CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 316Autism Spectrum Disorder ResearchLanguage, Discourse, Communication StrategiesChild and Animal Learning Development

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 56 of the 56 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Neurodivergent intersubjectivity: Distinctive features of how autistic people create shared understanding

Open access
Heasman, Brett, Gillespie, Alex·2019·Autism
DOI 10.1177/1362361318785172PMC PMC6512057
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Autistic people are neurologically divergent, yet approaches to studying autism are framed by neurotypical definitions of being social. Using the concept of intersubjectivity, which conceptualises a variety of ways of socially relating, we investigate distinctive features of how autistic people build social understanding. A total of 30 members of a charity supporting adults with autism were video-recorded during a social activity they enjoyed, namely collaborative video gaming. Mapping the coherence, affect and symmetry of each conversational turn revealed shifting patterns of intersubjectivity within each interaction. Focussing on clusters of consistent and fragmented turns led us to identify two features of neurodivergent intersubjectivity: a generous assumption of common ground that, when understood, led to rapid rapport, and, when not understood, resulted in potentially disruptive utterances; and a low demand for coordination that ameliorated many challenges associated with disruptive turns. Our findings suggest that neurodivergent intersubjectivity reveals potential for unconventional forms of social relating and that a within-interaction analysis is a viable methodology for exploring neurodivergent communication. Future research should examine the varieties of neurodivergent intersubjectivity, with associated problems and potentials, and how those forms of intersubjectivity can be enabled to flourish, particularly in autistic-to-neurotypical encounters.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1177/1362361318785172

Cites

56 of 56 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Figures

Figure 1. Percentage of interaction involving consistent and fragmented coordination turns.
Figure 1. Percentage of interaction involving consistent and fragmented coordination turns.CC BY · PubMed Central
Figure 2. Example interaction, with 20-turn moving average of intersubjective dimensions and 3-turn clusters of consistent and fragmented moments.
Figure 2. Example interaction, with 20-turn moving average of intersubjective dimensions and 3-turn clusters of consistent and fragmented moments.CC BY · PubMed Central

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 56 references

Research works printed but not linked: 6

  1. Cornell J, 1986, Crocodile Dundee
  2. De Jaegher H, 2013, Frontiers in Integrative Neuroscience, 7, 1
  3. Dekker M (1999) On our own terms: emerging autistic culture. In: Proceedings of the Autism99. Available at: http://www.autscape.org/2015/programme/handouts/Autistic-Culture-07-Oct-1999.pdf
  4. Kushner D, 1982, Tron
  5. Oakley B, 1995, Bart vs. Australia
  6. Ochs E, 2010, Journal of the Society for Psychological Anthropology, 38, 69

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Items 201–300 of 314

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Heasman, B., & Gillespie, A.
Affiliations
London School of Economics and Political Science (GB)
Corresponding author
Heasman, Brett
ORCID
Venue
Autism
Publisher
SAGE Publications
Published
2018-08-03
Volume
23
Issue
4
Pages
910-921
ISSN
  • 1362-3613 (ISSN-L)
  • 1461-7005
DOI
10.1177/1362361318785172
PMC
PMC6512057
OpenAlex
W2886786591
Cited by
316
References
56
Citations by year
2026: 112 · 2025: 70 · 2024: 33 · 2023: 32 · 2022: 20 · 2021: 26 · 2020: 18 · 2019: 5
FWCI
7.30
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • Autism (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • London School of Economics and Political Science Research Online (London School of Economics and Political Science) (acceptedVersion)
  • Research at York St John (York St John University) (submittedVersion)
  • London School of Economics and Political Science Theses Online (London School of Economics and Political Science) (submittedVersion)
  • UCL Discovery (University College London) (submittedVersion)
Funders
Economic and Social Research Council (ES/J500070/1)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Autism Spectrum Disorder Research
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Language and Linguistics › Language, Discourse, Communication Strategies
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Child and Animal Learning Development
Keywords
mutual understanding, social communication, conversational turns, common ground, rapport building, coordination
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, Autistic Disorder, Communication, Female, Humans, Interpersonal Relations, Male, Social Behavior, Video Games, Comprehension, Qualitative Research, Young Adult

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