Cited by 20Personal Information Management and User BehaviorDisability Education and EmploymentAutism Spectrum Disorder Research

“It Was Something I Naturally Found Worked and Heard About Later”: An Investigation of Body Doubling with Neurodivergent Participants

Open access
Eagle, Tessa, Baltaxe-Admony, Leya Breanna, Ringland, Kathryn E.·2024·ACM Transactions on Accessible Computing

Abstract

Body doubling has emerged as a community-driven phenomenon primarily employed by neurodivergent individuals. In this work, we survey 220 people to investigate how, when, and why they engage in body doubling and their own definitions for it. The community roughly defines it as using the presence of others to start, stay focused on, or accomplish a task. Tasks can be productivity or leisure-related. A body double can be collocated or remote, recorded or live, known or a stranger. This phenomenon remains nameless to many neurodivergent individuals; however, once presented with the term and concept, many recognize it as a strategy they have engaged in for years. We present the variety of ways people engage in body doubling (e.g., at a café, with YouTube videos), the diverse range of tasks people utilize it for (e.g., studying and working, doing dishes, cleaning, and exercising), and their motivations for doing so (e.g., generating momentum, staying on task). Lastly, we present implications for future work based upon a two-part model of body doubling as a continuum of space/time and mutuality.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1145/3689648

Cites

98 of 98 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 4

  1. Floyd Henry Allport. 1924. Social Psychology. Houghton Mifflin.
  2. Cynthis K. Matthews and Nancy Grant Harrington. 2000. Invisible disability. In Handbook of Communication and People with Disabilities: Research and Application. Dawn O. Braithwaite, Teresa L. Thompson (Eds.), 405–421.
  3. Daniel Miller and Jolynna Sinanan. 2014. Webcam. John Wiley & Sons.
  4. Solvegi Shmulsky, Ken Gobbo, Andy Donahue, and Frank Klucken. 2021. Do neurodivergent college students forge a disability identity? A snapshot and implications. Journal of Postsecondary Education and Disability 34, 1 (2021), 53–63.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Eagle, T., Baltaxe-Admony, L. B., & Ringland, K. E.
Affiliations
University of California, Santa Cruz (US)
Venue
ACM Transactions on Accessible Computing
Published
2024-09-30
Volume
17
Issue
3
Pages
1-30
ISSN
  • 1936-7228 (ISSN-L)
  • 1936-7236
OpenAlex
W4401815531
Cited by
20
References
80
Citations by year
2026: 11 · 2025: 9
FWCI
8.60
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
ACM Transactions on Accessible Computing (publishedVersion, cc-by)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Information Systems and Management › Personal Information Management and User Behavior
  • Social Sciences › Safety Research › Disability Education and Employment
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Autism Spectrum Disorder Research
Keywords
neurodivergence, assistive technology, community-driven solutions, remote collaboration, collocated collaboration, continuum model, mutuality

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review