic injustice.”
§ Neurodiversity, epistemic injustice, and the good human life > 6 | IMPLICATIONS AND SUGGESTIONS FOR AMELIORATION
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“Anita Ho (2011) uses the term “catch 22” to describe a different situation, in which disabled people put themselves at risk if they do not trust their physician, but equally so if they do, since physicians can be epistemically overconfident and hence make harmful decisions.”
§ Neurodiversity, epistemic injustice, and the good human life > 6 | IMPLICATIONS AND SUGGESTIONS FOR AMELIORATION
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Ho, 2011
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
In the paper
“Wardrope's (2015) claim that impaired or ill persons do “acknowledge the utility of medical framings and find a certain instrumental value in the treatments consequently made available, but resist in varying fashions the idea that the biomedical model says all that there is to say about their conditions and identities””
§ Neurodiversity, epistemic injustice, and the good human life > 6 | IMPLICATIONS AND SUGGESTIONS FOR AMELIORATION
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Wardrope, 2015
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
In the paper
“Carel (2017), who in discussion of the neurodevelopmental disorder fetal alcohol spectrum disorder has stressed the need to relativize our understanding of the virtues in light of individual cognitive limitations.”
§ Neurodiversity, epistemic injustice, and the good human life > 6 | IMPLICATIONS AND SUGGESTIONS FOR AMELIORATION
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Carel, 2017 source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“If so, neurodivergent people must adapt to an environment not built for them rather than having to adapt to diminished health.”
§ Neurodiversity, epistemic injustice, and the good human life > 6 | IMPLICATIONS AND SUGGESTIONS FOR AMELIORATION
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In closing, we suggest that our analysis may bear significance more widely, beyond the case of autism.”
§ Neurodiversity, epistemic injustice, and the good human life > 6 | IMPLICATIONS AND SUGGESTIONS FOR AMELIORATION
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“cultivating epistemic humility among the broader neurotypical public would help establish epistemic justice too.”
§ Neurodiversity, epistemic injustice, and the good human life > 6 | IMPLICATIONS AND SUGGESTIONS FOR AMELIORATION
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence.
The authors state this as an assumption.
The neurodiversity framing can be applied to the autism spectrum to some extent at least.
“For the purposes of this article, we will suppose that the neurodiversity framing can be applied to the autism spectrum to some extent at least, as even critics of the broader application of the neurodiversity framing admit (e.g., Jaarsma & Welin, 2012;Wakefield et al., 2020).”
The paper relies on this without support.
There are many different, yet equally legitimate, ways of functioning within humanity.
“and that there are many different, yet equally legitimate, ways of functioning”
The paper relies on this without support.
Autistic individuals can live good lives and flourish.
“if a person who identifies as autistic and who fulfills the diagnostic criteria is living a good life”
The paper relies on this without support.
Autistic individuals' declarations about their own quality of life should not be overridden by the presumption that autism causes their low quality of life.
“even if they declare otherwise”
Citations
Cites
Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders
American Psychiatric Association (2013) · doi:10.1176/appi.books.9780890425596 · Cited by 116,369
Epistemic Injustice: Power and the Ethics of Knowing
Fricker, M. (2007) · doi:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198237907.001.0001 · Cited by 9,198
Creating Capabilities: The Human Development Approach
Nussbaum, M. C. (2011) · doi:10.4159/harvard.9780674061200 · Cited by 5,664 · cited 1×
“For her, core capabilities include having senses, imagination, thought, and emotions in a “truly human” (Nussbaum, 2011, p. 33) way.”
BackgroundOliver, M. (1990) · doi:10.1007/978-1-349-20895-1 · Cited by 4,227
Frontiers of justice: disability, nationality, species membership
Lamey, A. (2006) · Choice Reviews Online · doi:10.5860/choice.44-2056 · Cited by 3,796
Lottery winners and accident victims: is happiness relative?
Brickman, P., Coates, D., & Janoff-Bulman, R. (1978) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-3514.36.8.917 · Cited by 2,225
Tracking Epistemic Violence, Tracking Practices of Silencing
Dotson, K. (2011) · Hypatia · doi:10.1111/j.1527-2001.2011.01177.x · Cited by 2,150
On the ontological status of autism: the ‘double empathy problem’
Milton, D. E. M. (2012) · Disability & Society · doi:10.1080/09687599.2012.710008 · Cited by 2,082
Nussbaum, M. C. (2007) · Harvard University Press eBooks · doi:10.2307/j.ctv1c7zftw · Cited by 1,814
Research works printed but not linked: 12
- Gilbert D., 2006, Stumbling on Happiness
- Gross Z., 2012, Loud Hands: Autistic People, Speaking
- Heller J., 2011, Catch 22
- Higashida N., 2017, Fall Down Seven Times: Get Up Eight. A Young Man’s Voice From the Silence of Autism
- McCafferty K. R., 2018, My Son With Autism's Joyous Moments Help Us Get Through the Tougher Ones
- Mitchell D., 2017, Almost Everything I'd Been Told About My Son's Autism Was Wrong, Newstatesman (July 5)
- Montgomery C., 2012, Critic of the Dawn. Loud Hands: Autistic People, Speaking
- Singer J., 1999, Disability Discourse
- Solomon M., 2017, Philosophical Issues in Psychiatry IV: Classification of Psychiatric Illness
- Sontag S., 1978, Illness as Metaphor
- Walker N., 2012, Throw Away the Master's Tools: Liberating Ourselves from the Pathology Paradigm
- Walker N., 2015, The Real Experts: Readings for Parents of Autistic Children, 1
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Epistemic injustice in psychiatric research and practice
Kidd, I. J., Spencer, L. J., & Carel, H. (2022) · Philosophical Psychology · doi:10.1080/09515089.2022.2156333 · Cited by 133
“Jackson argues that addressing the epistemic injus-tices experienced by the neurodivergent will require new conceptions of empathy (see also Chapman & Carel, 2022).”
