Cross-cultural variation in experiences of acceptance, camouflaging and mental health difficulties in autism: A registered report.

Recent findings suggest that stigma and camouflaging contribute to mental health difficulties for autistic individuals, however, this evidence is largely based on UK samples. While studies have shown cross-cultural differences in levels of autism-related stigma, it is unclear whether camouflaging and mental health difficulties vary across cultures. Hence, the current study had two aims: (1) to determine whether significant relationships between autism acceptance, camouflaging, and mental health difficulties replicate in a cross-cultural sample of autistic adults, and (2) to compare these variables across cultures. To fulfil these aims, 306 autistic adults from eight countries (Australia, Belgium, Canada, Japan, New Zealand, South Africa, the United Kingdom, and the United States) completed a series of online questionnaires. We found that external acceptance and personal acceptance were associated with lower levels of depression but not camouflaging or stress. Higher camouflaging was associated with elevated levels of depression, anxiety, and stress. Significant differences were found across countries in external acceptance, personal acceptance, depression, anxiety, and stress, even after controlling for relevant covariates. Levels of camouflaging also differed across countries however this effect became non-significant after controlling for the covariates. These findings have significant implications, identifying priority regions for anti-stigma interventions, and highlighting countries where greater support for mental health difficulties is needed.

The inside out model of emotion recognition: how the shape of one's internal emotional landscape influences the recognition of others' emotions.

Some people are exceptional at reading emotional expressions, while others struggle. Here we ask whether the way we experience emotion "on the inside" influences the way we expect emotions to be expressed in the "outside world" and subsequently our ability to read others' emotional expressions. Across multiple experiments, incorporating discovery and replication samples, we develop EmoMap (N = 20; N = 271) and ExpressionMap (N = 98; replication N = 193) to map adults' experiences of emotions and visual representations of others' emotions. Some individuals have modular maps, wherein emotional experiences and visual representations are consistent and distinct-anger looks and feels different from happiness, which looks and feels different from sadness. In contrast, others have experiences and representations that are variable and overlapping-anger, happiness, and sadness look and feel similar and are easily confused for one another. Here we illustrate an association between these maps: those with consistent and distinct experiences of emotion also have consistent and distinct visual representations of emotion. Finally (N = 193), we construct the Inside Out Model of Emotion Recognition, which explains 60.8% of the variance in emotion recognition and illuminates multiple pathways to emotion recognition difficulties. These findings have important implications for understanding the emotion recognition difficulties documented in numerous clinical populations.

Facial Expression Production and Recognition in Autism Spectrum Disorders: A Shifting Landscape.

Social "difficulties" associated with ASD may be a product of neurotypical-autistic differences in emotion expression and recognition. Research suggests that neurotypical and autistic individuals exhibit expressive differences, with autistic individuals displaying less frequent expressions that are rated lower in quality by non-autistic raters. Autistic individuals have difficulties recognizing neurotypical facial expressions; neurotypical individuals have difficulties recognizing autistic expressions. However, findings are mixed. Task-related factors (e.g., intensity of stimuli) and participant characteristics (e.g., age, IQ, comorbid diagnoses) may contribute to the mixed findings. The authors conclude by highlighting important areas for future research and the clinical implications of the discussed findings.

Facial Expression Production and Recognition in Autism Spectrum Disorders: A Shifting Landscape.

Social "difficulties" associated with ASD may be a product of neurotypical-autistic differences in emotion expression and recognition. Research suggests that neurotypical and autistic individuals exhibit expressive differences, with autistic individuals displaying less frequent expressions that are rated lower in quality by non-autistic raters. Autistic individuals have difficulties recognizing neurotypical facial expressions; neurotypical individuals have difficulties recognizing autistic expressions. However, findings are mixed. Task-related factors (e.g., intensity of stimuli) and participant characteristics (e.g., age, IQ, comorbid diagnoses) may contribute to the mixed findings. The authors conclude by highlighting important areas for future research and the clinical implications of the discussed findings.

The social dominance paradox.

Dominant individuals report high levels of self-sufficiency, self-esteem, and authoritarianism. The lay stereotype suggests that such individuals ignore information from others, preferring to make their own choices. However, the nonhuman animal literature presents a conflicting view, suggesting that dominant individuals are avid social learners, whereas subordinates focus on learning from private experience. Whether dominant humans are best characterized by the lay stereotype or the animal view is currently unknown. Here, we present a "social dominance paradox": using self-report scales and computerized tasks, we demonstrate that socially dominant people explicitly value independence, but, paradoxically, in a complex decision-making task, they show an enhanced reliance (relative to subordinate individuals) on social learning. More specifically, socially dominant people employed a strategy of copying other agents when the agents' responses had a history of being correct. However, in humans, two subtypes of dominance have been identified: aggressive and social. Aggressively dominant individuals, who are as likely to "get their own way" as socially dominant individuals but who do so through the use of aggressive or Machiavellian tactics, did not use social information, even when it was beneficial to do so. This paper presents the first study of dominance and social learning in humans and challenges the lay stereotype in which all dominant individuals ignore others' views. The more subtle perspective we offer could have important implications for decision making in both the boardroom and the classroom.