Looking for a doctoral program focused on ASD in adults

Post Reply New Topic

I've been all over the Internet looking. Does anyone know of a doctoral program focused on identifying and serving adults with ASD?

I would say try something dealing with cognitive neuroscience—though most of these programs emphasize research over clinical types of things.

Are you wanting to advocate for autistic adults, or help supports and treatments?

I don't know about programs specifically focused on a single condition like that. All the doctors in academia I've know who had an ASD focus had their doctorates in more generic areas, like psychology or medicine. While some did their dissertations on ASD topics, their official titles didn't mention ASD in any capacity.

Perhaps you could contact Tony Attwood's practice as he is pretty much in touch with international bodies and developments. He's in Australia but you could use Google to find contact details.

Also this centre produces interesting and AS-led work:
https://participatoryautismresearch.wor ... com/about/

I've had correspondence with the latter.

Doctoral programs are usually mostly self-guided research - the focus of the PHd is whatever the focus of your thesis is. If you wanted a PHd in assisting autistic adults, you'd get a PHd in something like behavioral sciences or similar, and do your thesis on treatment of autism in adults. If you're looking for something more guided and specific, look at bachelors and masters degrees in behavior and psychology. My local university has an autism research center as part of the behavioral sciences and organizational sciences degrees.

AS is more than a collection of behaviours.

Yes it is. But from the perspective of diagnosing and assisting autistic adults, being versed in behavioral sciences seems to be the most practical. After all, diagnosing autism is literally looking for specific behaviors associated with autism, and being able to determine of it is in fact autism, or something else generating the same or similar effect, such as ptsd or ocd, not comorbid with autism. Same goes for diagnosing many other neuro- and psychological conditions. "Do you exhibit these behaviors?" And helping people with those behaviors involves understanding behavior. Especially since autistics often have sensory, perceptive, or functional issues, congnitive and organizational behavioral assistance is of great utility.

There are more nuances to human being, sensation and experience than the positivist tools of experimental psychology can detect. I am so tired of the reductionism which already (and perhaps particularly) blights "autism research" and distorts so many "research finds!! !" claims.

I truly wish that a degree in the philosophy of science was a prerequisite to anyone wanting to be the next big finder in AS research.

Also correct. But I have neither suggested anything regarding "experimental psychology" nor any form of reduction or simplification of what is or isn't autism. Your irritation is understandable, but I feel it's also misplaced. I feel like you are referring to classical psychotherapy as relates to applied behavioral analysis, which is certainly not what I am referring to. Different discipline altogether. Quite the opposite, the behavioral sciences I'm referring to, rather than simplifying an individual, elaborates and explores the individuals personal and unique nuances. It doesn't seek to place people in boxes - it's goal is to individually identify strategies for an individual, based on that specific individual's needs and goals. Instead of simply saying "this is who you need to be", it focuses on who you actually are, and rather than change that, tries to embrace it in more functional ways. There's nothing reductionist about it, and takes quite the opposite approach to what you are referring to. I'm sorry you felt I was embracing a technique that you find so distasteful. I don't care for it either, that's why I'm trying to advance a different method.

I am slightly disappointed that I was not asked a single question or given a change to elaborate, before I was written off as a reductionist with no awareness of philosophy. It was an unexpected welcome. Lesson learned. Thank you for your feedback. I shall be more mindful of my behavior in the future.

The thread begins with an opening post from an OP who wants to do AS research. We get that all the time here; most come with an attitude " see, I'm doing AS people a big favour". Some don't seem to know that AS is a developmental difference. Others sent simplistic surveys incapable of capturing valid and reliable information.

Nearly all of them could benefit from an hour's mediation on the meaning of the saying "nothing about us without us" - and by that I mean in a consultative capacity, rather than assuming they are better placed to find out things about us than ourselves.

I have had a long life, and seen various incarnations of "research help" "research shows" claims about autism, most of them done by either medical personnel or experimental psychologists with no direct knowledge of the wider pictures and nuances of AS. They lack that knowledge - it often seems - because their lack of respect for AS people prevents them from considering us as informed about ourselves, as uniquely helpful sources in their theorising process. After years of seeing this on Wrong Planet, it does start to grate.

We have members who are highly academically qualified, (which comes as a surprise to some), and few of the "I want to do research on autism" seem to consider that academia is not closed to AS people. In fact it has been said that the best place to find us is in universities.

I don't know what your mindset or personal situation is, though I hope you will learn things here that you didn't know before.

That's great and all, and I can see how people doing that is frustrating, but, I definitely didn't see OP do that - all they said was "I've been all over the Internet looking. Does anyone know of a doctoral program focused on identifying and serving adults with ASD?" You say that "most come with an attitude " see, I'm doing AS people a big favour" - but I fail to see where OP said anything that could even be remotely construed as such, or any attitude at all, other than curiosity. You have a valid point when it comes to past research regarding AS, and how much of it has been conducted by non autistics, but I still fail to see who that applies to anything OP said. Are you assuming that OP is not autistic? How is that a fair assumption? Is it not just as fair to assume they are autistic? If they are autistic, does that mean your complaint is invalid, since it would in fact be an autistic person researching autism? Either way, you really should ask rather than assume. Your ire still seems misplaced on those grounds.

In other words, cool story, and I get you, but what's that got to do with me? I can see that you're comparing me to that, but I'm not sure on what grounds, and you've yet to explain beyond stating what someone else has done, while offering no examples as to how I've committed the same act. The weirdest part is, your complaint seems to be that autistics should be involved in autism research, but since I am autistic, my goal of entering the field is exactly what you claim should happen, yet you still paint me as part of the problem. That makes no sense.

