Does Language Matter? Identity-First Versus Person-First Language Use in Autism Research: A Response to Vivanti.
Botha Monique, Hanlon Jacqueline, Williams Gemma Louise
What this study means for families
This paper discusses how we talk about autism - whether to say 'person with autism' or 'autistic person'. The researchers argue that the words we use matter because they can affect how autistic people are treated in society. They believe autistic people should have the main say in how they want to be described, as this respects their right to make their own choices.
Summary by AutismInsights from published abstract. This is not a substitute for reading the original paper.
Research summary
This commentary paper argues for the importance of language choices in autism research, specifically addressing the debate between person-first language ('person with autism') versus identity-first language ('autistic person'). The authors contend that language use has material consequences for autistic people, including potential stigmatisation, dehumanisation, and violence. They advocate that decisions about language should primarily center on the needs, autonomy, and rights of autistic people themselves, preserving their right to self-determination. The paper is written as a response to another editorial and concludes with recommendations for future research directions in this area.
Summary by AutismInsights from published abstract. This is not a substitute for reading the original paper.
Key findings
- 1
Language use in autism research has material consequences including stigmatisation, dehumanisation, and violence for autistic people
Confidence: limitedRelevance: Highlights importance of respectful communication in clinical practice - 2
Language debates should center on autistic people's needs, autonomy, and rights to preserve self-determination
Confidence: limitedRelevance: Emphasizes person-centered approach to terminology and communication
Summary by AutismInsights from published abstract. This is not a substitute for reading the original paper.
Clinical implications
Clinicians should be mindful of language choices when communicating about autism. Respecting autistic individuals' preferred terminology may improve therapeutic relationships and outcomes. Language decisions should involve autistic people themselves to ensure respectful, person-centered care.
Summary by AutismInsights from published abstract. This is not a substitute for reading the original paper.
Limitations
This is a commentary paper rather than empirical research. No data, methodology, or sample size is provided. The arguments presented are theoretical and not supported by quantitative evidence or systematic analysis of language impact.
Summary by AutismInsights from published abstract. This is not a substitute for reading the original paper.
Original abstract
In response to Vivanti's 'Ask The Editor…' paper [Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 50(2), 691-693], we argue that the use of language in autism research has material consequences for autistic people including stigmatisation, dehumanisation, and violence. Further, that the debate in the use of person-first language versus identity-first language should centre first and foremost on the needs, autonomy, and rights of autistic people, so in to preserve their rights to self-determination. Lastly, we provide directions for future research.
Evidence Grade
emerging
Grade assigned by AutismInsights based on study type and published abstract.
Study Details
- Journal
- Journal of autism and developmental disorders
- Year
- 2023
- PMID
- 33474662
- DOI
- 10.1007/s10803-020-04858-w
MeSH Terms