Self-citationShaw, S. C. K., Carravallah, L. A., Johnson, M. M., O’Sullivan, J., Chown, N., Neilson, S., & Doherty, M. (2023) · Autism · doi:10.1177/13623613231205629 · Cited by 135
“Epistemic injustice can be defined as ‘harms that relate specifically to our status as epistemic agents, whereby our status as knowers, interpreters, and providers of information, is unduly diminished or stifled in a way that under-mines the agent’s agency and dignity’ (Chapman & Carel, 2022).”
BackgroundPearson, A., Rose, K., & Rees, J. C. (2022) · Autism · doi:10.1177/13623613221104546 · Cited by 98
“…of the participants reported that the perpetrator was not aware that they were autistic, and most people were not sure whether the perpetrator was also neurodivergent (we use the same definition as Chapman and Carel (2022) to include cognitive, neurodevelopmental and psychosocial disabilities).”
MethodIs neurodiversity a Global Northern White paradigm?
Nair, V. K., Farah, W., & Boveda, M. (2024) · Autism · doi:10.1177/13623613241280835 · Cited by 70
“Moreover, our espoused ideologies and the arguments presented in this article are firmly rooted in the contemporary neurodiversity scholarship (e.g. Bottema-Beutel et al., 2021; Chapman & Carel, 2022; Fletcher-Watson, 2022; Milton, 2020; Pellicano & den Houting, 2022).”
Neurodivergence, intersectionality, and eating disorders: a lived experience-led narrative review
Cobbaert, L., Millichamp, A., Elwyn, R., Silverstein, S., Schweizer, K., Thomas, E., & Miskovic‐Wheatley, J. (2024) · Journal of Eating Disorders · doi:10.1186/s40337-024-01126-5 · Cited by 88
Applied Behavior Analysis and the Abolitionist Neurodiversity Critique: An Ethical Analysis
Graber, A. D., & Graber, J. (2023) · Behavior Analysis in Practice · doi:10.1007/s40617-023-00780-6 · Cited by 69
“…of the neurodiversity perspective are likely to criticize treating neurotypical behavior as the benchmark for success: “[ABA] does not help the autistic person in question, it only makes the autistic person more ‘acceptable’ to others” (Schuck et al., 2022a, p. 12; see also, Chapman & Carel, 2022).”
BackgroundPantazakos, T., & Vanaken, G.-J. (2023) · Frontiers in Psychology · doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1225152 · Cited by 59
“In line with these findings, neurodiversity scholars have often made the point that thriving and wellbeing are not necessarily at odds with being autistic, and that ‘a flourishing autistic life’ is not a contradiction in terms (Chapman and Carel, 2022).”
BackgroundFrom Puzzle to Progress: How Engaging With Neurodiversity Can Improve Cognitive Science
Manalili, M. A. R., Pearson, A., Sulik, J., Creechan, L., Elsherif, M. M., Murkumbi, I., Azevedo, F., Bonnen, K., Kim, J. S., Kording, K. P., et al. (2023) · Cognitive Science · doi:10.1111/cogs.13255 · Cited by 66
“…in favor of social models*, which locate disability in the relationship between a person and their environment rather than being inherent to the person alone (Betts et al., in press; Chapman & Carel, 2022; Creechan, 2022; Kapp, 2013; Milton, 2012; Oliver, 1983, 2013; Stenning & Rosqvist, 2021).”
BackgroundBlack, M. H., Helander, J., Segers, J., Ingard, C., Bervoets, J., de Puget, V. G., & Bölte, S. (2024) · Clinical Psychology Review · doi:10.1016/j.cpr.2024.102487 · Cited by 73
“Outside of normative standards, qualitative research has high-lighted that many neurodivergent individuals may live fulfilling and meaningful lives according to their own subjectively determined standards (Chapman & Carel, 2022).”
BackgroundThe experiences of autistic medical students: A phenomenological study
Shaw, S. C. K., Doherty, M., & Anderson, J. L. (2023) · Medical Education · doi:10.1111/medu.15119 · Cited by 54
“tains an epistemic injustice, whereby autistic voices remain unheard in academic circles or are presented through a non-autistic filter.(47) Such social justice and autonomy issues are already well-embedded within psychiatric research, for example.”
