False cordiality, often referred to as feigned politeness or “being fake” is the act of exhibiting a friendly, polite, or agreeable demeanor while concealing true feelings, intentions, or thoughts. It’s a social strategy that may be employed for various reasons, from navigating awkward social situations to achieving strategic advantage in professional contexts. Here’s a more in-depth look at its aspects:
Characteristics of False Cordiality:
Disguised Emotions: Individuals may hide feelings of dislike, disinterest, or even contempt behind a veil of friendliness.
Strategic Interaction: False cordiality can be used to manipulate a situation or conversation in a way that benefits the person exhibiting it, often at the expense of genuine interaction.
Lack of Authenticity: The hallmark of false cordiality is a lack of sincerity. The individual’s actions do not align with their true feelings.
Contexts and Consequences:
Social Navigation: In social gatherings, people may use false cordiality to avoid conflict or to politely engage with others whom they may not genuinely like or respect.
Professional Advancement: In the workplace, false cordiality might be used to curry favor, to network, or to maintain a façade of professionalism when dealing with rivals or disliked colleagues.
Personal Relationships: Feigned cordiality can occur in strained personal relationships, where parties might maintain appearances for the sake of family unity or social standing.
Impact on Relationships:
Erosion of Trust: Over time, false cordiality can lead to a breakdown of trust if the true feelings behind the façade are revealed.
Miscommunication: It can cause confusion and misunderstanding, as the receiver may take the feigned emotions at face value.
Emotional Drain: Both parties can experience stress due to the lack of genuine communication and the emotional labor involved in maintaining a false front.
Philosophical and Psychological Perspectives:
Ethical Considerations: From an ethical standpoint, false cordiality raises questions about honesty and the virtue of authenticity in interpersonal relations.
Cognitive Dissonance: Engaging in behavior that contradicts one’s true feelings may lead to cognitive dissonance, a psychological conflict that arises from holding conflicting beliefs and actions.
Coping with False Cordiality:
Awareness: Being cognizant of one’s own use of false cordiality and its potential impacts can help mitigate negative outcomes.
Authenticity: Striving for authenticity, when possible, promotes healthier and more meaningful connections.
Tactful Honesty: Finding a balance between honesty and tact can allow for genuine interaction without causing undue harm or offense.
False cordiality is a complex social behavior with nuanced ethical implications. While it can serve as a useful social lubricant in certain contexts, its overuse or detection can lead to negative personal and professional consequences. Understanding and navigating the delicate balance between societal expectations of politeness and individual authenticity is a challenging but important aspect of social relations.
The experience of “being perceived” and the resultant anxiety can significantly impact autistic individuals, shaping their interactions with the world in profound ways. This effect can be seen from childhood through adulthood, affecting everyday activities, school participation, and workplace dynamics. The anxiety associated with being the focus of attention—whether during birthday celebrations, classroom activities, or professional presentations—stems not merely from the act of being observed but from a complex interplay of neurodivergent characteristics and the challenges they bring.
Childhood Experiences
For autistic children, seemingly joyful activities like opening presents in front of others or blowing out birthday candles can become sources of anxiety. The awareness of being watched and the pressure to react in socially expected ways can be overwhelming. This anxiety doesn’t just dampen moments of celebration but extends to everyday school interactions, such as reluctance to participate in group activities or partner-based projects. The fear of judgment, coupled with the challenges of navigating social cues, can make these situations fraught with anxiety.
School and Work Environments
As autistic individuals progress into more structured school and work environments, the stakes of “being perceived” grow higher. Joining groups, participating in science projects, or presenting in front of a class or at work can trigger intense anxiety. This response is not solely due to the act of being observed but is compounded by specific challenges associated with autism, such as:
Language and Communication Deficits: Expressive and receptive language difficulties can complicate public speaking and real-time collaboration.
Central Auditory Processing Disorder: Issues with processing verbal information can lead to misunderstandings or delayed responses, increasing the fear of negative judgment.
Sensory Processing Sensitivities: Overwhelming sensory environments common in group settings can exacerbate stress and discomfort.
