The Social Function of Camouflaging and its Impact on the Mental Health of Autistic Individuals
Disclaimers:
Land Acknowledgment: We live and work on the unseated territories of the Wahpekute and Chumash peoples, we pay respects to their elders past and present. We encourage folks to explore the ancestral lands they live and work on, and to learn about the Native communities that live there, the treaties that have been broken. If folks feel called, we encourage them to consider taking actions to support Native communities, reparations, and land back movements (see other resources at the end for more info).
A note on language: The language in the DSM, including the use of the word disorder (D in acronym), some find this harmful, while others prefer the language “disorder.” When this language is used, it is because, as mental health professionals, we need to use this same language when referring to “diagnoses” in the DSM. In addition some Autistics find the use of the level system helpful in identifying the level of support needed, while others view it as an overly simplistic way of defining something that’s fluid, and may feel it’s harmful and minimizing. The beauty is that each individual gets to choose what language feels validating and affirming to them. Inspired by Dr. Jennifer Mullan, we use the term, “therapy participant” rather than “client” or “patient,” as we work toward decolonizing therapy.
Educational Purposes: The information presented here is for educational purposes, and not meant to diagnose, treat or cure medical conditions or challenges, including neurodivergence (including mental health challenges), or physical health.
Welcome back friends! Today we’re going to be revisiting the topic of camouflaging, looking specifically at two interesting recent studies. The first study conducted by Funawatari et al. (2024) examines the social function of camouflaging among Autistic individuals, looking at whether Autistic folks engage in camouflaging more towards neurotypical individuals than towards neurodivergent individuals. The second study by Khudiakova et al. (2024) similarly addresses camouflaging: this time by comparing the compensatory strategy with that of impression management, and in determining the impact of camouflaging on Autistic individuals’ mental health.
Below, you’ll find each study summarized separately, highlighting their aims, current research on the topic, and their findings. Feel free to skip to the final paragraph to read an overall synopsis of the study’s findings and their key takeaways.
Study 1: Funawatari et al. (2024)
Funawatari et al. (2024) conducted a study to better understand the social function of camouflaging among Autistic individuals. The study aimed to investigate whether Autistic individuals engage in camouflaging more toward neurotypical peers than Autistic peers, in an effort to “fit in” socially.
Camouflaging has been thought of as a compensatory strategy employed by Autistic individuals to display “neurotypical” behaviors in social settings, to hide certain Autistic characteristics (such as stimming) in an effort to “fit or blend in” with their neurotypical counterparts. Social camouflaging is an adaptive strategy that can improve the quality of life for some Autistic folks, though there are both positive and negative impacts associated with its use. For instance, some Autistic individuals find camouflaging to be a useful strategy that helps them feel more integrated into society, while others find camouflaging to be burdensome, making it harder for them to integrate into social settings. To this end, Funawatari et al. (2024) note that camouflaging can lead to clinical symptoms such as anxiety, depression, and self-blame.
In weighing the pros and cons of this strategy employed by Autistic individuals, Funawatari et al. (2024) emphasizes the importance in understanding the function of camouflaging in social interactions/settings. Funawatari et al. (2024) cites one implicit assumption— that camouflaging is directed from Autistic individuals toward neurotypical others. To support this assumption, Funawatari et al. (2024) discuss two main factors.
First, camouflaging is assumed to serve as a bridge in communication between Autistic and neurotypical individuals, enabling Autistic individuals to better navigate social situations.
Second, this assumption supports the double empathy theory, which suggests that individuals with different experiences struggle to understand each other (and that those with similar or shared experiences are more likely to understand and form connections with each other).
Rather than solely attributing difficulties in understanding and communication to Autistic individuals, this theory argues that there is a mutual disconnect between individuals (e.g. neurotypical and neurodivergent individuals) who experience the world differently.
To challenge this assumption, Funawatari et al. (2024) conducted their study which found that Autistic individuals had significantly higher social camouflaging scores than neurotypical individuals, which is consistent with past literature. Importantly, Autistic individuals were found to engage in more camouflaging toward Autistic others than their neurotypical peers, which contrasts with the finding that neurotypical individuals did not show any significant differences based on their partner’s characteristics.