BackgroundFusar‐Poli, P., Estradé, A., Esposito, C. M., Rosfort, R., Basadonne, I., Mancini, M., Stanghellini, G., Otaiku, J., Olanrele, O., Allen, L., et al. (2024) · World Psychiatry · doi:10.1002/wps.21189 · Cited by 58
“Indeed, neurodivergent young people are often unfairly harmed as a social minority 157 : their story is frequently disvalued, silenced, ignored, distorted or misrepresented 158 .”
BackgroundKenny, N., Doyle, A., & Horgan, F. (2023) · International Journal of Qualitative Methods · doi:10.1177/16094069221146992 · Cited by 38
“This has given rise to concerns regarding the potential for epistemic injustice (Chapman & Carel, 2022; Fricker, 2007) in the production of knowledge or development of theory within disability research.”
BackgroundWhat’s in a name? The costs and benefits of a formal autism diagnosis
Fletcher‐Watson, S. (2023) · Autism · doi:10.1177/13623613231213300 · Cited by 44
“While guidance now recognises that difficulties may be masked or effortfully and superficially overcome, it remains an epistemic injustice at the heart of autism diagnosis, that to be autistic and thriving is conceptually impossible (Chapman & Carel, 2022).”
BackgroundBody social models of disability: Examining enactive and ecological approaches
Jurgens, A. (2023) · Frontiers in Psychology · doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1128772 · Cited by 23
Le, N., Belay, Y. B., Le, L. K., Pirkis, J., & Mihalopoulos, C. (2023) · Australian & New Zealand Journal of Psychiatry · doi:10.1177/00048674231165477 · Cited by 26
“Those individuals presented a poor HRQoL outcome as a result of limitations on several aspects of functioning but valued their life highly and profoundly, and were genuinely happy (Chapman and Carel, 2022; Guyatt, 1997).”
Backgroundde Carvalho, F. N., & Krueger, J. W. (2023) · Philosophical Psychology · doi:10.1080/09515089.2023.2237065 · Cited by 27
“This medical deficit model portrays autism as a harmful developmental trajectory stemming from underlying neurological dysfunction (Chapman & Carel, 2021; see also Kidd & Carel, 2018).”
Cage, E., Botha, M., McDevitt, L., King, K. N., Biscoe, L., Tucker, K., & Pearson, A. (2024) · Autism · doi:10.1177/13623613231220418 · Cited by 34
“…to employ an adapted participatory photovoice method (which we will refer to as photovoice for brevity) because autistic people are often subjected to testimonial and epistemic injustice (Chapman & Carel, 2022), whereby their life narratives, testimony and expertise are both side-lined and erased.”
‘We have so much to offer’: Community members’ perspectives on autism research
Haar, T., Brownlow, C., Hall, G., Heyworth, M., Lawson, W. B., Poulsen, R. E., Reinisch, T., & Pellicano, E. (2024) · Autism · doi:10.1177/13623613241248713 · Cited by 34
“…2017; Kapp, 2023; Milton & Bracher, 2013; Natri et al., 2023); a new emphasis on services and supports that enable Autistic flourishing (Chapman & Carel, 2022; Ne’eman, 2021; Pellicano & Heyworth, 2023); a new set of research priorities stressing issues of immediate and everyday…”
McGreevy, E., Quinn, A., Law, R., Botha, M., Evans, M., Rose, K., Moyse, R., Boyens, T., Matejko, M., & Pavlopoulou, G. (2024) · Journal of Humanistic Psychology · doi:10.1177/00221678241232442 · Cited by 29
“This now paves the way for creating a society where autistic people flourish (Chapman & Carel, 2022).”
BackgroundSchuck, R. K., & Fung, L. K. (2024) · Frontiers in Psychiatry · doi:10.3389/fpsyt.2023.1250895 · Cited by 29
“Chapman and Carel (18) argue that stigma toward neurodivergent people has led to society discrediting, disenfranchising, and excluding them from what society considers a “good life.”
BackgroundAccess Points: Understanding Special Interests Through Autistic Narratives
Long, R.-E. M. (2024) · Autism in Adulthood · doi:10.1089/aut.2023.0157 · Cited by 19
Problems for enactive psychiatry as a practical framework
Russell, J. L. (2023) · Philosophical Psychology · doi:10.1080/09515089.2023.2174423 · Cited by 19
“Chapman and Carel (2022) make a compelling case for how experiences of autism are shaped by preconcep-tions that individuals with autism suffer.”
BackgroundLegault, M., Catala, A., & Poirier, P. (2024) · Synthese · doi:10.1007/s11229-024-04730-9 · Cited by 21
“This “neurotypical ignorance” (Catala et al., 2021; Chapman & Carel, 2022, p. 13), to borrow Mills’s words, “unashamedly presents itself as knowledge” (Mills, 2007, p. 19).”
A qualitative interview study on quality of life and ageing experiences of autistic adults
Viner, H. E., Yuill, N., Costa, A. P., Radford, H., & Kornadt, A. E. (2024) · Communications Psychology · doi:10.1038/s44271-024-00142-0 · Cited by 20
“It recognises autism as a ‘ natural and valuable formofhumandiversity ’ 15 andinlinewiththe socialmodelofdisability 16 , highlights how existing societal structures can be disabling 17,18 and limit autistic fl ourishing 19 .”
Recovery-oriented psychiatry: oxymoron or catalyst for change?
