Prior research has identified the divergence across different stakeholder groups in the semantic choice of language when describing autism, as members of the autism and autistic community preferred to use identity-first language (autistic person), whereas professionals were more likely to use person-first language (person with autism). This study explored 803 e-learners’ responses from their comments across two massive open online courses on autism education held between 2017 and 2019. Comments from members of the autistic and autism community and professionals were analysed together using thematic analysis, to identify shared opinions on what, why and how language should be used when describing autism across stakeholder groups. Learners agreed that autistic individuals should guide others on which terminology to use when describing autism and that the diagnostic label is a way to facilitate understanding across stakeholder groups and help the individual gain access to support. Semantic language choices may matter less as long as the person’s difficulties are clearly acknowledged, with adaptations made to meet their specific needs. Adding to a growing body of literature on terminology use in autism research and practice, we highlight that consideration for semantic choice of language use should focus on communicating an individual’s strengths and differences.

Lay abstract

Within the neurodiversity movement, one recent divergence is in the semantic choice of language when describing autism, as members of the autism and autistic community preferred to use identity-first language (autistic person), whereas professionals were more likely to use person-first language (person with autism). This study explored 803 e-learners’ responses from their comments across two massive open online courses on autism education held between 2017 and 2019. Learners agreed that autistic individuals should guide others on which terminology to use when describing autism, and although identity-first language acknowledges autism as part of an individual’s identity, it can also conjure up negative stereotypes and be stigmatising. Although family, friends and professionals highlighted that the diagnostic label is a way to facilitate understanding across stakeholder groups and help autistic individuals gain access to support, autistic self-advocates found the process of disclosing autism as a form of disability to conflict with their sense of identity, and broader terms such as ‘autism spectrum’ failed to capture individual strengths and weaknesses. Semantic language choices may matter less as long as the person’s difficulties are clearly acknowledged, with adaptations made to meet their specific needs. Adding to a growing body of literature on terminology use in autism research and practice, we highlight that language used when describing autism should follow the autistic individual’s lead, with the primary focus on communicating an individual’s strengths and difficulties, to foster a sense of positive autism identity and inclusivity, and enable access to appropriate support.

中文翻译：

---

从两个关于自闭症教育和技术使用的大型开放在线课程中探索电子学习社区对自闭症语言和术语使用的反应

先前的研究已经确定了在描述自闭症时不同利益相关者群体在语言语义选择方面的差异，因为自闭症和自闭症社区的成员更喜欢使用身份-第一语言（自闭症人士），而专业人士更可能使用人-第一语言（自闭症患者）。本研究探讨了 803 名电子学习者在 2017 年至 2019 年期间举办的两门关于自闭症教育的大型开放在线课程的评论中的反应。使用主题分析对来自自闭症和自闭症社区成员和专业人士的评论进行了分析，以确定对以下问题的共同看法在跨利益相关者群体描述自闭症时，应该使用什么、为什么以及如何使用语言。学习者一致认为，自闭症患者应该指导他人在描述自闭症时使用哪些术语，并且诊断标签是促进利益相关者群体理解并帮助个人获得支持的一种方式。只要清楚地认识到个人的困难，并根据他们的特定需求进行调整，语义语言选择可能就不那么重要了。

摘要

在神经多样性运动中，最近的一个分歧是在描述自闭症时语言的语义选择，因为自闭症和自闭症社区的成员更喜欢使用身份-第一语言（自闭症人士），而专业人士更可能使用以人为本的语言（自闭症患者）。本研究探讨803的e-学习者的回应，从他们的评论跨越自闭症教育2017年至2019年之间的学生举行了两次大规模开放在线课堂一致认为，孤独症患者应引导别人描述自闭症当其上的术语来使用，虽然身份的第一语言承认自闭症是个人身份的一部分，但它也可能会唤起负面的刻板印象和污名化。尽管家人、朋友和专业人士强调，诊断标签是促进利益相关者群体理解并帮助自闭症患者获得支持的一种方式，但自闭症自我倡导者发现将自闭症作为一种残疾形式披露的过程与他们的认知相冲突。身份，以及诸如“自闭症谱系”之类的更广泛的术语未能捕捉到个人的优势和劣势。只要清楚地认识到个人的困难，并根据他们的特定需求进行调整，语义语言选择可能就不那么重要了。增加了越来越多的关于自闭症研究和实践中术语使用的文献，