With the findings contradicting both Funawatari et al. (2024) hypothesis and the double empathy theory, there are a few factors to consider. Most notably, this study was conducted in Japan and participants were primarily from one cultural group (Japanese) The study also had an overall small sample size (57 Autistic participants; 146 neurotypical participants). To this end, it would be interesting to see whether the findings hold true among a larger and more diverse group of participants.
Additionally, Funawatari et al. (2024) note that the findings may suggest that camouflaging serves as a broader social behavior aimed at projecting a favorable image to others. With this in mind, researchers discuss the suggestion that camouflaging is similar to impression management, which is a social behavior observed in neurotypical individuals. It’s this notion (i.e. impression management) that then leads us into the second study by Khudiakova et al. (2024), which looks at impression management and the impact of camouflaging on mental health.
Study 2: Khudiakova et al. (2024)
Following the Funawatari et al. (2024) study addressing the social function of camouflaging, Khudiakova et al. (2024) similarly addressed this compensatory strategy–with their study focused on impression management and the impact of camouflaging on Autistic individuals’ mental health.
Khudiakova et al. (2024) begin by introducing the concept of impression management, which explains a social coping process of projecting favorable impressions in social settings. This framework also ties in with the Funawatari et al. (2024) findings that suggest camouflaging might be a part of a broader social behavior aimed at presenting a favorable image or impression to others. It is noted that there is conceptual overlap between camouflaging and impression management, with both concepts involving deliberate, explicit tactics to appear more socially favorable. In addition to this, there are empirical findings that also support this similarity between camouflaging and impression management.
While both neurodivergent and neurotypical individuals engage in camouflaging, Khudiakova et al. (2024) was interested in better understanding the impact of camouflaging on the mental health and well-being of Autistic individuals.
For example, Khudiakova et al. (2024) note the finding that individuals with “higher Autistic traits” report poorer mental health when engaging in higher levels of camouflaging, while those with higher ADHD traits report more positive mental health, respectively. As a result, Khudiakova et al. (2024) highlight the importance in understanding group differences and how individual traits interact with social demands.
The impression management framework utilizes existing literature to identify possible mechanisms of how camouflaging impacts the mental health of Autistic individuals. This framework posits impression management as being employed and experienced differently depending on three main factors—individual traits and cognitive abilities; sociocontextual demands; and individual-contextual transactions.
With respect to individual traits and cognitive abilities, the effectiveness or desired outcome of camouflaging may differ depending on each individuals’ cognitive capabilities. For instance, having fewer executive functioning differences has been associated with greater use of camouflaging among Autistic folks. To this end, Khudiakova et al. (2024) suggest that higher cognitive abilities might serve as a protective factor in reducing adverse effects of camouflaging (i.e. poor mental health outcomes). Additionally, empirical data shows camouflaging has more adverse effects among those with “greater Autistic traits” (i.e. data reveals those with “greater Autistic traits” and higher use of camouflaging report increased levels of anxiety, depression, fatigue, and reduced mental wellbeing).
The second factor in this framework notes that the outcomes and motivations for camouflaging depend on the social context. For example, it is mentioned that the social dynamics of girls’ groups at the playground allowed Autistic girls to more easily blend in, while boys’ groups highlighted the “interactive differences of Autistic boys.” Additionally, Khudiakova et al. (2024) note that the degree to which camouflaging is a voluntary response (versus a forced form of social modification) may be important in understanding its impact on mental health. For instance, Autistic individuals are more often compelled to engage in camouflaging as a means for avoiding harm and blending in. It is this forced or coerced nature of camouflaging among Autistic folks that might impact mental health outcomes (i.e. burnout, anxiety, depression, etc.).