Speyer, H., Roe, D., & Slade, M. (2025) · The Lancet Psychiatry · doi:10.1016/s2215-0366(25)00092-6 · Cited by 18
Pearson, A., & Hodgetts, S. (2023) · Autism in Adulthood · doi:10.1089/aut.2022.0103 · Cited by 22
“36 It was important to the authors that this study did not perpetuate harmful stereotypes about autistic desire (e.g., labeling intimate interests as paraphilic), objectify autistic people, or stigmatize people who engage in BDSM/kink (neurodivergent or otherwise).”
Neurodiversity and psychotherapy—Connections and ways forward
Pantazakos, T. (2023) · Counselling and Psychotherapy Research · doi:10.1002/capr.12675 · Cited by 22
McDowall, A., Doyle, N., & Kiseleva, M. (2025) · Human Resource Management · doi:10.1002/hrm.22307 · Cited by 28
Epistemic injustice in experiences of young people with parents with mental health challenges
Yates, S., Gladstone, B., Foster, K., Hagström, A. S., Reupert, A., O’Dea, L., Cuff, R., McGaw, V. E., & Hine, R. H. (2023) · Sociology of Health & Illness · doi:10.1111/1467-9566.13730 · Cited by 24
“…of marginalised groups, and manifests in the diminishment or undermining of the status of individuals or groups as epistemic agents (Fricker, 2017)—their capacity to act and to be accepted by others as ‘knowers, interpreters and providers of information’ (Chapman & Carel, 2022, p. 1).”
BackgroundOpening up autism research: Bringing open research methods to our field
Hobson, H., Poole, D., Pearson, A., & Fletcher‐Watson, S. (2022) · Autism · doi:10.1177/13623613221105385 · Cited by 16
Hine, R. H., Gladstone, B., Reupert, A., O’Dea, L., Cuff, R., Yates, S., Hagström, A. S., McGaw, V. E., & Foster, K. (2023) · Qualitative Health Research · doi:10.1177/10497323231211454 · Cited by 17
“…complex, intersecting operations of stigma across various facets of people ’ s identities and statuses tend to undermine the capability of those stigmatised, to name and narrate their experiences, and to have these recognised in interactions with relatively powerful others (Chapman & Carel, 2022).”
BackgroundDecolonizing autism research: Integrating Indigenous ways of knowing, being, and doing
Bruno, G., Lindblom, A., Tupou, J., Kewene, F., Waisman, T., & Magiati, I. (2025) · Autism · doi:10.1177/13623613251382398 · Cited by 15
“Conventional autism research has long been rooted in approaches and frameworks that pathologize Autistic people, rather than emphasize their strengths and lived experiences (Chapman & Carel, 2022; Dinishak, 2022).”
Vanaken, G., Noens, I. L. J., Steyaert, J. G., van Esch, L., Warreyn, P., & Hens, K. (2023) · Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders · doi:10.1007/s10803-023-06139-8 · Cited by 14
Downs, J. L., & Adams, M. (2025) · Journal of Eating Disorders · doi:10.1186/s40337-025-01271-5 · Cited by 14
Fisher, E., MacLennan, K., Mullally, S. L., Rodgers, J., & Tzemou, E. (2025) · Neurodiversity · doi:10.1177/27546330251385325 · Cited by 14
“Most concerningly, understanding school anxiety in isolation risks reinforcing essentialist narratives that frame it as a fi xed ‘ de fi cit ’ or ‘ weakness ’ of Neurodivergence (Boyle, 2011; Chapman & Carel, 2022; McKinlay et al., 2024).”
Fox, J. (2024) · Autism in Adulthood · doi:10.1089/aut.2023.0100 · Cited by 16
“2 However, the conceptualization of functional ability is underpinned by normative standards and often disregards the complexity of sociocultural context in relation to impairment.”
Integrating autistic perspectives into autism science: A role for autistic autobiographies
Dinishak, J., & Akhtar, N. (2022) · Autism · doi:10.1177/13623613221123731 · Cited by 13
“Indeed, interventions often presuppose concepts of well-being modeled on non-autistic experience, but these concepts may not provide good guidance on what constitutes autistic flourishing (Chapman & Carel, 2022; Rodogno et al., 2016).”
BackgroundBetts, K., Creechan, L., Cawkwell, R., et al. (2022) · Social Inclusion · doi:10.17645/si.v11i1.5737 · Cited by 13
“By cultivating a space to share these narratives, we have established a community of care through which we can begin to tackle epistemic injustice (Chapman & Carel, 2022).”
Co-opting the “neuro” in neurodiversity and the complexities of epistemic injustice
Russell, G., & Wilkinson, S. (2023) · Cortex · doi:10.1016/j.cortex.2023.09.002 · Cited by 14
Roberts, J. (2023) · Language Speech and Hearing Services in Schools · doi:10.1044/2023_lshss-23-00037 · Cited by 13
The role of clinicians in the looping effect: epistemic injustices and looping breaks
Gauld, C., Nicolle, B., Constant, A., & Gagné‐Julien, A. (2025) · Medicine Health Care and Philosophy · doi:10.1007/s11019-025-10279-2 · Cited by 12
“…may have to use incomplete or problematic hermeneutic resources to be able to communicate their experience to others, such as pejorative terminology found in official nosography (Bueter 2019) or inadequate frameworks to understand distress or difference (Chapman and Carel 2022; Gagné-Julien 2022).”
