Clearly, people / researchers are more comfortable calling kids “autistic” than adolescents or adults. This is a picture of the usage of IFL in scholarly papers about autistic folks in all three age groups. I suspect that including “boys” and “girls” in the overall numbers would shed light on this, but looking at the vast difference between children and adult references… yeah, it just kinda boggles the mind.
What’s the connotation of “autistic” for researchers, I wonder?
Do they think that only kids can be autistic?
Let’s look at the overall percentages:
Clearly, there’s more activity going on with researching autistic children.
Maybe because there’s the focus on “curing” the “disorder”? And if they look at kids, they might find a way to stop it from happening anymore?
Who knows? Personally, I don’t think that’s a good use of time and money.
And a lot of folks agree with me.
But I don’t fund the studies, I don’t set the agendas, and I certainly do not have visibility into the inner workings of the autism research world.
All I have is numbers…