Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34385964›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in psychology2021

Overcoming the Double Empathy Problem Within Pairs of Autistic and Non-autistic Adults Through the Contemplation of Serious Literature.

Melissa Chapple, Philip Davis, Josie Billington, Joe Anthony Myrick, Cassie Ruddock, Rhiannon Corcoran

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in psychology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
2.5field-weighted citation impact, top 11% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

9 citing papers in PubMed, 34 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. The design of the "autistics in (educational) space: building our own futures" doctoral project.Autism : the international journal of research and practice · 2025
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Moving Through a Textual Space Autistically.The Journal of medical humanities · 2024
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Melissa ChappleDepartment of Primary Care and Mental Health, School of Psychology, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, United Kingdom.
Philip DavisCentre for Research Into Reading, Literature and Society, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, United Kingdom.
Josie BillingtonCentre for Research Into Reading, Literature and Society, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, United Kingdom.
Joe Anthony MyrickIndependent Researcher, Hamtramck, MI, United States.
Cassie RuddockIndependent Researcher, Gloucester, United Kingdom.
Rhiannon CorcoranDepartment of Primary Care and Mental Health, School of Psychology, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, United Kingdom.
University of Liverpool · GBWildfowl & Wetlands Trust · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Recent research based on the needs of the autistic community has explored the frequent social misunderstandings that arise between autistic and non-autistic people, known as the double empathy problem. Double empathy understandings require both groups to respect neurodiversity by focussing on individuality across groups. This study aimed to explore how literature, through its ability to uncover nuanced emotional response differences between readers, could facilitate double empathy understandings within pairs of autistic and non-autistic adults. A longitudinal, qualitative design was used, with 4 gender-matched pairs. Participants read

Indexed as

autismautistic communitydouble empathyemotional intelligenceliterary fictionneurodiversity

Identifiers

PMID34385964
PMCPMC8354525
OpenAlexW3183181654

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.