A critical reflection on definitions of autistic well‐being
Deakin, M., Petty, S., Heasman, B., & Hamilton, L. (2024) · Brain and Behavior · doi:10.1002/brb3.3572 · Cited by 11
Countering essentialism in psychiatric narratives
Broeker, M. D., & Arnaud, S. (2024) · Philosophical Psychology · doi:10.1080/09515089.2024.2407502 · Cited by 11
“The absence of a narrative that supports a fulfilling life may leave autistic people epistemically adrift, unable to fully comprehend and navigate their experiences (Chapman & Carel, 2022), which highlights the importance of suitable narratives.”
Autistic SPACE(S) in Social Work
Guthrie, J., Doherty, M., Shaw, S. C. K., O'Reilly, M., Chinnéide, E. N., & Archard, P. (2024) · Practice · doi:10.1080/09503153.2024.2423405 · Cited by 5
Algorithmic emergence? Epistemic in/justice in AI-directed transformations of healthcare
Emah, I., & Bennett, S. (2025) · Frontiers in Sociology · doi:10.3389/fsoc.2025.1520810 · Cited by 11
Wassell, E. (2025) · Disability & Society · doi:10.1080/09687599.2025.2498417 · Cited by 15
“The conditions of epistemic injustice noted by Chapman and Carel (2022) suggests that urgent community research is needed into autistic flourishing, and i assessed that there was an ethical imperative to conduct the study.”
InfluentialBeyond Diagnosis: Setting Research Priorities with the Neurodivergent Community
Ostaszewska, A., Harper, G., Davis, R., & Joseph, H. S. S. L. (2025) · Neurodiversity · doi:10.1177/27546330251374236 · Cited by 13
“A signi fi cant contributor to stigma is the de fi cit-based criteria embedded in neurodevelopmental diagnostic criteria, which pathologise neurodivergence (Bottema-Beutel et al., 2021; Chapman & Carel, 2022; Pellicano & den Houting, 2022).”
Speaking with Us, Not for Us: Neurodiversity, Theology and Justice
Jacobs, N. L. (2023) · Journal of Disability & Religion · doi:10.1080/23312521.2023.2249448 · Cited by 9
“And because our own voices are not heard in most research, research rarely asks how we can be given the opportunity to live up to our potential as neurodivergent people (Chapman & Carel, 2022, p. 2).”
BackgroundInfluentialAutistic adults’ experiences of managing wellbeing and implications for social prescribing
Featherstone, C., Sharpe, R. A., Axford, N., Asthana, S., & Husk, K. (2023) · Disability & Society · doi:10.1080/09687599.2023.2263628 · Cited by 13
“The study demonstrated that a positive sense of wellbeing can be achievable for autistic people, a perspective that has sometimes been obscured by mainstream research narratives (Chapman and Carel 2022).”
BackgroundSilvester, S.-J. E., & Rankine, R. (2024) · Journal of Psychologists and Counsellors in Schools · doi:10.1177/20556365241267050 · Cited by 11
“Chapman and Carel (2022) highlight the impact of dismissing the merit within neurodiver-gent voices upon their wellbeing and self-actualisation.”
An Introduction to Research Methods and Ethics in Neurodiversity Studies
Jackson‐Perry, D., & Rosqvist, H. B. (2024) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-3-031-66127-3_1 · Cited by 10
Menstruation and Autism: A Qualitative Systematic Review
Ellis, R., Williams, G., Caemawr, S., Craine, M., Holloway, W., Williams, K., Shaw, S. C. K., & Grant, A. (2025) · Autism in Adulthood · doi:10.1089/aut.2024.0307 · Cited by 9
“In doing so, they reinforced the neuro-typical body mind as the “ norm, ” 62 and sometimes displayed frustration at these differences.”
Hedlund, Å., Wester, M. E., Edenvik, P., Ingard, C., Isakson, K., Sabel, L. K., Unéus, D., Lindström, T., Black, M. H., & Rosqvist, H. B. (2025) · Frontiers in Sociology · doi:10.3389/fsoc.2025.1611803 · Cited by 8
“Following Chapman and Carel (2022), hermeneutic injustice can contribute to the neurotypical world missing essential knowledge that autistic people have inside but have not formulated together.”
InfluentialWhat is autism? Identity in jeopardy and the collaborative way ahead
Alexandrovsky, M., Frayne, M., & Lai, M. (2025) · Autism · doi:10.1177/13623613251371485 · Cited by 8
“As in the clinical realm, this co-production cultivates scientifically robust questions to be asked in inclusive and ethical ways (Chapman & Carel, 2022), and research constructs to be defined as validly, coherently, and meaningfully as possible (Nicolaidis et al., 2025).”