The Need for Understanding and Flexibility
The apprehension about “being perceived” is not a matter of whimsy or mere insecurity; it is deeply rooted in the neurological makeup of autistic individuals. Acknowledging this requires a shift in how schools and workplaces accommodate neurodivergent individuals. Rather than penalizing or forcing participation, these environments should offer understanding and flexibility, allowing autistic individuals to opt into activities when ready and providing alternative options that acknowledge their unique challenges.
Empathy and Awareness
Creating more empathetic and aware school and work environments entails recognizing the wide array of reasons behind an autistic individual’s reservations about certain activities. By not forcing participation and instead offering support and accommodations, we can foster a more inclusive atmosphere that respects neurodiversity. This approach not only alleviates anxiety but also empowers autistic individuals to engage with the world on their terms, ensuring that when they do choose to participate, it is from a place of readiness and confidence, not coercion.
In conclusion, understanding the profound impact of “being perceived” on autistic individuals underscores the need for greater empathy, awareness, and flexibility in our schools and workplaces. By adopting practices that accommodate the complex realities of neurodivergence, we can create environments where autistic individuals feel valued, understood, and, most importantly, safe to navigate the world at their own pace.
Unpacking How ‘Asperger’s’ Contributes to Division in the Autism Community
Is Asperger syndrome a severe form of autism spectrum disorder?
How does Asperger’s compare to autism intelligence?
What is life like for someone with Asperger’s?
Above are the typical questions Autistics and families of Autistics get asked often. Words matter. They can be inclusive or divisive. Because we can never know how an individual feels about a word or events surrounding a word, its always best to ask or use formal terminology. If you can’t remember either choice, silence is always an option.
The use of the term “Asperger’s” within the autistic community and broader discussions about autism spectrum disorder (ASD) has become a topic of debate and sensitivity for several reasons, leading some to avoid its use in favour of more inclusive or neutral terminology. Here are the key reasons why the term “Asperger’s” can perpetuate negative bias and why it may be viewed unfavourably by some within the autistic community:
Association with Hans Asperger: The term “Asperger’s syndrome” originates from Hans Asperger, an Austrian pediatrician who, during World War II, identified a group of children with distinct psychological characteristics. Recent historical research has revealed that Asperger cooperated with the Nazi regime’s eugenics policies, including the forced sterilization and euthanasia of disabled individuals. This association with Nazi eugenics has led to a reevaluation of his legacy and a push to distance the autistic community from his name.
Pathologizing Language: The term “Asperger’s syndrome” is sometimes criticized for pathologizing individuals, implying a disease or disorder that needs to be cured or fixed. Many within the autistic community prefer identity-first language (e.g., “autistic person” rather than “person with autism”) and view autism as a difference rather than a disorder. The specific label of “Asperger’s” can be seen as reinforcing a medical model of disability rather than a social model that focuses on societal barriers and acceptance.
False Perception of Homogeneity: Using specific labels like “Asperger’s” can contribute to stereotypes about what autism looks like, potentially overshadowing the diversity within the autistic community. It may reinforce a narrow view of autism as being associated only with those who are verbal or have certain intellectual or academic abilities, ignoring the wide range of experiences and needs within the community.
Hierarchy within the Autism Spectrum: The term “Asperger’s” has been used in the past to denote a “milder” form of autism, sometimes leading to a perceived hierarchy within the autism spectrum. This can invalidate the experiences and challenges faced by those who don’t fit this narrow definition, and it can perpetuate the idea that some autistic experiences are more “acceptable” or “normal” than others.
Diagnostic Criteria Changes: The diagnostic criteria for autism spectrum disorders have evolved. The DSM-5 (Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition), published by the American Psychiatric Association in 2013, removed Asperger’s syndrome as a separate diagnosis and merged it into the broader category of autism spectrum disorder (ASD). This change reflects a move towards understanding autism as a spectrum with varying degrees of support needs rather than as distinct subtypes. This shift in diagnostic criteria has also influenced the language professionals and advocates use.
