Billets de Michelle Dawson
Liens cités structurés
Philippine Geelhand, Fanny Papastamou, Marie Belenger, Elise Clin, Lydia Hickman, Connor T. Keating, Sophie Sowden (2023). Autism-Related Language Preferences of French-Speaking Autistic Adults: An Online Survey. Autism in Adulthood, 5(3), 275-288. SAGE Publications.
Résumé
Background: In recent years, there have been increasing discussions surrounding the appropriate terminology to talk about autism. Initially, this debate revolved around the use of person-first language (e.g., person with autism ) versus identity-first language (IFL; e.g., autistic person) but has recently expanded to other autism-related terms (e.g., deficits). However, to date, studies investigating autism-related language preferences have been limited to English-speaking countries, and little is known about preferences in other languages. This study addresses this gap by investigating the language preferences of French-speaking autistic adults. Methods: Five hundred and forty-one French-speaking autistic adults (formal diagnosis and self-identified) completed an online survey where they selected terms they preferred to use to talk about: (1) the nomenclature of autism; (2) an autistic person; (3) someone's autistic identity; (4) autism more broadly; (5) the abilities of autistic people; and (6) people without a diagnosis of autism. Participants also revealed more about their language preferences via an open-text response. Results: The most preferred terms were “Autisme,” “Personne autiste,” “Autiste,” “Est Autiste,” “Différence neurologique/cérébrale,” “Différences,” “Difficultés,” “Personne neurotypique,” “Neurotypique,” and “Personne non-autiste.” To better understand these preferences, participants' open comments were analyzed, revealing further support for IFL and the social model of disability, and a preference for simple, precise, and validated terms. Conclusions: These results are consistent with autism terminology preferences in English-speaking countries and provide additional insight into the reasons underlying these preferences. Such work has implications for informing the language of researchers, clinicians, and other professionals in the field, as well as the general public.
Auteur·ices de l’étude dans cette référence citée