Bolton, M. J. (2023) · doi:10.31234/osf.io/q2t8h · Cited by 8
Central Sensitivity Symptoms and Autistic Traits in Autistic and Non‐Autistic Adults
Grant, S., Norton, S., & Hoekstra, R. A. (2025) · Autism Research · doi:10.1002/aur.3297 · Cited by 8
“…a broad range of chronic illness and disease (Croen et al. 2015; Rydzewska et al. 2019; Ward et al. 2023; Weir et al. 2021; Williams and Gotham 2022), and that there are also significant barriers to healthcare for autistic people (Doherty et al. 2022; Nicolaidis et al. 2015; Shaw et al. 2024 2020).”
Epistemic humility meets virtual reality: teaching an old ideal with novel tools
Starke, G., Sobieska, A., Knochel, K., & Buyx, A. (2025) · Journal of Medical Ethics · doi:10.1136/jme-2024-110591 · Cited by 8
“9 A separate body of literature has also investigated epistemic humility with a view to the limitations of medical knowledge, looking at the epistemic limitations of physicians and the ensuing ethical obligations 10 as well as critically discussing epistemic humility in the context”
May, J. (2025) · Neuroethics · doi:10.1007/s12152-025-09603-7 · Cited by 7
Epistemic injustice and psychotherapy
Drożdżowicz, A., & Grodniewicz, J. P. (2025) · Philosophical Psychology · doi:10.1080/09515089.2025.2519320 · Cited by 6
“To the extent that this conceptual resource is developed and used in the community of the marginalized group (see Chapman & Carel, 2022), having her contribution ignored by Tony would constitute a case of contributory injustice.”
Tōjisha‐Kenkyū on Autism in Japan: Against Epistemic Injustices and Tokenism
Ayaya, S. (2025) · Journal of Social Issues · doi:10.1111/josi.70026 · Cited by 8
Risk and resilience in developmental diversity: Protocol of developing ICF core sets
Black, M. H., Goidsenhoven, L. V., Hens, K., Bourgeron, T., & Bölte, S. (2023) · Neurodiversity · doi:10.1177/27546330231190235 · Cited by 7
“While less explored, others have highlighted that neurodivergent individuals can achieve a “ good life ” according to subjectively determined criteria (Chapman & Carel, 2022).”
BackgroundProblems for enactive psychiatry? Mindshaping, social normativity, and neurodiversity
Maiese, M. L. (2024) · Philosophical Psychology · doi:10.1080/09515089.2024.2446631 · Cited by 6
“…associated with autism as dysfunctional and pathological, enactive psychiatry may contribute to epistemic injustice against disabled persons (Chapman & Carel, 2022), e.g., in cases where their testimony about their own flourishing does not receive uptake within medical, clinical, and…”
InfluentialGibbs, A. (2022) · Aotearoa New Zealand Social Work · doi:10.11157/anzswj-vol34iss4id977 · Cited by 6
Billington, J., Knott, F. J., & Craythorne, S. (2025) · International Journal of Qualitative Methods · doi:10.1177/16094069251346839 · Cited by 8
O’Laughlin, C. (2025) · The Journal of Higher Education · doi:10.1080/00221546.2025.2557155 · Cited by 6
Jacobsen, K. (2025) · International Journal of Transgender Health · doi:10.1080/26895269.2025.2566190 · Cited by 6
Inclusion by design a-neuro-cognitive trait interaction approach-to neurodivergent research
Dark, J. (2025) · Methodological Innovations · doi:10.1177/20597991251396144 · Cited by 5
“It calls for researchers to recognise all people as credible in the knowledge held about themselves and to avoid misconceptions drawn from medicalised views, which can silence or distort marginalised voices (Chapman and Carel, 2022).”
Longhurst, P., Woodworth, E. C., Cunha, I. C. K. O., & Rodgers, R. F. (2024) · Body Image · doi:10.1016/j.bodyim.2024.101801 · Cited by 5
Scaffolded Agents, for Better or Worse: Assessing the Formative Aspect of Scaffolding
Dengsø, M. J. (2025) · Topoi · doi:10.1007/s11245-024-10148-2 · Cited by 5
“Is the pathologization of certain developmental conditions conducive to such individuals’ welfare or simply to their stigma-tization and medicalization (Rosqvist et al. 2020; Chapman & Carel 2022; Maiese 2022b)?”
Glaser, N. J., Calyam, P. P., Duan, Y., Li, S. E., Nuguri, S. S., Ousley, C., Kambhampati, A., Parishani, Z., Joshi, A. C., & Yang, M. (2025) · Communications in computer and information science · doi:10.1007/978-3-031-80475-5_19 · Cited by 5
de Prado‐Gordillo, M. N. (2024) · Synthese · doi:10.1007/s11229-023-04427-5 · Cited by 8
“Privileging medical perspectives would function as a contributory factor in epistemic injustice, for instance by reinforcing prejudices about the disorder necessarily impairing their judgement and communicative abilities (Chapman & Carel, 2022; Kidd et al., 2022).”
Injusticias epistémicas normalizadas y restricción de la agencia de las personas con discapacidad
Hernández, R., & Revuelta, B. (2024) · Acta bioethica · doi:10.4067/s1726-569x2024000100057 · Cited by 8
“Por otro lado, Chapman y Carel (35) argumentan que las personas autistas también sufren de un déficit de credibilidad.”
