A group of academics say autistic, ADHD, dyslexic, and dyspraxic people are often considered objects of study rather than active research contributors
Academics are calling for better inclusivity in higher education, to combat harmful assumptions about neurodivergent (e.g. autistic, ADHD, dyslexic, and dyspraxic) people.
The group says there is a dilemma of representation in neurodiversity research, as neurodivergent individuals are often considered objects of study rather than active contributors.
They are part of FORRT, which stands for Framework for Open and Reproducible Research Training, which seeks to build a more diverse community of researchers. The collective encourages open scholarship practices by providing support and training to those wanting to involve more under-represented individuals in academia.
A mission statement, published in British Psychological Society's Cognitive Psychology Bulletin, argues neurodivergent perspectives are often overlooked and misunderstood within behavioural and cognitive sciences.
It says recent movements towards a more open and inclusive academia focus on addressing traditional power imbalances affecting under-represented individuals, including women, people of colour, and non-WEIRD societies (Western, educated, industrialised, rich and democratic).
Neurodiversity needs to be part of academia’s systemic efforts for diversity, equality, and inclusion.
One of the co-authors, Dr Steven Kapp, Senior Lecturer in Psychology at the University of Portsmouth, is autistic and researches autism and neurodiversity. He said: “Neurodiversity needs to be part of academia’s systemic efforts for diversity, equality, and inclusion. Neurodivergences intersect with race, ethnicity, gender and gender identity, sexual orientation, class, and other disabilities.
“That’s why we’re calling for more open and participatory research on neurodiversity, as it can lead to a more representative science.”
The paper recommends incorporating the views of neurodivergent individuals into the whole research cycle, using participatory research practices. This would allow them to be active rather than passive collaborators.
The paper’s contributors argue combining participatory research and open scholarship practices are an essential way to advance neurodiversity research. They believe it can strengthen the relationship between members of the public and scientific communities, empower neurodivergent people, and ensure current research is meaningful and impactful to their lives.
Associate Professor, Tamara Kalandadze from Østfold University College in Norway, added: “Open scholarship and participatory research practices can be coupled to allow neurodivergent people to focus on specific parts of a research project according to their individual strengths and interests and be formally acknowledged as contributors.
“As a group of both neurodivergent and neurotypical academics ourselves, we have experienced this Big Team Science approach as enabling our views to be integrated and our voices to be heard.”
Despite the potential benefits of combining participatory research and open scholarship movements, the group warns there are some challenges. These include a lack of training and resources, a need for mutual trust, and fair compensation for everyone involved.
Dr Kapp added: “These challenges can be overcome, as long as there is a shared vision for a more inclusive future.
“Not all people conform to what is widely considered ‘the norm’, and these neurodivergent individuals shouldn’t be excluded as a result. We’re confident the practices and systematic changes outlined in our work can lead to more representative and open science.”
Not all people conform to what is widely considered ‘the norm’, and these neurodivergent individuals shouldn’t be excluded as a result.