Self-Identification and Community Preferences: Some individuals diagnosed with Asperger’s syndrome before the diagnostic criteria change may still identify with the term, and it’s important to respect personal identification choices. However, the broader movement towards more inclusive and less stigmatizing language reflects a community preference towards unity and recognition of diversity within the spectrum.
In conclusion, the debate surrounding the use of the term “Asperger’s” within the autistic community and discussions about autism spectrum disorder underscores the importance of language and its impact on inclusion and perception. The term’s association with Hans Asperger, pathologizing language, false perception of homogeneity, perceived hierarchy within the autism spectrum, changes in diagnostic criteria, and community preferences all contribute to the complexity of this issue.
Moving forward, it’s crucial to prioritize respectful and inclusive language that reflects the diversity and lived experiences of individuals on the autism spectrum. This includes using identity-first language when appropriate and recognizing that autism is a spectrum with a wide range of strengths, challenges, and support needs. By fostering a sense of unity and understanding within the community, we can work towards creating a more accepting and supportive environment for all individuals on the autism spectrum.
Memory Mismatch: Navigating Cognitive Dissonance in Autistic-Non-Autistic Dialogues
“ It’s important for non-autistic individuals to acknowledge the strong memory retention in autistic people and consider it in their interactions, while autistic individuals might benefit from understanding that non-autistic people’s memories can change over time due to their psychological mechanisms.“
Cognitive Dissonance 101
How was Cognitive Dissonance Discovered?
Leon Festinger was a pioneering psychologist whose cognitive dissonance theory has profoundly impacted social psychology. Introduced in 1957, his theory was a groundbreaking discovery that addressed the psychological tension that arises from holding conflicting beliefs and values or engaging in behaviour that contradicts one’s self-concept. Festinger posited that individuals have an inherent desire for internal consistency. When confronted with inconsistencies among beliefs or behaviours, they experience psychological discomfort, known as cognitive dissonance. To alleviate this discomfort, people are motivated to reduce the dissonance by changing their beliefs, justifying their behaviour, or adopting new attitudes. This theory broadened our understanding of human psychology and provided insight into the mechanisms behind decision-making and attitude change. Festinger’s work has had a lasting influence, shaping subsequent research and applications in various domains, including decision-making, education, and behavioural change interventions.
How does cognitive dissonance happen in the brain?
The brain’s handling of cognitive dissonance is complex and involves several areas and processes:
Discomfort and Arousal: When cognitive dissonance occurs, it is often accompanied by psychological discomfort. This discomfort is believed to stem from the anterior cingulate cortex, a brain region involved in error detection, expectation of rewards, and emotional regulation.
Resolution and Rationalization: To reduce this discomfort, individuals engage in cognitive processes that try to reduce the inconsistency. This can involve rationalizing, denying, or even ignoring the conflicting information. The prefrontal cortex, involved in complex behaviours, including planning and personality development, plays a vital role in this rationalization process.
Change in Attitudes or Beliefs: Sometimes, to alleviate dissonance, people might change their attitudes, beliefs, or actions. This change process involves neural pathways associated with decision-making and reward, such as the orbitofrontal cortex.
Memory and Selective Recall: The brain may also engage in selective recall, emphasizing memories or information that align with the current belief and ignoring those that don’t. This is linked to the functioning of the hippocampus, the brain region involved in memory.
Emotional Regulation: The amygdala, which plays a crucial role in emotion and motivation, can also be involved, particularly when cognitive dissonance has a vital emotional component.
Examples of Cognitive Dissonance
Health-Related Behaviors: A smoker who knows that smoking is bad for health but continues to smoke may experience cognitive dissonance. They might rationalize their behaviour by thinking they can offset the effects with other healthy behaviours to reduce this discomfort.
Environmental Concerns vs. Lifestyle: An environmentally conscious individual driving a gas-guzzling car might experience dissonance. They might resolve this by minimizing the perceived impact of their car or overemphasizing their other environmentally friendly actions.
Political Beliefs and Voting: A voter might experience cognitive dissonance if they support a political ideology but agree with a policy from an opposing viewpoint. They might avoid information about the opposing view to reduce dissonance or rationalize their support as a one-time exception.
