“Autistic traits” are not autistic
Mottron, Laurent
“Autistic traits” are not autistic - 2021.
6
Longitudinal studies of “at-risk” siblings of an autistic child provide information on the phenotypic precursors of an autistic presentation, its predisposing familial factors, and their developmental sequences. Their interpretation is based on our ability to clinically distinguish traits associated with the genetic predisposition for autism, found in relatives, from autism itself. Despite this distinction, we are witnessing the proliferation of research into “autistic traits” in the general population and in a variety of neurodevelopmental and psychiatric conditions. These trait studies are done using “continuity” scales, the Autism Quotient and the Social Responsiveness Scale. These scales conceptually merge risk, autistic condition, and non-autistic neurodevelopmental conditions. We have shown that a) the effect size of the difference between autism and the control population decreases with the publication date (Rødgaard et al. 2019); b) the heterogeneity of the autistic phenotype combines a “good” heterogeneity, inherent in the autistic condition, and a “bad” heterogeneity, resulting from the criteria and instruments used (Mottron & Bzdok 2020); c) a return to the prototype in research cohorts is among the most rational remedies to the current stagnation of autism research (Mottron 2021). These results and methodological considerations question the etiological, phenotypic, and instrumental continuity between autistic trait and autism. This continuity is expressed by the aphorism of J. Constantino et al. (2011), that “autistic traits are continuously distributed in the general population.” We propose that considering “autistic traits” as “autistic” results trivially from the choice of excessively general dimensional measures to characterize autism. This conceptual assimilation makes use of an abstract definition in place of the recognition of a prototypical phenotype. Yet we are still strictly dependent on the recognition of autism to study it. We therefore propose to reverse this movement by refocusing autism research on smaller and more homogeneous cohorts of prototypical individuals, while decoupling service and diagnosis.
“Autistic traits” are not autistic - 2021.
6
Longitudinal studies of “at-risk” siblings of an autistic child provide information on the phenotypic precursors of an autistic presentation, its predisposing familial factors, and their developmental sequences. Their interpretation is based on our ability to clinically distinguish traits associated with the genetic predisposition for autism, found in relatives, from autism itself. Despite this distinction, we are witnessing the proliferation of research into “autistic traits” in the general population and in a variety of neurodevelopmental and psychiatric conditions. These trait studies are done using “continuity” scales, the Autism Quotient and the Social Responsiveness Scale. These scales conceptually merge risk, autistic condition, and non-autistic neurodevelopmental conditions. We have shown that a) the effect size of the difference between autism and the control population decreases with the publication date (Rødgaard et al. 2019); b) the heterogeneity of the autistic phenotype combines a “good” heterogeneity, inherent in the autistic condition, and a “bad” heterogeneity, resulting from the criteria and instruments used (Mottron & Bzdok 2020); c) a return to the prototype in research cohorts is among the most rational remedies to the current stagnation of autism research (Mottron 2021). These results and methodological considerations question the etiological, phenotypic, and instrumental continuity between autistic trait and autism. This continuity is expressed by the aphorism of J. Constantino et al. (2011), that “autistic traits are continuously distributed in the general population.” We propose that considering “autistic traits” as “autistic” results trivially from the choice of excessively general dimensional measures to characterize autism. This conceptual assimilation makes use of an abstract definition in place of the recognition of a prototypical phenotype. Yet we are still strictly dependent on the recognition of autism to study it. We therefore propose to reverse this movement by refocusing autism research on smaller and more homogeneous cohorts of prototypical individuals, while decoupling service and diagnosis.
Réseaux sociaux