Lastly, this framework posits camouflaging as being understood as a “transaction” between a person and their social setting. For example, in impression management literature, the degree of stigmatization is associated with one’s identity, social demands, and the accessibility of sociocultural norms–which are all factors that might impact one’s engagement in impression management. For many Autistic individuals, camouflaging requires understanding social expectations, with camouflaging serving as a form of impression management. Impression management framework suggests that the effects of camouflaging on one’s mental health are likely to vary by sociocultural context.
Camouflaging may be indirectly related to increased mental health challenges including self-blame, depression, and anxiety. In noting the relationship between utilizing camouflaging and one’s mental health, Khudiakova et al. (2024) discuss the dilemma of using this strategy—that is, while camouflaging may allow Autistic individuals the ability to make meaningful social connections, these connections/relationships might be attributed with increased feelings of social disconnection. For example, if you make a meaningful friendship while engaging in camouflaging, you might feel as though you are not being fully understood or accepted because you aren’t truly representing yourself (as you’re “hiding” or suppressing parts of you that you feel could be stigmatized).
Another dilemma related to the consistent use of camouflaging is the fear of broader societal stigma. For instance, if an individual uses camouflaging as a means to avoid any stigma associated with being Autistic, there is still the fear of broader societal stigma (meaning that even while the individual tries to reduce the risk of stigmatization via camouflaging, society as a whole still largely holds ableist and stigmatizing views towards Autistic individuals and Autism in general).
Synopsis and Key Takeaways
Our focus today was on camouflaging, looking specifically at the question of its function and impact on the mental health/wellbeing of Autistic individuals.
First, we looked at Funawatari et al. (2024) who was interested in better understanding the social function of camouflaging, in particular whether Autistic individuals use it more around neurotypical peers in an effort to “blend in.” The findings suggest that Autistic individuals utilize camouflaging more than neurotypical peers, and interestingly found Autistic individuals engaged in more camouflaging toward Autistic others. Based on these findings, Funawatari et al. (2024) argue that camouflaging may be better understood as being a broader social behavior aimed at presenting a favorable image to others, similar to that of impression management.
Moving to the second study by Khudiakova et al. (2024), their purpose was to advocate for the use of the impression management framework in understanding camouflaging. Khudiakova et al. (2024) also examined the impact of camouflaging on Autistic individuals’ mental health, noting that it is indirectly related to anxiety, depression, and self-blame.
Both studies highlight the complex role of camouflaging in Autistic individuals' social interactions and mental health. Together, these studies emphasize the need for further research to understand the motivations, effectiveness, and mental health consequences of camouflaging, particularly within different sociocultural contexts.
Are you neurodivergent and looking for affirming mental health care? Contact us today to schedule a free 15-minute consult with one of our incredible neuroaffirming practitioners. We also offer various affirming group therapies/support groups designed to provide a safe and inclusive space for individuals to explore their identities and connect with others who share similar experiences. We look forward to potentially working with you!!
Land acknowledgement Resources: Support starts with educating yourself about history, and being willing to sit with uncomfortable truths. It can then include things like: learning about cultural appropriation, and commit to not engaging in and perpetuating cultural appropriation; committing to calling people in to conversations; educating others, honoring Native folks on holidays such as Indigenous People’s Day, considering the implications of celebrating holidays such as Thanksgiving, or the Fourth of July; making land acknowledgements, (to find out whose land you’re on, head here), having conversations with people about what you learn; financial support; uplifting and amplifying Native voices and stories; understanding and supporting Land Back efforts; researching and supporting Native causes, including supporting and advocating Native-led for legislation changes. Some options for financial support of Native communities on Wahpekute land are here, here, here, here, here or here; Chumash land here; National.
References:
Funawatari, R., Sumiya, M., Iwabuchi, T. et al. Camouflaging in Autistic Adults is Modulated by Autistic and Neurotypical Characteristics of Interaction Partners. J Autism Dev Disord (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10803-024-06481-5
Khudiakova, V., Alexandrovsky, M., Ai, W., & Lai, M. C. (2024). What We Know and Do Not Know About Camouflaging, Impression Management, and Mental Health and Wellbeing in Autistic People. Autism research : official journal of the International Society for Autism Research, 10.1002/aur.3299. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1002/aur.3299
