Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37663447›Full record

ArticleAutism in adulthood2023

"Simultaneously Vague and Oddly Specific": Understanding Autistic People's Experiences of Decision Making and Research Questionnaires.

Rachael Stacey, Eilidh Cage

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Autism in adulthood, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

11 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Quality employee-manager relationships are key to career success.Autism : the international journal of research and practice · 2026
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Evaluating measures to assess loneliness in autistic adults.Autism : the international journal of research and practice · 2024
    Article
  11. 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

2 authors.

Rachael StaceyDepartment of Psychology, University of Stirling, Stirling, Scotland.
Eilidh CageDepartment of Psychology, University of Stirling, Stirling, Scotland.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6281-1632

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Autism researchers often use questionnaires to gather the views and experiences of autistic people. However, questionnaires may not always be designed in accessible ways. In addition, answering questions within a questionnaire involves decision making, which some autistic people have reported finding difficult. Therefore, this exploratory study aimed to enhance our understanding of autistic people's experiences of decision making, and to analyze their feedback on questionnaire measures to further understand decision making within the research context. Methods: One hundred seventeen participants completed an online questionnaire. In the questionnaire, they answered an open question about what affected their ability to make decisions. They then completed four questionnaire measures and after each one provided feedback. We used content analysis to categorize participants' qualitative answers. Results: Participants discussed how their internal state, other people, the quality and quantity of information, pressure on choosing a response, external distractions, and lack of time all affected their decision making. Feedback on the questionnaires highlighted how questions needed context, often questions themselves were unclear and difficult to understand, that there were issues with Likert scales, and how measures could have questionable validity for autistic people. Conclusions: Autism researchers need to consider how they can make their research as accessible as possible for autistic people. Our study highlights how decision making is not a straight-forward process, and researchers have a role in ensuring they give their participants clear and contextualized information. Involving autistic people in the design of research is a potential way of improving the quality of research.

Indexed as

anxietyautismcontextdecision-makingLikert scalesquestionnaire measuresvalidity

Identifiers

PMID37663447
PMCPMC10468547

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.