Understanding the Double Empathy Problem in Autism
The Double Empathy Problem fundamentally challenges traditional views of social difficulties in autism, emphasizing mutual misunderstandings between autistic and non-autistic people. Developed by Damian Milton in 2012, this theory shifts focus from autism as solely a deficit within the individual to a dynamic interplay of reciprocal social experiences. In this article, we explore the theoretical background, supporting research, implications for communication, and future directions in understanding and addressing this complex phenomenon.
Defining the Double Empathy Problem in Autism
What is the Double Empathy Problem in autism?
The Double Empathy Problem (DEP), first introduced by Damian Milton in 2012, offers a new perspective on social misunderstandings involving autistic and non-autistic people. Unlike traditional views that see communication difficulties as stemming solely from deficits within autistic individuals, the DEP highlights that these misunderstandings are mutual and rooted in differences between the two groups.
The theory explains that both autistic and non-autistic people experience challenges in understanding each other's social cues, emotions, and perspectives. It emphasizes that autistic individuals do not lack empathy; instead, they tend to experience and express emotions differently, which can be misunderstood by non-autistic (allistic) people.
In practical terms, this mutual miscommunication leads to social disconnects, prejudices, and sometimes stigma. Both groups often misinterpret each other’s cues—autistic individuals might communicate in ways that seem unusual or hard to read for non-autistic people, while non-autistic individuals may respond insensitively or dismissively.
The DEP challenges older, deficit-focused theories that labeled autistic social difficulties as inherent deficits in empathy or social capacity. Instead, it recognizes that genuine empathy in autistic people is often present but expressed differently, and that understanding across neurotypes is a two-way street.
Overall, this approach advocates for a shift in perspective—from viewing autism as a defect or impairment to understanding it as a different way of experiencing and interacting with the world. Improving mutual understanding involves respecting these differences, fostering genuine communication, and promoting neurodiversity.
Research supporting the DEP has shown that autistic individuals generally relate more positively and communicate more effectively with each other than with non-autistic people. This mutual understanding can lead to better social relationships, enhanced well-being, and reduced societal stigma. The theory encourages us to see social interactions as reciprocal and emphasizes the importance of empathy that is attuned to different neurotypes.
By recognizing the bidirectional nature of social misunderstandings, the Double Empathy Problem opens pathways to more inclusive communication strategies, training programs, and supportive environments that value neurodiversity and mutual respect.
Theoretical Foundations and Empirical Evidence
What is the theoretical background and research evidence for the Double Empathy Problem?
The Double Empathy Problem (DEP), first introduced by Damian Milton in 2012, provides a fresh perspective on social difficulties associated with autism. Unlike traditional theories that view these challenges primarily as deficits within the autistic individual, DEP emphasizes that mutual understanding breakdowns occur because of differing communication styles and social perceptions between autistic and non-autistic people.
The core idea is that empathy is bidirectional. Both groups struggle to understand each other's emotional and cognitive experiences due to their unique ways of perceiving the world. This mutual misunderstanding can lead to social exclusion, stigma, and miscommunication.
Research supports this by exploring how different forms of empathy are impacted by autistic traits. Studies indicate that individuals with higher autistic traits tend to show a pattern where emotional empathy (the ability to feel others' emotions) is stronger relative to cognitive empathy (the ability to understand others’ mental states). This imbalance, called empathic disequilibrium, has been linked to social interactions and perceptions.
In particular, research shows that autistic individuals often have a surplus of affective or emotional empathy, enabling them to connect deeply with others emotionally. However, difficulties arise in cognitive empathy—interpreting facial expressions, tone, or body language—leading to misunderstandings with non-autistic people.
Empirical studies have also examined empathic accuracy and perception in interactions. For instance, research where non-autistic participants watched videos of autistic and non-autistic narrators describing emotional events found that participants struggled more to accurately read emotions from autistic narrators, especially for feelings like happiness and sadness. Meanwhile, participants reported experiencing stronger bodily reactions, such as heightened sensitivity to anger and fear, when viewing autistic speakers.
Furthermore, investigations have demonstrated that autistic people tend to enjoy and communicate better with their peers, suggesting that shared neurotypes facilitate mutual understanding. Conversely, cross-neurotype interactions often result in perceived awkwardness or misjudgments.
