The workplace masking experiences of autistic, non-autistic neurodivergent and neurotypical adults in the UK

Abstract

Masking entails hiding or concealing one’s traits during social interactions. Research suggests that masking is particularly common for autistic people, though many non-autistic people also conceal aspects of their identity. Existing research has identified the key motivations and consequences of masking. No research to date, however, has considered how this might be affected by the social context in which masking is employed. This study compared the masking experiences of 285 autistic, 88 non-autistic neurodivergent and 99 neurotypical adults within a context in which masking is expected to be highly prevalent, namely the workplace. We used reflexive thematic analysis to explore the motivations, consequences, and contextual differences of workplace masking compared to other social contexts. Workplace masking was considered by participants in all three groups to be an adaptive response to a range of socially grounded workplace challenges and was usually employed as a strategy to safeguard against the threat of negative social and employment outcomes. Our non-autistic neurodivergent and autistic participants, however, reported experiencing unique pressures to mask, given the limited understanding of neurodiversity in workplaces and society more broadly. These findings have important implications for the wider masking literature and for workplace practice.

A transdiagnostic approach to neurodiversity in a representative population sample: The N+ 4 model

“…A second consequence was that we explored links between neurodiversity traits and self-rated depression, anxiety, and mental wellbeing, rather than testing how they might relate within a common factor structure. This approach is in accord with claims that the experience of neurodivergence in a majority-neurotypical world can have negative consequences for mental health and wellbeing (Alexander-Passe, 2015;Cage et al, 2018;Cage & Troxell-Whitman, 2019;Dwyer, 2022;Gallant & Good, 2023;Kiraz & Sertçelik, 2021;Mantzalas et al, 2022;Pryke-Hobbes et al, 2023;Reindal, 2008). However, as noted in the introduction, the distinction between neurodevelopmental and psychiatric conditions may be questioned in at least some cases.…”

“…Addicoat et al., 2020 ; Eberhard et al., 2022 ; England‐Mason, 2020 ). The latter argument has been countered by the suggestion that the demands of living with a neurodevelopmental condition in a largely neurotypical world may itself be a cause of at least some co‐occurrent psychiatric conditions (Alexander‐Passe, 2015 ; Cage et al., 2018 ; Cage & Troxell‐Whitman, 2019 ; Dwyer, 2022 ; Gallant & Good, 2023 ; Kiraz & Sertçelik, 2021 ; Mantzalas et al., 2022 ; Pryke‐Hobbes et al., 2023 ; Reindal, 2008 ). In the present work we follow the common practice of distinguishing neurodevelopmental and psychiatric conditions, and we model our data on self‐rated depression, anxiety, and mental wellbeing separately from neurodiversity traits.…”