Annotated Bibliography 1

Annotated Bibliography

Happé, F. (1999). Autism: Cognitive deficit or cognitive style? ​Trends in Cognitive

Sciences​, 3(6), 216-222. Recuperado em 30 outubro, de 2014, de
http://invibe.net/biblio_database_dyva/woda/data/att/18a1.file.pdf

Happe explores the impact on Autism and reflects on whether to consider Autism as a
deficit, which has been the typical approach, or a variation in cognitive style. By viewing
Autism as more of a cognitive style it recognizes that Autistic people show tremendous
signs of intelligence, but in application don’t always conform to the typical style of
processing application of that intelligence.

Happe takes issue with much of the research that demonstrate deficits in people with
autism because they fail to account for the full diverse population who are autistic.
Autistic people show vast skills in math, memory, art, and other areas where people with
autism show great skill. In reviewing executive function which are areas such as
planning ahead, conforming to other norms, adapting to change.

Happe takes issue with many of the perceptions of inability such as people’s ability to
navigate the physical world, understand and connect to others verbally. Happe
introduces the idea of Central Coherence, which Happe describes as a variation in
cognitive style and encourages others to consider Autism as a cognitive style rather than
deficit, however admitting even that description doesn’t fully distinguish such a diversity
of skills.

Baron-Cohen, S. (2002). Is Asperger Syndrome Necessarily Viewed as a Disability? ​Focus

on Autism and Other Developmental Disabilities​, 17(3), 186-191.
doi:10.1177/10883576020170030801

In Baron-Cohen’s article, he tackles the major differences in high functioning autism,

specifically Asperger’s Syndrome, and considers whether it should continue to be
considered a disability as other lower-functioning forms of autism are. He continues the
consideration by reflecting on all the similarities in people with Asperger’s Syndrome and
what we would consider normal development. The areas where he finds consistencies
are in behavior, neurobiology, and cognitive style. He then considers aspects of autism
and reflects on the argument for considering people with Asperger's as a disability.
These areas include social interests, empathy, and needing more help with executive
function.

In conclusion of Baron-Cohen’s review of the arguments for or against identifying

Asperger Syndrome as a disability, he reflected on a very interesting point in my opinion.
He states that “if environmental expectations were to change, or if individuals with AS
were set down in a different environment, they would not be perceived as disabled”
(Baron-Cohen, 2002). To me that consideration begs the question that it’s not that
people with Asperger Syndrome need to change to conform to the norms of the larger
society, but the society needs to recognize and accept the differences of Aspergers. I
 Annotated Bibliography 2

appreciate that perspective although realize how daunting and long-term potential
change is.

Trottier, G., MSc, Srivstava, L., PhD, & Walker, C., PhD. (1999). Etiology of infantile
autism: A review of recent advances in genetic and neurobiological research.
Journal of Psychiatry & Neuroscience​, 24(2), 103-115.

Trottier et al takes the position in this article to review the impact of genetics and
environmental factors have on the cause of Autism. They provide a comprehensive list
of research in many varying cases of autism, including research in genetics,
complications or insults during gestation, as well as variation in levels of certain
chemicals within the brain as it develops. Based on much of their research, they
summarize that the 5th week of pregnancy is the most vulnerable time for babies to
develop autism and link the etiology of autism most strongly through genealogy rather
than other factors.

It should be noted that throughout much of the research that was summarized, there was
always a caveat that essentially nullified each explanation as a final conclusion of the
cause of autism. I found it interesting as reading it, that it was extensive and discussed
factors that I have very little experience in. The article discussed higher areas of
probability with certain conditions during pregnancy or due to familial genetic conditions.
This article reasserts that there is still much more that we can learn about the cause of
autism and still not be entirely certain that certain measures could be taken to prevent it.

Sandin, S., Lichtenstein, P., Kuja-Halkola, R., Larsson, H., Hultman, C. M., & Reichenberg,
A. (2014). The familial risk of autism. Jama, 311(17), 1770-1777.

In this longitudinal study, Sandin et al set out to evaluate all births within Sweden
between 1982 and 2006 - specifically focusing on twins, full siblings, half siblings, and
cousins to determine the importance of genetics versus environmental factors linked to
ASD. This study was the largest of its kind in part because it included the entire country
of Sweden with a large database and a plethora of information to include in the research.
The findings were interesting when considering the etiology of ASD. They found that
heredit accounts of 50% of probable causes of ASD, noting the predisposition in males
more than females. This finding was much lower than in previous studies. The research
also noted that environmental factors only have a “negligible effect” on the cause of
autism.

As I read through this article, I couldn’t help but get a sense of disappointment that there
were no more definitive answers from a study of this magnitude. There was a hope that
in this data set there could be substantial links to our understanding of the cause of
Autism, but in fact it was less than previous and more negligible than expected. In the
end, the authors noted that they thought this could be valuable information that could
help with the counseling of families with affected children. I could see this as being
helpful, since there are so many people out there with an intrinsic guilt that it was
somehow their fault.

Ekblad, L. (2013). Autism, Personality, and Human Diversity. ​SAGE Open,​ 3(3),
 Annotated Bibliography 3

215824401349772. doi:10.1177/2158244013497722

In this article, Ekblad makes an effort to better define neurodiversity so that it can be
researched scientifically in order to better explain and approach autism not as a disorder.
It describes the failed efforts to disassociate innabilities with autism, and strives to
pursue a better approach to understanding autism by distinguishing neurodiversity as an
explanation for research. Ekblad makes a point to say that research about autism has
been based on deficits and disorders, which makes an assumption that there is a
“normal” behavior associated with humans. He points out the disparities in much of the
research around the causes of autism and considers humanity as a species continuing
to evolve, which would naturally include variations in development.

I find Ekblad’s approach interesting and although he is not looking for causes or
explanations, only a way to isolate neurodiversity as an isolated researchable concept
using a particular tool, the Aspie Quiz. Ekblad’s approach was thorough, including
racial, gender, and regional factors. Ekblad ultimately found that the Aspie Quiz was
suitable to use in researching neurodiversity without bias.

Jaarsma, P. & Welin, S. (2012). Autism as a natural human variation: Reflections on the
claims of the neurodiversity movement. Health Care Analysis, 20(1), 20-30.

Jaarsma’s and Welin’s approach to the neurodiversity concept is that of reviewing the
claims and considerations of the topic and arguing that our perceptions of ASD should
be rewired and ASD should be considered a “natural variation” rather than a disorder
that needs to be corrected. They review the origins of the word Autism and reflect on the
foundation of our understanding of it and work to make the distinction between “high”
and “low” functional autism. They assert that their position is that “high-functioning
autism should neither be regarded as a disorder or a disability nor as an undesirable
condition ​per se,​ but rather as a condition with a particular vulnerability” (Jaarsma &
Welin, 2012). In fact, they point to an example where autism can be considered an
advantage due to heightened awareness and other factors that others may not have.

As I read this article, I found that I really appreciated their assertions and considerations
on how to reclassify how we approach autistic people in life and in education. It was
very empowering to consider taking the disability out of many forms of autism and as a
society be more willing to accept people with differences through all walks of life. They
say this direction when they assert that “the focus, in the medical model, is upon fixing,
curing and correcting deficits and difficulties to enable the individual to live in normal
society” (Jaarsma & Welin, 2012). Instead they argue to view high functioning autism as
a minority culture that has a right to claim protections as others do. I find this an
interesting concept and can understand that desire because I also believe that much of
society needs to be more accepting of change and diversity. Autism is another diversity
that should be respected.