Losing nuance in camouflaging research: the unintended harms for research, clinical practice, and public discourse
Abstract
Camouflaging refers to the conscious or subconscious suppression of autistic (or neurodivergent) behaviours, and/or the use of compensatory strategies, to navigate social interactions with the aim of being perceived as neurotypical and to keep safe. The field is currently at an important turning point: camouflaging is now firmly established within autism research, but its rapid movement into public discourse and clinical practice has outpaced conceptual and measurement precision. In this Personal View, we identify two related challenges. First, existing conceptualisations often capture only one slice of the relationship between camouflaging and other outcomes (e.g. mental health), treating camouflaging as unidimensional and its associations with outcomes as linear, potentially obscuring more complex and heterogeneous relationships. Current frameworks similarly tend to quantify camouflaging behaviours without in-depth functional analysis to capture differences in agency, context, and cognitive mechanisms that may give rise to different behaviours and outcomes. We propose a multidimensional framework to capture these distinct but interacting processes and support more precise mechanistic research. Second, simplified clinical and public narratives increasingly frame camouflaging as uniformly harmful and “unmasking” as inherently desirable. We argue instead for a nuanced, neurodiversity-affirming approach centred on safety and personal autonomy. Applying the multidimensional framework clinically may help practitioners understand when, why, and how camouflaging is helpful or harmful for a particular person in a particular context.
Related
- Characterising patients in England with Down syndrome and Alzheimer's disease: a descriptive observational study using data from Clinical Practice Research Datalink linked to Hospital Episode Statistics.
- Nicotine replacement therapy sampling for cigarette cessation in dental care: A National Dental Practice-Based Research Network cluster randomized clinical trial
- Reporting of research priorities in migraine clinical practice guidelines still need improvement—A methodological analysis
- Addressing heterogeneity in trauma responses in research and clinical practice: reflections and recommendations from early career researchers.
- A Critical Review of Caregiver Report Measures of Autistic Traits in Children (4 to 12 years): Considerations for Research and Clinical Practice
BibTeX
@misc{mckinney2026losing,
title = {{Losing nuance in camouflaging research: the unintended harms for research, clinical practice, and public discourse}},
author = {Ailbhe McKinney and Connor Tom Keating and Holly Elizabeth Anne Sutherland and Rae Field and Jiedi Lei},
howpublished = {PsyArXiv},
year = {2026},
month = sep,
doi = {10.31234/osf.io/yf84d_v1},
url = {https://osf.io/preprints/psyarxiv/yf84d_v1/},
note = {CC BY 4.0},
}
RIS
TY - UNPB
TI - Losing nuance in camouflaging research: the unintended harms for research, clinical practice, and public discourse
AU - Ailbhe McKinney
AU - Connor Tom Keating
AU - Holly Elizabeth Anne Sutherland
AU - Rae Field
AU - Jiedi Lei
PY - 2026
DA - 2026/09/19
PB - PsyArXiv
DO - 10.31234/osf.io/yf84d_v1
UR - https://osf.io/preprints/psyarxiv/yf84d_v1/
AB - Camouflaging refers to the conscious or subconscious suppression of autistic (or neurodivergent) behaviours, and/or the use of compensatory strategies, to navigate social interactions with the aim of being perceived as neurotypical and to keep safe. The field is currently at an important turning point: camouflaging is now firmly established within autism research, but its rapid movement into public discourse and clinical practice has outpaced conceptual and measurement precision. In this Personal View, we identify two related challenges. First, existing conceptualisations often capture only one slice of the relationship between camouflaging and other outcomes (e.g. mental health), treating camouflaging as unidimensional and its associations with outcomes as linear, potentially obscuring more complex and heterogeneous relationships. Current frameworks similarly tend to quantify camouflaging behaviours without in-depth functional analysis to capture differences in agency, context, and cognitive mechanisms that may give rise to different behaviours and outcomes. We propose a multidimensional framework to capture these distinct but interacting processes and support more precise mechanistic research. Second, simplified clinical and public narratives increasingly frame camouflaging as uniformly harmful and “unmasking” as inherently desirable. We argue instead for a nuanced, neurodiversity-affirming approach centred on safety and personal autonomy. Applying the multidimensional framework clinically may help practitioners understand when, why, and how camouflaging is helpful or harmful for a particular person in a particular context.
ER -