Tomlinson, M., & Vincent, J. (2025) · Higher Education · doi:10.1007/s10734-025-01451-x · Cited by 5
“(Survey_Female_MSc_Psychology) The scope to find ‘neurodivergent modes of flourishing’ (Chapman & Carel, 2022) in the labour market was a dominant concern although as Walker (2015) contends, thriving among this group can look quite different to neurotypical groups.”
Beagan, B. L., Kamenetsky, S. B., Zaman, S., Parhar, G., & Jarus, T. (2024) · Teaching and Learning in Medicine · doi:10.1080/10401334.2024.2439848 · Cited by 6
“36,39,40 This is a particular form of epistemic injustice (injustice concerning knowing and knowers) known as “testimonial injus-tice.””
Between essence and diversity: Challenges for phenomenological Autism research
Hughes, E., Ekdahl, D., & Boldsen, S. (2025) · Theory & Psychology · doi:10.1177/09593543251315074 · Cited by 5
“…researchers have also emphasised the ways in which epistemic injustices continue to have profoundly detrimental consequences for the capacity of Autistic people to be the narrators of their own experiences and the authors of their own sense of self (Chapman & Carel, 2022; Ritunnano, 2022).”
Harrison, M., & Mosen, J. (2025) · International Journal of Developmental Disabilities · doi:10.1080/20473869.2025.2527252 · Cited by 4
“Chapman and Carel (2022) articulate a neurodiversity perspective that honours human variation rather than reducing individuals to deviations from a normative scale of mild, moderate, or severe impairment.”
Angeler, D. G., Smith, E., Berk, M., Ibáñez, A. M., & Eyre, H. A. (2023) · Discover Mental Health · doi:10.1007/s44192-023-00051-4 · Cited by 4
“There remains a need to account for harmful injustice and violations of human rights in health care, specifically among people with mental and physical disabilities [23].”
BackgroundAutism and Thriving: A Critical Review of the Academic Literature
Dantas, S., Jasper, C., Botha, M., Strachan, K., & Grainger, C. (2025) · Autism in Adulthood · doi:10.1089/aut.2024.0228 · Cited by 4
“4”
InfluentialMalberg, N. T., & Gori, I. (2024) · Journal of Infant Child and Adolescent Psychotherapy · doi:10.1080/15289168.2024.2306460 · Cited by 4
“In a recent article by Chapman and Carel (2022), the authors expand on the importance of thinking about the impact of medical and psychiatric diagnosis in the quality of life of individuals.”
BackgroundEditorial: Addressing community priorities in autism research
Pearson, A., Surtees, A. D. R., Crompton, C. J., Goodall, C., Pillai, D., Sedgewick, F., & Au‐Yeung, S. K. (2022) · Frontiers in Psychology · doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2022.1040446 · Cited by 5
“Historically, autism (and thus autistic people) has been studied through a medical lens (Chapman and Carel, 2022), owing primarily to the characterization of autism as a disorder of childhood development.”
BackgroundLonghurst, P., Aspell, J. E., Todd, J., & Swami, V. (2025) · Body Image · doi:10.1016/j.bodyim.2025.101876 · Cited by 3
Ashley, A. S. (2025) · TSQ Transgender Studies Quarterly · doi:10.1215/23289252-11710350 · Cited by 5
Signifying the Autistic Sense of Self
Hughes, E. (2025) · Topoi · doi:10.1007/s11245-025-10318-w · Cited by 4
Uisma, A., Virkki, T., & Ylilahti, M. (2025) · Sociology of Health & Illness · doi:10.1111/1467-9566.70124 · Cited by 3
“Similar to Chapman and Carel (2022), here we see how different forms of epistemic injustice influence each other.”
The Politics of Self-narration: Self-Diagnosis as Digital Counter-Narrative
Russo, G., & Ferraro, M. (2025) · Topoi · doi:10.1007/s11245-025-10338-6 · Cited by 4
Liñares-de-Maarcos, J., Palomero-Sierra, B., Sánchez-Gómez, V., Fernández-Álvarez, C. J., & Canal‐Bedia, R. (2026) · Frontiers in Psychiatry · doi:10.3389/fpsyt.2025.1756323 · Cited by 6
“It reframed autism as a natural form of human variation and expanded the notion of well-being to include belonging, authenticity, and self-acceptance (7).”
Bury, S. M., Dwyer, P. S. R., Flower, R. L., Richardson, E. K., & Spoor, J. R. (2026) · Neurodiversity · doi:10.1177/27546330261430009 · Cited by 8
“In Real Life, Everything Feels so Different”: Autistic, Embodied Perspectives on Online Sociality
Ekdahl, D., & Krueger, J. W. (2026) · Autism in Adulthood · doi:10.1177/25739581261422981 · Cited by 3
Strengths-Based Approaches to Autism Language and Communications Research: Where Are We?
Ferreira, G. J., Getten, J., & Pesonen, H. V. (2024) · Review Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders · doi:10.1007/s40489-024-00455-0 · Cited by 5
“…articles and books in psychology, whereby theoretical interpretations regarding empirical results implicitly or explicitly construct the Other as inferior or problematic, despite the availability of alternative, equally viable evidence-based interpretations (Chapman and Carel, 2022; Teo, 2010).”
