Jacquelyn A Gates, Morgan L McNair, Jared K Richards, Matthew D Lerner
{"title":"自闭症的社会知识与表现:批判性评论与建议。","authors":"Jacquelyn A Gates, Morgan L McNair, Jared K Richards, Matthew D Lerner","doi":"10.1007/s10567-023-00449-0","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Autistic social challenges have long been assumed to arise from a lack of social knowledge (\"not knowing what to do\"), which has undergirded theory and practice in assessment, treatment, and education. However, emerging evidence suggests these differences may be better accounted for by difficulties with social performance (\"doing what they may know\"). This distinction has important implications for research, practice, policy, and community support of autistic people. This review examines the theoretical and clinical implications and empirical status of the knowledge-performance distinction in autism. Current evidence suggests that social knowledge deficits are neither definitional nor reliably related to outcomes in autism. Prioritizing social knowledge, then, may produce unanticipated, problematic consequences in terms of accuracy of assessment, intervention effectiveness, and promotion of stigma. It may also yield unrealistic expectations around the value of knowledge for autistic people and their families, yielding important ethical considerations. Conversely, recent evidence highlights performance-related factors as being especially promising for better modeling and addressing social challenges in autism. Prioritizing performance, then, may offer new directions for assessment, substantially different intervention opportunities, and novel methods of inclusion and affirmation. This review touches upon each of these domains and implications, integrates these developments with broader models of social competence in youth, and provides direction for future research and practice regarding social competence in autism.</p>","PeriodicalId":51399,"journal":{"name":"Clinical Child and Family Psychology Review","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":5.5000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10613329/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Social Knowledge & Performance in Autism: A Critical Review & Recommendations.\",\"authors\":\"Jacquelyn A Gates, Morgan L McNair, Jared K Richards, Matthew D Lerner\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s10567-023-00449-0\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Autistic social challenges have long been assumed to arise from a lack of social knowledge (\\\"not knowing what to do\\\"), which has undergirded theory and practice in assessment, treatment, and education. However, emerging evidence suggests these differences may be better accounted for by difficulties with social performance (\\\"doing what they may know\\\"). This distinction has important implications for research, practice, policy, and community support of autistic people. This review examines the theoretical and clinical implications and empirical status of the knowledge-performance distinction in autism. Current evidence suggests that social knowledge deficits are neither definitional nor reliably related to outcomes in autism. Prioritizing social knowledge, then, may produce unanticipated, problematic consequences in terms of accuracy of assessment, intervention effectiveness, and promotion of stigma. It may also yield unrealistic expectations around the value of knowledge for autistic people and their families, yielding important ethical considerations. Conversely, recent evidence highlights performance-related factors as being especially promising for better modeling and addressing social challenges in autism. Prioritizing performance, then, may offer new directions for assessment, substantially different intervention opportunities, and novel methods of inclusion and affirmation. This review touches upon each of these domains and implications, integrates these developments with broader models of social competence in youth, and provides direction for future research and practice regarding social competence in autism.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":51399,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Clinical Child and Family Psychology Review\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":5.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-09-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10613329/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Clinical Child and Family Psychology Review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10567-023-00449-0\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2023/8/6 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical Child and Family Psychology Review","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10567-023-00449-0","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/8/6 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
Social Knowledge & Performance in Autism: A Critical Review & Recommendations.
Autistic social challenges have long been assumed to arise from a lack of social knowledge ("not knowing what to do"), which has undergirded theory and practice in assessment, treatment, and education. However, emerging evidence suggests these differences may be better accounted for by difficulties with social performance ("doing what they may know"). This distinction has important implications for research, practice, policy, and community support of autistic people. This review examines the theoretical and clinical implications and empirical status of the knowledge-performance distinction in autism. Current evidence suggests that social knowledge deficits are neither definitional nor reliably related to outcomes in autism. Prioritizing social knowledge, then, may produce unanticipated, problematic consequences in terms of accuracy of assessment, intervention effectiveness, and promotion of stigma. It may also yield unrealistic expectations around the value of knowledge for autistic people and their families, yielding important ethical considerations. Conversely, recent evidence highlights performance-related factors as being especially promising for better modeling and addressing social challenges in autism. Prioritizing performance, then, may offer new directions for assessment, substantially different intervention opportunities, and novel methods of inclusion and affirmation. This review touches upon each of these domains and implications, integrates these developments with broader models of social competence in youth, and provides direction for future research and practice regarding social competence in autism.
期刊介绍:
Editors-in-Chief: Dr. Ronald J. Prinz, University of South Carolina and Dr. Thomas H. Ollendick, Virginia Polytechnic Institute Clinical Child and Family Psychology Review is a quarterly, peer-reviewed journal that provides an international, interdisciplinary forum in which important and new developments in this field are identified and in-depth reviews on current thought and practices are published. The Journal publishes original research reviews, conceptual and theoretical papers, and related work in the broad area of the behavioral sciences that pertains to infants, children, adolescents, and families. Contributions originate from a wide array of disciplines including, but not limited to, psychology (e.g., clinical, community, developmental, family, school), medicine (e.g., family practice, pediatrics, psychiatry), public health, social work, and education. Topical content includes science and application and covers facets of etiology, assessment, description, treatment and intervention, prevention, methodology, and public policy. Submissions are by invitation only and undergo peer review. The Editors, in consultation with the Editorial Board, invite highly qualified experts to contribute original papers on topics of timely interest and significance.