Public Perceptions of the Neurodiversity Movement: A Thematic Analysis
Rachel A VanDaalen, Alessandro A Vallefuoco, Margarette Lorraine Fernandez, Sarah Y Liu, Cecilia JA LemaireInterpretations of the goals and meaning of the neurodiversity movement (NDM) have varied within scholarly, advocacy, and general public communities, as it has become more widely discussed since its original development. The current study focuses on understanding the public's opinions on the NDM and their perceptions of its goals. The research team conducted a thematic analysis of open-ended text responses by 99 adults. Most participants approved of the movement, though many also offered critiques. The most frequently endorsed subthemes about the goals of the movement included acceptance, utilizing a diversity framework, discussing society, and empowering the neurodivergent community through the expansion of opportunities. The variety within responses demonstrates the range of definitions of the NDM, despite some efforts within academic or advocacy circles to promote a unified, top-down definition. Public interpretations of the NDM have implications for informing attitudes and decision-making toward disability advocacy, treatment-seeking, and collective identity development.
Lay Abstract
The neurodiversity movement (NDM) began in the 1990s in autistic communities. However, more people in academic, advocacy, and general communities have been discussing it more recently. Many experts have proposed definitions of neurodiversity and the NDM. It is also important to understand how everyday people think about the NDM because these conceptualizations may differ from expert definitions. In this study, we wanted to understand (1) how people from the general American public defined the goals of the NDM, and (2) how they felt about the NDM. We analyzed written responses to online surveys from 99 participants. We categorized their responses into themes and subthemes. People in our study were most likely to say that the goals of the NDM involve acceptance, using a diversity framework, society, and empowerment of the neurodivergent community through the expansion of opportunities. Most people in our study approved of the NDM, but they also had some critiques. These critiques included concerns that the NDM is too extreme or excludes the perspectives of people with severe disabilities or their caregivers. This study shows how people have diverse definitions and opinions of the NDM, but that they have some commonalities. Some details of these definitions or opinions contradict how experts would define the NDM. However, these perspectives from the public are important because they reflect what people actually believe in practice. These beliefs and attitudes could influence how people relate to disability communities and identities, as well as how people make decisions about treatment or supports.