Bottema-Beutel2017

From emcawiki
Revision as of 12:58, 25 June 2017 by SaulAlbert (talk | contribs) (Created page with "{{BibEntry |BibType=ARTICLE |Author(s)=Kristen Bottema-Beutel |Title=Glimpses into the blind spot: Social interaction and autism |Tag(s)=EMCA; Autism; Medical EMCA; Cognition;...")
(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Jump to: navigation, search
Bottema-Beutel2017
BibType ARTICLE
Key Bottema-Beutel2017
Author(s) Kristen Bottema-Beutel
Title Glimpses into the blind spot: Social interaction and autism
Editor(s)
Tag(s) EMCA, Autism, Medical EMCA, Cognition, Autism spectrum disorder, Social interaction, Conversation analysis, Discourse analysis, Enactivism
Publisher
Year 2017
Language
City
Month July-August
Journal Journal of Communication Disorders
Volume 68
Number
Pages 24–34
URL
DOI
ISBN
Organization
Institution
School
Type
Edition
Series
Howpublished
Book title
Chapter

Download BibTex

Abstract

Highlights

- Social-cognitive accounts of ASD have limited utility for understanding interaction. - Enactive accounts may be a useful alternative. - Discourse and conversation analytic research is consistent with enactivism. - This review draws upon this literature to describe social interaction in ASD.

A primary feature of autism spectrum disorder (ASD) is marked difficulty in social interactions. Despite the centrality of social interaction differences to the clinical presentation of ASD, only a small portion of research in this field characterizes interaction in everyday social contexts. This theoretical paper reviews the growing corpus of interactional research on ASD, including discourse analysis (DA) and conversation analysis (CA) approaches. DA and CA are micro-analytic methods aimed at understanding the organizational structure of, and actions pursued within, social encounters. These methods are aligned with enactive theories of social interaction. The bulk of current ASD research construes social interaction as involving isolated individuals who represent and/or theorize about the minds of an interlocutor. Enactive approaches posit that achieving intersubjectivity does not require theories of other minds, but instead a propensity for coordinating social actions with others. Through the complementary lenses of enactivism and interactional research, I offer an account of autistic social interaction as involving differences in interactional coordination, interactional priorities, and the enactment of meaning across conversational turns. This characterization challenges the explanatory role of cognitive processes such as Theory of Mind, and points to new avenues for conceptualizing, measuring, and supporting social interaction.

Notes