The frustrating part is still being talked down to, for no reason other than you *think* I'm stupid. Since you're not keen on asking questions, allow me to ask one. Based on your vitriol, it occurs to me that you might mistakenly believe that I am an NT just here to butt into conversation and able-splain things to people. Is that the case? You *do* know I'm autistic, right?

I understand why you're annoyed, but I still don't get why you're annoyed at ME or OP specifically. I'm not one of those people, and I haven't done those things. Neither has OP from what I've seen. So... Yeah... Still doesn't make sense.

If you'd bothered to ask, you'd know that my personal situation is that I'm an academically qualified autistic attending university, and applying to a grad school that specializes in autism research, so that I can be one of those autistics actually directly involved in autism research. It's the main reason I felt qualified to answer the question. It wasn't a guess. It's from relevant real-world first-person autistic-perspective experience, of a process I am currently in the act of going through, as an autistic individual. Seemed reasonable to me - perhaps I was mistaken.

You might do well to learn more, or anything really, about someone, before you haul off to judge and lecture them. You might learn things you didn't know before. I'm damn proud of what I've done and where I'm going, so I'm really not keen on you persistence in talking down to me, while you yourself admit you don't know a thing about me.

Nope, didn't think you were stupid and didn't say you were. I hope your WP journey will be rewarding despite our different views.

Could have fooled me. Talking down to people and lecturing them about what *you* think *they* could learn sure feels like treating someone like they're stupid. If you didn't think I was stupid, then why did you spend so much effort reciting derisive commentary if you didn't think I was guilty of the actions you were ranting about? If you didn't think I was stupid, then what was the point of all of that? Sure, you didn't CALL me stupid, but you sure went out of your way to treat me like it. Your entire position started from a place of assuming the absolute worst, of both OP and myself, for no quantifiable or justifiable reason.

"Different views" hogwash. If you've read what I've written, you'd see that I agree with you regarding much of what you've been saying. MY issue is the fact that you're brandishing it at ME, as though I'M one of those people you've described. This has nothing to do with "different views", unless by different views you mean "I think you shouldn't make blind assumptions of people, but you think it's ok to make blind assumptions of people". If that's the case, then sure, we have "different views". But right now, this, to me, is more about how and why you've chosen to respond to this situation in this manner, regardless of your views or how they compare to mine. You didn't even know my views before you started trying to criticize what you assumed they were.

So what was the point of all that, if you didn't think I was stupid? Or, "hope I learn things", if you want to continue to split hairs. The tone of your messages made it clear that you felt you were laying out details that you were certain the other party (me) didn't know. I.E., an assumption of ignorance, that I didn't know better, or at all. You didn't have to explicitly use the word "stupid". The nature of the message made it abundantly clear. Stupid, ignorant, uninformed, didn't know - a distinction without a difference given the hostile and condescending tone of your messages. You certainly didn't seem willing to give me, or OP, any of doubt's benefit.

So I'll ask another question. If you didn't think I was stupid, what DID you think I was? You seemed quite confident that I had no idea what I was talking about, and could learn some things here that I didn't know. You didn't answer my question about whether you thought I was an NT, and it occurs to me that that's a likely possibility. I really get the impression that you thought I was just a random NT speaking from a position of ignorance, and without considering otherwise, you took that and ran with it, and it turned out to be wrong. I admit this is just a guess, but I feel it's a reasonable one.

Regardless, if someone talks to me the way you have, I tend to try to find out why. A little disrespect is fine, but I feel you've gone beyond the realm of good taste, for reasons which have yet to be made clear. Your points are valid, but why are you hurling them at ME? "Nope, didn't think you were stupid and didn't say you were" is a bit of a meaningless non-answer in the spirit of "ha, wrong, gotcha!", and in no way justifies your reaction to me or OP. "Other people did it, so I assumed this was more of the same" also isn't much of a reason, especially since nobody actually did those things in this thread, to my knowledge, so it's not like you were vindicated after the fact, either.

And all of that still has absolutely nothing to do with OP's question. The fact remains that, doctoral degrees are more you doing your own research, rather than information being taught to you by an instructor. If OP is looking for a program where they are formally taught rather than doing their own research independently, then they should go for a masters. They could go for a bachelors, too, but a masters is required to be a practitioner in the field, which is what it seems OP wants to do. Despite any issues with behavioral sciences and related fields, it's still one of the primary fields they expect one to major in, in order to enter the field of autism research and treatment.

I wish you well with your research plans.

Hopefully the outcome will achieve more than the last twenty years of research done at great cost with minimal benefit for AS children or adults.

Thank you. That's kinda the whole point. Change has to start somewhere.

Sure would be nice if you could answer some of my questions. Refusal to answer is in and of itself an answer, but I'm still going to ask, and give you the chance to speak for yourself, which is more respect than you've shown me throughout this entire conversation.

Are you going to keep beating the same dead horse? Yes, we've established that past practices have been less than ideal, if not outright harmful, not to mention short sighted due to their lack of autistic inclusion. I've agreed with you on that repeatedly, and cited it as among my reasons for involvement in this field. I've kinda lived through it. A long life, too. But I wasn't a part of those practices, and I'm not one of those evil clueless non-autistic researchers you keep referencing. Nobody can change the past, so nobody can retroactively address those problems, and that's a crime and a shame. But to continuously throw that in my face is uncalled for. Don't take it out on me.