Supporting Research and Data
| Study Focus | Methodology | Main Findings | Significance |
|---|---|---|---|
| Empathy & Autism Traits | Surveys measuring emotional and cognitive empathy levels | Higher emotional empathy than cognitive in autistic traits; imbalance linked to social difficulties | Supports reciprocal empathy issues as innate rather than deficits |
| Recognizing Emotions | Video-based recognition tests with autistic and non-autistic narrators | Non-autistic viewers had lower accuracy reading autistic narrators' emotions, especially for happiness and sadness | Validates mutual misunderstanding hypothesis |
| Emotional Intensity | Participant self-reports during interaction viewing | Higher intensity felt for anger and fear from autistic narrators | Indicates emotional perception differences |
| Social Interaction Qualities | Observations and ratings of mixed autistic/non-autistic interactions | Interactions with autistic partners reported as less smooth, with less open disclosure from non-autistic participants | Highlights communication obstacles stemming from mutual differences |
Research from recent years, including systematic reviews published in 2024, reinforces these findings. They reveal that autistic individuals tend to have positive relations within the autistic community, with more authentic sharing and mutual understanding, contrasting with more strained cross-neurotype interactions. These observations demonstrate that the social communication issues are not solely rooted within autistic individuals but are a shared phenomenon influenced by differing communication styles.
The empirical evidence also challenges earlier assumptions, such as the 'mind-blindness' theory proposed by Simon Baron-Cohen, which posited a universal deficit in 'theory of mind' among autistic people. Instead, findings suggest that differences in understanding stem from mismatched social-cognitive frameworks, emphasizing the importance of mutual and reciprocal approaches to communication.
How does this support an evolving understanding of autism?
The research supporting the Double Empathy Problem encourages a shift from viewing autism as a deficit to appreciating its distinct modes of social and emotional processing. It underscores that social misunderstandings are often due to a mismatch rather than deficiency, pointing towards more inclusive communication strategies and better societal acceptance.
In healthcare, education, and social support, recognizing this bidirectional nature can lead to more effective interventions that promote mutual understanding, dignity, and respect. This approach not only enhances community integration but also helps reduce stigma and improve mental health outcomes for autistic individuals.
Impact on Communication and Social Understanding
How does the Double Empathy Problem affect communication and social understanding in autism?
The Double Empathy Problem (DEP) fundamentally reshapes how we view social interactions between autistic and non-autistic individuals. Instead of seeing communication difficulties solely as an autistic deficit, the DEP illustrates that misunderstandings are mutual, stemming from differences in cognition, emotional expression, and social experiences. This mutual nature means that both groups can struggle to understand each other's signals accurately, leading to misinterpretations and barriers to meaningful interaction.
Research demonstrates that autistic individuals often experience better and more fluid communication with others who share similar neurotypes, such as fellow autistics, or in contexts where mutual understanding is prioritized. Conversely, interactions between autistic and non-autistic people tend to be perceived as awkward or less successful, partly because each side interprets social cues differently.
A significant aspect of this mutual misunderstanding relates to how emotions are perceived. Studies involving video recounts of emotional events show that non-autistic participants find it harder to recognize and interpret the emotions expressed by autistic narrators, especially happiness and sadness. They also tend to feel emotions more intensely—particularly anger and fear—when viewing autistic individuals, which can lead to further misjudgments.
This disparity in emotional perception extends to reading facial expressions, tone of voice, gestures, and body language. For instance, autistic people may express their feelings in ways that are less conventional or harder for non-autistic observers to decode. Similarly, non-autistic people may unconsciously dismiss or misinterpret autistic expressions, which can reinforce negative stereotypes.
Understanding that these difficulties are bidirectional underlines the importance of developing social and communication strategies that foster mutual respect and awareness. Recognizing the role of differing worldviews and sensory processing styles helps create more inclusive environments. It emphasizes the shared responsibility to bridge communication gaps, rather than placing the burden solely on autistic individuals.
This mutual understanding challenge impacts various settings—from everyday social interactions to healthcare and education. For example, in medical contexts, miscommunication can lead to delayed diagnoses or inadequate treatment, further exacerbating health disparities. Conversely, acknowledging the double empathy perspective encourages adaptations such as tailored communication support, empathy training, and more person-centered approaches.
Ultimately, this paradigm shift promotes a more respectful and empathetic view of autism. It encourages society to see autistic traits as natural variations of human experience rather than deficits, fostering more authentic connections. The double empathy problem highlights that mutual understanding is a shared process, requiring effort and openness from all parties involved.
