ReviewFrontiers in psychology2026
Stigmatization of neurodivergence in the workplace.
Review in Frontiers in psychology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Neurodistinct (e.g., autistic, dyslexic, ADHD) people, who comprise 17-20% of the population, continue to be stigmatized in the workplace. Several bodies of literature address the stigmatization of neurodivergence, but a comprehensive model of how it arises in organizations does not exist, particularly as it relates to socio-contextual and perceiver-based factors. Some existing empirical accounts in which neurodistinct stigmatization is evident currently do not align with theoretical explanations, drawing attention to the need for more comprehensive conceptualization. Without such a model, theorizing about disclosure decisions and identity management, and organizational practice and policy adjustments to support neurodiversity, are incomplete. In this paper, I address this issue through a conceptual integration; I build on a stigma theory informed interaction model to trace pathways of potential neurodistinct stigmatization with a particular focus on characteristics of the social setting and the perceiver. I identify three bases of neurodistinct stigmatization-label, invalidation, and deviance-which each imply different perceiver experiences and interactional outcomes. I further discuss how the model contributes to understandings of identity management and organizational action to support workplace neurodiversity.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.