Workplace Ethics: Employees who value honesty but work for a company that engages in unethical practices may experience cognitive dissonance. They might reduce this discomfort by justifying the practices necessary for business success or distancing themselves emotionally from their work.
Social Relationships and Group Behavior: People often experience cognitive dissonance in social settings. For instance, if someone values inclusivity but finds themselves in a group that excludes others, they might experience dissonance. They may resolve this by changing their view of the group or by denying the exclusionary behaviour.
Understanding Memory Differences in Autistic and Non-Autistic Communication
Cognitive dissonance can significantly impact communication between autistic and non-autistic individuals, often due to differing memory perceptions and social cognitive mechanisms. Autistic individuals typically possess strong memory skills in specific areas, including the ability to recall details of events accurately and consistently over time. This contrasts with non-autistic individuals, who might experience memory shifts due to cognitive dissonance. In social situations, non-autistic people often unconsciously alter their memories to reduce discomfort caused by inconsistencies between their actions and beliefs. For example, they might remember a conflict with less severity or reshape the details to better align with their self-image or societal expectations.
This discrepancy can lead to misunderstandings in communication. An autistic person may insist on the accuracy of their detailed memory, while a non-autistic person may not recall the event with the same clarity or may have revised their memory, whether consciously or subconsciously, to cope with cognitive dissonance. Such situations can lead to feelings of being gaslighted for the autistic individual, as the non-autistic person’s account of past events might contradict the autistic person’s precise memories, making them question their reality.
Both autistic and non-autistic individuals need to be aware of these differences in processing and memory recall. Recognizing that cognitive dissonance can affect how memories are recalled and discussed can help in fostering better understanding and communication. It’s important for non-autistic individuals to acknowledge the strong memory retention in autistic people and consider it in their interactions, while autistic individuals might benefit from understanding that non-autistic people’s memories can change over time due to their psychological mechanisms. Such awareness can reduce potential conflicts and aid in building more effective and respectful communication.
Gaslighting
Gaslighting is a form of psychological manipulation where one person leads another to question their own reality, memory, or perceptions. This can be particularly impactful in interactions between autistic and non-autistic individuals due to their differing experiences and ways of processing information.
1. Differences in Memory and Perception:
Autistic individuals often have detailed, precise memories, especially for events or conversations that are significant to them. Non-autistic individuals, on the other hand, might not recall events with the same level of detail and may unconsciously alter their memories due to cognitive dissonance, a natural tendency to reshape memories to reduce psychological discomfort. When these differing recollections of events are discussed, a non-autistic person might, unintentionally or intentionally, suggest that the autistic person’s detailed and specific recollection is wrong. This can lead the autistic individual to doubt their memory, especially if they are not aware of the concept of gaslighting.
2. Social Understanding and Theory of Mind:
Autistic individuals may have challenges with “theory of mind” — the ability to recognize and understand the thoughts, beliefs, desires, and intentions of others. This can make it difficult for them to discern whether someone is being manipulative or genuinely misremembers an event. Without this awareness, autistic individuals may be more susceptible to gaslighting because they might accept the other person’s account as a plausible alternative to their own memories.
3. Communication Styles:
Autistic individuals often prefer and rely on straightforward and literal communication. If a non-autistic person uses more nuanced or emotionally manipulative communication techniques, the autistic individual might not recognize the underlying intentions. This can lead to misinterpretations and further exacerbate feelings of confusion and self-doubt.
4. Implications of Repeated Gaslighting:
Repeated experiences of gaslighting can lead to significant emotional distress for autistic individuals. It can erode their confidence in their memory and perception, contributing to increased anxiety, depression, and isolation. It’s crucial for both autistic and non-autistic individuals to be aware of these dynamics to avoid harmful interactions and foster more respectful and understanding relationships.
Prevention and Awareness:
Education and awareness about the different ways autistic and non-autistic people perceive and remember events are crucial. Both parties should strive for clear, respectful communication and seek to understand the other’s perspective without overriding it. Autistic individuals can be taught about gaslighting and how to recognize it, which can empower them to assert their perceptions and seek clarification when discrepancies in communication occur. Meanwhile, non-autistic individuals should be mindful of the potential impact of their words and remember that their recollection of events may not always align with others’ experiences due to natural cognitive biases.