Relationship with Theory of Mind and Empathy Concepts
How does the Double Empathy Problem connect to Theory of Mind?
The Double Empathy Problem (DEP), first introduced by Damian Milton in 2012, challenges traditional perspectives on social understanding in autism. Historically, much of the autism discourse has centered on the idea that autistic individuals lack a Theory of Mind (ToM)—the ability to attribute mental states, intentions, and feelings to oneself and others.
However, the DEP shifts this viewpoint by emphasizing that social misunderstandings are mutual and bidirectional. Instead of viewing autism as a deficit within an individual, it highlights that both autistic and non-autistic people experience difficulties understanding each other's perspectives due to differing ways of experiencing and communicating emotions.
Research supports this by showing that challenges in reading facial expressions and emotional cues are common across all groups, suggesting that these are not unique deficits within autism but part of broader social cognition differences. In this light, mutual misunderstanding results from contrasting social and communicative styles rather than a lack of innate empathy or mentalizing ability in autistic individuals.
Thus, the DEP broadens the scope of social understanding by emphasizing reciprocal interactions and the importance of context. It proposes that both groups can experience social cognitive difficulties, which are intensified in cross-neurotype interactions.
This perspective invites a rethinking of autism support and intervention strategies. Instead of solely targeting autistic 'deficits,' it advocates for fostering mutual understanding and adaptation in social exchanges, recognizing the diversity and validity of different ways of socializing.
What is the relationship between the Double Empathy Problem and concepts like Theory of Mind?
| Aspect | Traditional View of ToM | Double Empathy Perspective | Explanation |
|---|---|---|---|
| Focus | Individual deficits in perspective-taking | Mutual understanding gaps | Both groups share difficulties, not just autistic individuals |
| Implication | Autism characterized by an inherent 'mind-blindness' | Social differences are reciprocal | Emphasizes social context and interactional dynamics |
| Approach | Interventions aim to improve autistic ToM | Emphasizes adapting communication styles | Supports mutual learning and empathy |
| Research Evidence | Lower ToM task performance in autistic children | Better understanding among autistic peers | Highlights shared capabilities and mutual understanding |
How do affective and cognitive empathy relate in this context?
Affective empathy involves feeling and sharing the emotional experiences of others, while cognitive empathy—or perspective-taking—refers to understanding others' mental states intellectually.
In the context of the DEP, autistic people often demonstrate what is called 'affective empathy'—they genuinely feel concern and emotional resonance with others' feelings. However, they may face challenges with cognitive empathy, such as interpreting social cues or mental states, especially when these differ from neurotypical expectations.
Non-autistic individuals frequently interpret autistic expressions as lacking empathy or emotional responsiveness, but the DEP shows that this perception can be mistaken. Autism may involve different modes of expressing and experiencing empathy, which require mutual understanding to bridge.
Recognizing that affective empathy is often present in autistic individuals underscores the importance of designing social environments and interactions that foster mutual respect and comprehension, rather than assigning deficits based solely on cognitive empathy limitations.
What are the implications for understanding trust and perspective-taking?
Understanding trust in social interactions relies heavily on effective perspective-taking. The DEP implies that trust between autistic and non-autistic individuals can be hindered by reciprocal misunderstandings rather than a fundamental lack of empathy.
When autistic individuals do not conform to neurotypical social norms, non-autistic people may misinterpret these behaviors, leading to suspicion or mistrust. Conversely, autistic individuals may struggle to interpret social cues from non-autistic partners, impacting their ability to feel secure or understood.
Therefore, fostering genuine mutual understanding requires both sides to recognize and respect differing communication styles. Emphasizing reciprocal empathy and flexible social expectations can enhance trust, reduce stigma, and promote more meaningful connections.
Overall, moving beyond the deficit model of ToM toward an appreciation of mutual, contextual understanding aligns with the principles of the Double Empathy Problem. It highlights that improving social relationships involves not only training autistic people but also encouraging neurotypical individuals to adapt and empathize in ways that validate autistic experiences.
Influences on Support Strategies and Practice
How does the Double Empathy Problem influence support strategies and communication practices in autism?
The Double Empathy Problem fundamentally shifts how support and communication are approached in autism. Instead of viewing autistic social difficulties as solely a deficit within the autistic individual, it highlights that misunderstandings are mutual, involving both autistic and non-autistic persons.