England, E., Henley, J., & Sheppard, E. (2025) · Housing and Society · doi:10.1080/08882746.2025.2488643 · Cited by 3
“One repeated criticism has been around the framing of research questions themselves, and specifically whether they are designed to produce useful, meaningful answers to problems faced by neurodivergent individuals (Chapman & Carel, 2022).”
Mad, mentally ill and neurodivergent professionals: epistemic injustice in practice
Beagan, B. L., Gulliver, M., Sibbald, K. R., Pride, T. M., & Yee, B. (2025) · Disability & Society · doi:10.1080/09687599.2025.2520780 · Cited by 4
“…pathologizes these as ‘impairments’, the neurodiversity movement sees them as divergence, part of the wide range of human differences (Catala, Faucher, and Poirier 2021; Chapman and Carel 2022; Craddock 2024; Leong and Graichen 2024; Mellifont 2023; Runswick-Cole 2014; Stenning and Rosqvist 2021).”
InfluentialGrant, A., Williams, G., Williams, K., et al. (2023) · Policy Press eBooks · doi:10.51952/9781447369219.ch012 · Cited by 3
Meinen, L. (2023) · Scandinavian Journal of Disability Research · doi:10.16993/sjdr.1037 · Cited by 3
Gibbs, A., Flanagan, J., & Gray, L. (2023) · Journal of Intellectual & Developmental Disability · doi:10.3109/13668250.2023.2271757 · Cited by 3
“In drawing on the work of disability rights ’ researchers and activists (Chapman & Carel, 2022; Degener, 2016; Goodley & Runswick-Cole, 2016), FLWF uses the social model of disability and a neuro-diversity paradigm.”
BackgroundMethodQuality of Life Defined by Autistic People: A Thematic Analysis
Crowley, S., Kiernan, B., Heinly, J. M., Hector, B. L., Benevides, T. W., & Maddox, B. B. (2025) · Autism in Adulthood · doi:10.1089/aut.2024.0180 · Cited by 3
“22 Concerns about existing QoL measures activated conversations about the need to engage Autistic people as research participants or partners on the research team during the adaptation of an existing or the development of a novel QoL instrument.”
What do philosophers talk about when they talk about autism?
LaCroix, T., Amero, A., & Sidloski, B. (2025) · Synthese · doi:10.1007/s11229-025-05116-1 · Cited by 3
“…with our analysis of these data, suggest that the more 70 Some work that is contained in our corpus that at least seem to aspire to following some of these normative claims include Mole (2017); Chapman (2019, 2020); Catala et al. (2021); Chapman and Carel (2022); Boldsen (2022); Krueger (2023).”
Borren, M., & Robaszkiewicz, M. (2024) · Journal of the British Society for Phenomenology · doi:10.1080/00071773.2024.2306041 · Cited by 3
The Neurodiversity Model and Medical Model: Competitors or Alternative Perspectives?
Browning, H., & Veit, W. (2025) · AJOB Neuroscience · doi:10.1080/21507740.2024.2437994 · Cited by 3
“To do so would be a form of epistemic injustice (Chapman and Carel 2022).”
Normative implications of postgenomic deterministic narratives: the case study of epigenetic harm
Moormann, E. (2024) · History & Philosophy of the Life Sciences · doi:10.1007/s40656-024-00636-4 · Cited by 3
“…context of autism, what is also needed to decrease existing testimonial injustice is not only the cultivation of autistic self-understanding but also that of neurotypical epistemic humility with regard to autistic experiences and different conceptions of living a good life (Chapman & Carel, 2022).”
The absent presence of disability in British higher education
Koutsouris, G., Stentiford, L., Dimitrellou, E., Yu, Z., Pujaningsih, & Azizah, N. (2025) · British Educational Research Journal · doi:10.1002/berj.70011 · Cited by 3
Metadata
- Authors
- Chapman, R., & Carel, H.
- Affiliations
- Sheffield Hallam University (GB)
- University of Bristol (GB)
- Corresponding author
- Chapman, Robert
- Venue
- Journal of Social Philosophy
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2022-03
- Volume
- 53
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 614-631
- ISSN
- 0047-2786 (ISSN-L)
- 1467-9833
- OpenAlex
- W4214900417
- Semantic Scholar
- e632ea793a644afc30913a0fa516afad48c48ca9
- Cited by
- 231
- References
- 82
- Citations by year
- 2026: 65 · 2025: 80 · 2024: 40 · 2023: 38 · 2022: 8
- FWCI
- 58.78
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- Journal of Social Philosophy (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- Explore Bristol Research (acceptedVersion, cc-by)
- SHURA (Sheffield Hallam University Research Archive) (Sheffield Hallam University) (acceptedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Feminist Epistemology and Gender Studies
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Disability Rights and Representation
- Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Philosophy › Epistemology, Ethics, and Metaphysics
- Keywords
- neurodiversity, epistemic injustice, testimonial injustice, hermeneutical injustice, disability, good human life, epistemic agency
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.
A language model drew the claims from the paper on 2026-10-23, under version 3 of the claim definition (model deepseek-v4.1-flash, prompt extract-v3).
A second model labelled each claim on 2026-10-23 (model jev-1.13-20260917, definition revision gold-guideline-v0.2).
Cited sources are checked with a language model’s help (gpt-6-sol).
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