Overcoming Negative Bias: The Historical Context and Persistent Challenges of Autism
Negative biases towards autism profoundly affect autistic individuals’ lives, influencing how they are perceived by others and how they view themselves. This blog post explores the historical roots of these biases, their effects on autistic individuals in various aspects of life, and the ongoing efforts needed to combat these prejudices.
Historical Examples of Negative Bias and Its Consequences
Early Misunderstandings and Treatments:
19th Century Europe: Autism, not yet named, was often confused with schizophrenia or psychosis. Autistic behaviors were misunderstood as signs of madness, leading to inhumane treatments like confinement in asylums where individuals received minimal care and faced abuse.
Leo Kanner (1940s): Kanner first described “early infantile autism” and posited it resulted from cold and unaffectionate parenting. This “refrigerator mother” theory propagated a blame culture, stigmatizing families and isolating autistic individuals further.
The Rise and Fall of the Psychoanalytic Approach:
Mid-20th Century: Psychoanalysis dominated autism therapy, focusing on altering the supposed “emotional disturbances.” Treatments often ignored the actual needs and potentials of autistic individuals, emphasizing conformity over understanding.
Institutionalization and Its Legacies:
1960s-1970s USA: Many autistic individuals were institutionalized, often living in poor conditions with inadequate care. The belief that they could not learn or live independently led to lifelong institutionalization for many, stripping them of personal agency and growth opportunities.
Impact of Negative Bias on Perception by Others
Misunderstanding of Behavior: For example, Henry Cavendish, an 18th-century scientist suspected to have been autistic, was often described as reclusive and antisocial. His need for solitude was misunderstood, overshadowing his contributions to science.
Underestimation of Abilities: Historical figures like Nikola Tesla, who exhibited behaviors now commonly associated with autism, faced ridicule and isolation due to their unconventional thinking and habits.
Social Exclusion and Discrimination: Throughout history, from Renaissance geniuses to modern-day innovators, many potentially autistic individuals were marginalized, their talents overshadowed by their social peculiarities.
Impact on Self-Perception
Internalization of Negative Views: Famous autistic individuals like Temple Grandin initially struggled with self-esteem due to the negative feedback about their behaviors, which were often deemed inappropriate or strange.
Mental Health Challenges: The isolation and stigma can lead to severe mental health issues, as seen in the historical accounts of autistic scholars and artists who lived solitary, troubled lives.
Effects in Various Life Aspects
Home: Family dynamics often suffered under the weight of misunderstanding and stigma, as seen in the strained family relationships of historical autistic figures who were often viewed as burdens.
School: Educational settings have historically failed many autistic individuals by not accommodating diverse learning needs or addressing bullying, leading to a lack of academic and social development.
Work: The labor market has often been unwelcoming to autistic individuals, misunderstanding their unique needs and capabilities, which leads to underemployment and unemployment, as evidenced by the professional struggles of many intellectually capable autistic adults throughout history.
Combating Negative Bias
Promotion of Autism Awareness: Educational programs from the 1980s have gradually helped shift perceptions, emphasizing the abilities and potential of autistic individuals rather than just their challenges.
Advocacy and Inclusion Efforts: Advocacy groups, often led by autistic individuals, have worked tirelessly to change laws and policies to support better integration and accommodation in all spheres of life.
Cultural Shift: The portrayal of autistic individuals in media and literature has slowly begun to reflect more diversity and depth, showcasing autistic individuals as complex and capable rather than simply as caricatures.
Conclusion
The history of autism is marked by misunderstanding and marginalization, but it is also a story of gradual progress and empowerment. By learning from the past and continuing to advocate for inclusive and supportive environments, society can ensure that autistic individuals are recognised and fully appreciated for their unique contributions to our world. Moving forward, it is crucial that we all—educators, employers, policymakers, and community members—work together to dismantle the lingering stigmas associated with autism.