This perspective encourages the development of support strategies that foster reciprocal understanding and respect. For example, rather than only teaching autistic individuals to adapt to neurotypical social norms, support programs now emphasize training non-autistic people to understand and appreciate autistic communication styles.
Training programs by organizations like the National Autistic Society and AT-Autism focus on improving mutual understanding, cultivating empathy, and reducing societal stigma. These programs promote strategies such as active listening, patience, and adapting communication methods to fit different sensory and social preferences.
By recognizing that miscommunication stems from differences in perception and cognitive styles, support practices have become more person-centered. This approach involves co-creating communication strategies with autistic individuals, respecting their unique ways of socializing and expressing emotions.
Shift from deficit-based to mutual understanding
Historically, interventions centered on fixing or normalizing autistic behaviors, assuming deficits within the autistic person. The Double Empathy framework challenges this by advocating a shift towards mutual understanding.
This paradigm promotes viewing autism as a different, yet valid, way of experiencing the world. For example, instead of forcing autistic individuals to conform to typical social norms, the focus is on creating environments where their methods of communication are accepted and understood.
This shift encourages societal acceptance and inclusivity, emphasizing strengths and shared interests rather than perceived shortcomings.
Designing inclusive interventions
Effective interventions now prioritize inclusivity and reciprocity. This involves designing tools and environments that facilitate understanding across neurotypes.
For instance, social narratives and apps like Stories Online For Autism (SOFA) help autistic individuals articulate their experiences and goals in a structured way, promoting self-advocacy and mutual understanding.
Healthcare practices are also adapting by incorporating sensory-friendly environments, alternative communication methods, and trauma-informed care. These changes aim to bridge the communication gap caused by differing experiences and sensory sensitivities.
Educational programs incorporate peer-led activities where autistic and non-autistic students learn together, fostering empathy and reducing stereotypes.
Furthermore, community initiatives often focus on building relationships based on shared interests and mutual respect, which can help mitigate societal biases and promote social integration.
| Support Strategies | Approach | Benefits | Additional Details |
|---|---|---|---|
| Communication adaptation | Tailoring interaction styles | Enhances understanding and comfort | Using visual supports, reducing sensory overload |
| Mutual understanding training | Educating non-autistic individuals | Promotes empathy and reduces stigma | Programs include role-playing and perspective-taking |
| Co-created social narratives | Developing personalized stories | Empowers autistic individuals | Uses tools like SOFA app for goal setting |
| Inclusive environments | Sensory-friendly spaces | Supports diverse needs | Used in healthcare, education, workplaces |
| Peer-led activities | Socializing based on shared interests | Builds mutual respect | Common in schools and community groups |
This shift towards mutual, respectful communication aligns with more holistic support systems. It reframes social difficulties as shared challenges, encouraging collaboration and understanding.
Ultimately, embracing the Double Empathy Problem in practice nurtures a more empathetic society, where autistic and non-autistic people can interact meaningfully, respecting each other's differences and strengths.
Future Directions and Critical Perspectives
What are some critical perspectives or future directions in research on the Double Empathy Problem?
Research on the Double Empathy Problem (DEP) has evolved significantly since Damian Milton introduced it in 2012. A critical perspective emphasizes that social misunderstandings are mutual, involving both autistic and non-autistic people, challenging traditional deficit-based views of autism that focus solely on impairments within autistic individuals. This shift encourages a more balanced understanding of how differences in communication styles and social experiences contribute to interaction difficulties.
One major future direction involves broadening research to include more diverse populations. Most current studies primarily focus on Western and urban contexts, often neglecting cultural, linguistic, and socioeconomic variations. Expanding research to include non-Western, rural, and culturally diverse groups will help understand how different societal norms impact mutual understanding and communication.
Researchers also aim to investigate systemic influences that shape the interactions between autistic and non-autistic communities. These include societal biases, institutional practices, and healthcare systems, which can reinforce misunderstandings and marginalization. Recognizing these systemic factors is vital for developing more effective support and intervention strategies.
A growing area of interest is examining how support mechanisms like masking—where autistic individuals hide or alter their traits to conform—affect mutual understanding. Masking can obscure authentic interactions and lead to increased feelings of alienation for autistic individuals. Future research seeks to understand how masking impacts reciprocal empathy and how to foster environments where autistic expression is accepted.
Another future direction involves emphasizing strengths rather than deficits. Rather than framing autism as a disorder to be fixed, scholars advocate for approaches that recognize different communication styles and social worlds as valid. This perspective aligns with the neurodiversity movement, which promotes acceptance and respect for neurological differences.
