Camouflaging and autism: Conceptualisation and methodological issues.
Wayne M Arnold, Vicki Bitsika, Christopher F Sharpley
PMID 41721649WHAT IT FOUND
Camouflaging research is inconsistent in definitions and measurements.
The main tool, the CAT-Q, may not distinguish camouflaging from social anxiety or self-presentation. Clinicians should not use it for screening and should consider these other explanations for patient behaviours.
Key findings
01There is considerable inconsistency in how camouflaging is defined and measured across studies.
02The Camouflaging Autistic Traits Questionnaire (CAT-Q) may not be specific to autism, as it correlates strongly with social anxiety and self-presentation.
03Clinicians are cautioned against using the CAT-Q as a screening tool because its clinical validity is not established.
STILL TO COME
How it was doneWhat they foundWhat it means for SLPs
Read the rest of this summary
You get three full summaries a month, free, and we do not ask for a card. Search, the TL;DRs and your library stay unlimited either way.
What it does not show
The review used an unsystematic search strategy (backwards citation) due to inconsistent terminology. Included studies were not assessed for quality. The first author is autistic and camouflages, which may influence interpretation. The review relies on narrative synthesis rather than meta-analysis.
Declared interests
The authors declared no financial support and no potential conflicts of interest.
The easy way to misread this
Do not interpret high CAT-Q scores as proof of autism-specific camouflaging. The scale correlates strongly with social anxiety and self-presentation, so these scores may reflect general social distress or coping strategies rather than the concealment of autistic traits.
Summarised by AI from the full paper, without a clinician reviewing it. Check it against the source before it changes what you do. Read it on PubMed →