“The significance of context”: Fit, friction, and function in the work lives of early career academics with ADHD
7 affiliations
- 1School of Education, Language and Psychology, York St John University, York, United Kingdom.
- 2Section of Pediatric Population Science, Outcomes, and Disparities Research, Division of Pediatric Hematology/Oncology, Rutgers Cancer Institute, New Brunswick, New Jersey, United States of America.
- 3Psychosis Studies Department, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology & Neuroscience (IoPPN), King's College London, London, United Kingdom.
- 4Department of Psychology, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, United Kingdom.
- 5Department of Psychology and Vision Sciences, University of Leicester, Leicester, United Kingdom.
- 6Centre for Interaction, Development, and Diversity, School of Psychology, Sport and Health Sciences, University of Portsmouth, Portsmouth, United Kingdom.
- 7Cognition, Values & Behaviour Lab, Munich Interactive Intelligence Initiative, LMU Munich, Munich, Germany.
Abstract
Attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) is associated with various traits that influence individuals’ experiences at work. While some may be experienced as challenging (e.g., when differences in executive function impact time management), others can be more positive (e.g., when curiosity motivates exploration and discovery). Plausibly, academia is a work environment where these positive aspects should be valued. However, ADHD is still often viewed from a medicalised perspective in workplace settings, despite the neurodiversity paradigm offering an alternative, non-pathologising way to frame these individual differences. Research has begun to explore employment experiences and outcomes for adults with ADHD; however, there is currently little data relevant to academic workplaces specifically. This qualitative study offers a critical realist analysis of interviews with early-career academics, seeking to understand first-person ADHD perspectives on establishing an academic career. Consistent with the neurodiversity paradigm, the analysis foregrounds (mis-)matches between individual ‘neurotypes’ and workplace environments. It also highlights an ecological view by exploring how ADHD matters both for individual careers and for collective knowledge production. Findings suggest that academia can, in principle, be a rewarding environment for ADHDers, though social and institutional pressures often inhibit this potential. Furthermore, having an ‘ADHD neurotype’ influences both individual career trajectories and wellbeing at work; at the same time, knowledge production at the collective level may benefit from the inclusion of ADHD academics. The findings are discussed in reference to ecological models of neurodiversity and their implications for universities aiming to facilitate neurodivergent contributions and inclusion at work.
Related
- Digital Twins in Mental Health Care: A Qualitative Study on Subjective Relevance, Acceptability and Implementation Considerations Co-Designed, Co-Produced and Co-Written with Experts by Experience and Academics
- Ten simple rules for designing your career pivot
- mSphere Legacy: A career built on suppressors
- The Hidden Friction of Action: A Framework for Autistic Inertia
- Analysis of friction mechanisms during cricket stridulation
BibTeX
@article{hamilton2026significance,
title = {{“The significance of context”: Fit, friction, and function in the work lives of early career academics with ADHD}},
author = {Lorna G Hamilton and Anusha V Ramji and Mahmoud Elsherif and Steven K Kapp and Justin Sulik},
journal = {PLOS One},
year = {2026},
month = oct,
doi = {10.1371/journal.pone.0361208},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0361208},
note = {CC BY},
}
RIS
TY - JOUR
TI - “The significance of context”: Fit, friction, and function in the work lives of early career academics with ADHD
AU - Lorna G Hamilton
AU - Anusha V Ramji
AU - Mahmoud Elsherif
AU - Steven K Kapp
AU - Justin Sulik
PY - 2026
DA - 2026/10/29
JO - PLOS One
DO - 10.1371/journal.pone.0361208
UR - https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0361208
AB - Attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) is associated with various traits that influence individuals’ experiences at work. While some may be experienced as challenging (e.g., when differences in executive function impact time management), others can be more positive (e.g., when curiosity motivates exploration and discovery). Plausibly, academia is a work environment where these positive aspects should be valued. However, ADHD is still often viewed from a medicalised perspective in workplace settings, despite the neurodiversity paradigm offering an alternative, non-pathologising way to frame these individual differences. Research has begun to explore employment experiences and outcomes for adults with ADHD; however, there is currently little data relevant to academic workplaces specifically. This qualitative study offers a critical realist analysis of interviews with early-career academics, seeking to understand first-person ADHD perspectives on establishing an academic career. Consistent with the neurodiversity paradigm, the analysis foregrounds (mis-)matches between individual ‘neurotypes’ and workplace environments. It also highlights an ecological view by exploring how ADHD matters both for individual careers and for collective knowledge production. Findings suggest that academia can, in principle, be a rewarding environment for ADHDers, though social and institutional pressures often inhibit this potential. Furthermore, having an ‘ADHD neurotype’ influences both individual career trajectories and wellbeing at work; at the same time, knowledge production at the collective level may benefit from the inclusion of ADHD academics. The findings are discussed in reference to ecological models of neurodiversity and their implications for universities aiming to facilitate neurodivergent contributions and inclusion at work.
SN - 1932-6203
ER -