There is also an urgent need to re-evaluate training and intervention strategies. Current programs often aim to 'normalize' autistic behavior, which can inadvertently reinforce misunderstandings and stigma. Future efforts should focus on fostering mutual empathy by training both autistic and non-autistic individuals in inclusive communication. This includes teaching neurotypical people to better interpret autistic expressions and vice versa.
To support these goals, researchers call for contextually grounded, relational analyses of social interactions. Instead of studying isolated behaviors, future studies should consider the social, cultural, and personal contexts shaping communication. Such an approach respects the variability of human experiences and promotes more effective, empathetic engagement.
In summary, upcoming research and policy development should prioritize inclusive, systemic, and strength-based perspectives. By acknowledging that mutual understanding is a shared responsibility, these efforts can contribute to reducing stigma, improving social inclusion, and enriching the lives of autistic individuals.
| Aspect | Current Focus | Future Directions | Additional Notes |
|---|---|---|---|
| Research Populations | Mainly Western, urban | Include diverse, global populations | Helps generalize findings and account for cultural differences |
| Systemic Influences | Limited | Examine societal biases and institutional practices | Reveals broader structures affecting communication |
| Support and Intervention | Deficit-focused | Promote mutual empathy and neurodiversity approaches | Shift from normalization to acceptance |
| Masking Effects | Under-studied | Investigate how masking impacts mutual understanding | Addresses hidden dimensions of autistic experiences |
| Strengths Perspective | Less emphasized | Emphasize and leverage social strengths | Aligns with neurodiversity advocacy |
| Training Programs | Focus on autistic skill acquisition | Develop mutual understanding skills for all | Foster inclusive communication practices |
Broader Implications for Policy, Training, and the Neurodiversity Movement
Incorporating these research directions into policy and training can lead to more supportive environments. For instance, educational programs for professionals should emphasize reciprocal understanding and respect for autistic differences. Healthcare systems can adopt communication practices that recognize mutual misunderstandings, reducing disparities and improving outcomes.
The neurodiversity movement is well-positioned to influence these shifts. By framing autism as part of natural human variation, it advocates for societal and structural changes that promote acceptance over correction. Future research supporting this mindset can underpin policies that foster inclusivity, reduce stigma, and empower autistic communities.
Overall, emphasizing mutual understanding and systemic change aligns with evolving societal values around diversity and human rights. It challenges outdated narratives, encourages collaborative solutions, and emphasizes that understanding is a shared journey—crucial steps toward a more inclusive world.
Autism and Societal Impact of the Double Empathy
What is the significance of the Double Empathy Problem in autism psychology and sociology?
The Double Empathy Problem (DEP), first introduced by Damian Milton in 2012, is a groundbreaking concept that reshapes how we understand social difficulties related to autism. Traditionally, autism was viewed as a deficit within the individual, primarily focusing on impairments in social communication and theory of mind. However, the DEP shifts this perspective by emphasizing that misunderstandings between autistic and non-autistic people are mutual and rooted in differing experiences, perceptions, and communication styles.
In psychological and sociological contexts, this theory underscores that both groups struggle to understand each other due to inherent differences, not solely because of autistic deficits. This mutual misunderstanding can lead to negative stereotypes, social exclusion, and increased stigma against autistic individuals.
By recognizing that social challenges are bidirectional, the DEP promotes a more empathetic and respectful societal attitude towards autism. It encourages viewing autism through a lens of neurodiversity—celebrating different ways of experiencing and engaging with the world—rather than as a problem to be fixed.
This shift has important implications for societal attitudes, policies, and support systems. Educating the public about the mutual and dynamic nature of social misunderstandings can reduce misconceptions and prejudices. It paves the way for more inclusive practices, from educational settings to healthcare, where understanding mutual differences facilitates better interactions and outcomes.
In summary, the awareness of the Double Empathy Problem is vital for fostering societal acceptance and respectful engagement with autistic individuals. It champions the idea that embracing neurodiversity and mutual understanding benefits all, leading to a more inclusive society.
Summary and Reflection on the Double Empathy Concept
Recap of the Theory
The Double Empathy Problem, first introduced by Damian Milton in 2012, challenges traditional views that see autism as solely characterized by social deficits. Instead, it highlights that misunderstandings between autistic and non-autistic people are often mutual, stemming from differences in communication styles, social cognition, and sensory experiences. Research demonstrates that autistic individuals tend to communicate more effectively and empathetically with each other than with non-autistic people, often sharing more in-depth information and feeling more comfortable.
