How Long Does it Last? The Enduring Benefits of Neurodiversity Training and Diagnostic Disclosure on Hiring Outcomes for Adults with ASD.
Cynthia P May, Christopher E Whelpley, Levi Moyer and 1 others
PMID 39964656WHAT IT FOUND
Raters who watched neurodiversity training videos and knew a candidate’s diagnosis rated autistic candidates as equally likely to be hired as non-autistic candidates.
This held two weeks and two months after training, despite some social ratings remaining lower.
Key findings
01Candidates with ASD were rated as equally likely to be hired as non-autistic candidates at both the two-week and two-month delays.
02Despite equal hiring likelihood, ASD candidates were still rated less favorably on social dimensions like attractiveness and awkwardness compared to non-autistic candidates.
03Perceived qualifications were similarly predictive of hiring scores for both ASD and non-autistic candidates.
STILL TO COME
How it was doneWhat they foundWhat it means for OTs
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
There was no control group of raters who did not receive training, so it is impossible to know if the training caused the equal hiring outcomes or if other factors were at play. The study used mock interviews where candidates spoke for 5 minutes without interaction, which does not reflect the dynamic nature of real job interviews. The raters were not actual employers, and the candidates were students, limiting generalizability to real-world hiring scenarios. The two groups of raters (general population vs. students) had different delays and backgrounds, making it difficult to separate the effect of time from the effect of the rater type.
Declared interests
The study was funded by the College of Charleston. No other conflicts of interest were reported.
The easy way to misread this
Do not interpret this as proof that neurodiversity training causes equal hiring outcomes. The study lacked a control group of untrained raters, so the baseline hiring bias was not measured, and the observed equality could stem from other factors or the specific nature of the mock interview task.
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 →