Studies show that non-autistic observers struggle to interpret autistic expressions of emotion, especially in facial cues and emotional narratives. For example, research involving video recounts revealed that neurotypical participants found it harder to identify happiness and sadness in autistic narrators, yet they experienced more intense feelings of anger and fear. These findings support the notion that social difficulties arise from reciprocal misunderstandings rather than individual deficits.
Theorists also emphasize that autistic people do not lack empathy but experience and express emotions differently. They tend to connect better with others who share similar experiences, which leads to higher quality social interactions within autistic groups. Importantly, the theory disputes earlier models like Simon Baron-Cohen’s 'mind-blindness,' which suggested a universal empathy or theory of mind deficit in autism.
Implications for Future Practice and Research
Understanding the Double Empathy Problem invites a significant shift in how society, healthcare, and education approach autism. It suggests moving away from deficit-focused models toward embracing neurodiversity and mutual understanding.
In practice, this could lead to the development of training programs aimed at improving communication between autistic and non-autistic individuals. For example, organizations like the National Autistic Society and AT-Autism have begun embedding principles of mutual understanding, aiming to reduce stigma and foster inclusive environments.
Within healthcare, acknowledging the double empathy issue highlights the need for more autism-sensitive practices. Strategies include routine autism screening, creating sensory-friendly environments, and adopting trauma-informed communication. Recognizing that misunderstandings are bidirectional can improve diagnosis, treatment, and long-term support.
Research is increasingly focusing on the social strengths of autistic people and exploring cross-neurotype interactions. Recent systematic reviews underscore that autistic individuals often maintain positive relationships with each other, which could inform peer support initiatives. Additionally, expanding research to include diverse populations and cultural contexts is essential for a comprehensive understanding.
Looking ahead, the future of double empathy research involves integrating systemic and societal factors, such as cultural norms and healthcare policies. Such efforts are essential to address disparities, improve societal acceptance, and promote mutual respect.
Scholars are also now exploring tools like social narratives and digital applications, such as the Stories Online For Autism (SOFA) app, to facilitate co-creation and shared understanding. These approaches can help autistic individuals express their goals and experiences more effectively, fostering collaboration.
Overall, embracing the double empathy perspective encourages a paradigm shift—from fixing autistic deficits to fostering genuine, reciprocal relationships that respect neurodiversity. This shift could lead to more inclusive policies, better support systems, and a richer societal understanding of autism.
How does the Double Empathy Problem influence current understanding and future directions in autism?
The Double Empathy Problem fundamentally influences current understanding by reframing social communication challenges in autism as mutual, rather than solely deficit-based within the individual. It promotes a relational view that emphasizes reciprocal understanding, inclusive communication, and respect for neurodiversity. This perspective opens pathways for more effective support strategies, improved interactions, and less stigmatization. Future research is likely to focus on broadening studies across diverse populations, incorporating systemic influences such as healthcare and cultural differences, and developing training programs rooted in mutual understanding. Overall, the concept encourages a shift from fixing autistic deficits to fostering mutual empathy, inclusion, and genuine respect in social interactions.
Toward Mutual Understanding and Inclusion in Autism
The Double Empathy Problem in autism offers a transformative lens through which to view social interactions, emphasizing that mutual understanding is a shared responsibility. Recognizing that both autistic and non-autistic individuals face unique communication and social perception challenges can foster empathy, reduce stigma, and improve support strategies. As research continues to evolve, integrating the principles of mutuality and neurodiversity will be crucial in creating more inclusive environments. Moving forward, embracing the Double Empathy Perspective can lead to more respectful, effective, and compassionate approaches, ultimately enriching social experiences for all.
References
- The double empathy problem - National Autistic Society
- Double empathy, explained | The Transmitter
- Double empathy problem - Wikipedia
- Milton's 'double Empathy Problem': A Summary for Non-academics
- Do you feel me? Autism, empathic accuracy and the double ...
- Autism & the double empathy problem
- Double Empathy: Why Autistic People Are Often Misunderstood
- The 'double empathy problem': Ten years on - Damian Milton, Emine ...
- Non-autistic observers both detect and demonstrate the double ...
- The Double Empathy Problem: Why Autistic Communication is a ...
