Bridging the Double Empathy Gap How ABA Professionals Can Support Neurodivergent and Neurotypical Understanding
- Kaylee Madeiros Perdew, MS, BCBA
- Aug 10
- 8 min read
Misunderstanding is often treated like a one-person problem. A neurodivergent child “misses” a cue. An autistic adult “doesn’t read the room.” A learner with ADHD “interrupts.” The story usually points in one direction.
The double empathy problem asks us to look again.
It suggests that communication breakdowns between neurodivergent and neurotypical people are usually mutual, not one-sided. Each person may be using a different social language, shaped by different sensory experiences, attention patterns, communication styles, and cultural expectations. When those differences meet, both people can struggle to understand the other.
For ABA professionals, this idea matters. Our work often sits right at the meeting point between neurodivergent learners, families, schools, workplaces, and broader communities. We can either reinforce the idea that one group needs to become more like the other, or we can help build shared understanding in both directions.
This post is informational and not a substitute for clinical, legal, or ethics guidance. It is meant to support reflection and better practice.
What the double empathy problem means
The double empathy problem was described by autistic scholar Damian Milton and has become an important idea in neurodiversity-affirming practice. At its core, it says that empathy gaps can happen both ways.
A neurotypical person may not understand why a neurodivergent person avoids eye contact, repeats a phrase, leaves a loud room, or answers a question very directly. At the same time, a neurodivergent person may not understand why a neurotypical person relies on indirect hints, expects quick shifts in conversation, or treats certain body language as more important than spoken words.
Neither person is automatically wrong. They may be working from different rules.
A common example is eye contact. In many neurotypical spaces, eye contact signals attention. For some autistic people, eye contact can feel distracting, painful, or too intense. If a teacher says, “Look at me so I know you’re listening,” the teacher may be trying to connect. The learner may be trying to regulate enough to listen. Both are acting with purpose, but each may misread the other.
The same pattern can show up in many areas:
Tone of voice
A direct tone may be heard as rude, even when the speaker is being clear and honest.
Personal space
One person may seek closeness for comfort, while another needs distance to feel safe.
Conversation timing
A pause may mean processing time for one person and disinterest to another.
Sensory responses
Leaving a room may mean self-advocacy, not avoidance or defiance.
Facial expression
Limited facial movement may not mean limited emotion.
The double empathy problem does not deny that neurodivergent people may need support. It changes the question. Instead of asking, “How do we fix this person’s social deficits?” we can ask, “What is getting lost between these people, and how can both sides understand each other better?”
Why the gap can become harmful
Small misunderstandings can build into larger patterns. When a neurodivergent person is repeatedly told that their natural communication style is wrong, they may start to mask. Masking can include forcing eye contact, hiding stims, copying social scripts, suppressing discomfort, or pretending to understand.
Masking may help someone get through a moment, but it can come at a cost. Research and lived experience suggest that constant masking can be exhausting and stressful. It may also make it harder for support teams to see what a person actually needs.
The empathy gap can also affect behavior interpretation. A learner who runs from the cafeteria may be seen as noncompliant, when the sound level is overwhelming. A teen who corrects a teacher may be labeled disrespectful, when they value accuracy and do not recognize the hidden social rule. A child who repeats the same question may be seeking predictability, not trying to annoy anyone.
ABA professionals have a responsibility to look beyond surface behavior. Behavior has context. Communication has context. Relationships have context.
That does not mean every behavior is safe or acceptable. It means our response should be informed by curiosity before correction. If we skip curiosity, we may teach compliance without understanding. That can widen the gap instead of closing it.
How ABA professionals can help bridge the gap
ABA has tools that can support meaningful change. Data collection, skill building, environmental assessment, reinforcement, task analysis, and functional behavior assessment can all be useful. The key is how we use them.
If the goal is to make a neurodivergent person look more neurotypical, we may miss the point. If the goal is to improve safety, communication, access, autonomy, and quality of life, ABA can become part of the bridge.
Start with bidirectional goals
Social goals should not only target the neurodivergent person. Many intervention plans focus on teaching the learner to greet, share, wait, make eye contact, take turns, or identify emotions. Some of those skills may be helpful when tied to the person’s real needs. Still, the other communication partner also has responsibilities.
A bidirectional goal might include teaching family members or staff to:
Wait longer for a response
Offer choices in multiple formats
Accept communication that is spoken, typed, signed, gestured, or picture-based
Notice sensory distress earlier
Avoid forcing eye contact
Use plain language instead of hints
Validate self-advocacy
For example, a goal for a child might be, “Request a break using speech, card, gesture, or device.” A matching goal for adults might be, “Honor break requests within 10 seconds when safety allows.” The bridge needs both sides.
Reframe behavior as communication
Functional assessment already asks, “What purpose does this behavior serve?” The double empathy lens adds another question: “What might the environment or communication partner be misunderstanding?”
A learner who screams during group work may be communicating pain, confusion, lack of predictability, or social overload. A learner who refuses to join a game may not understand the rules, may dislike the sensory parts of the game, or may have been excluded in the past.
Good ABA practice should avoid quick labels like attention-seeking or escape-maintained without careful context. Even when those functions are accurate, they are only a starting point. Seeking attention may mean seeking connection. Escaping may mean seeking safety.
Teach self-advocacy as a core skill
Self-advocacy should not be treated as an advanced skill reserved for older or highly verbal learners. It can begin early and look many different ways.
A person can self-advocate by:
Handing over a break card
Moving away from loud noise
Saying “no”
Asking for help
Choosing headphones
Requesting written instructions
Typing instead of speaking
Saying, “I need more time”
Using a gesture to stop an interaction
ABA professionals can teach these skills and reinforce them consistently. Just as important, we can teach others to respect them. A break request that gets ignored teaches the person that communication does not work. A “no” that gets punished teaches the person that compliance matters more than consent.
Assent matters. When learners show signs that they do not want to participate, we should pay attention. Ethical practice includes watching for withdrawal, distress, refusal, shutdown, or repeated attempts to leave. Teaching should not depend on overpowering those signals.
What neurotypical communities can learn
Bridging the gap does not mean asking neurotypical people to become experts in every diagnosis. It means helping them become more flexible, respectful, and observant.
Many neurotypical social rules are treated as universal when they are actually cultural preferences. Eye contact, small talk, sitting still, smiling on cue, and using a certain tone may be expected in many settings, but they are not the only valid ways to show respect or connection.
ABA professionals can help families, teachers, peers, and community members replace assumptions with better questions.
Instead of assuming | Try asking |
“They are ignoring me.” | “How do they show they are listening?” |
“They are being rude.” | “Could this be direct communication without hidden meaning?” |
“They are overreacting.” | “What sensory input might be painful or overwhelming?” |
“They know better.” | “Did we teach this clearly and check for understanding?” |
“They just want control.” | “Where do they need more choice or predictability?” |
These shifts may seem small, but they change the emotional tone of support. They reduce blame. They make room for problem-solving.
Practical strategies for ABA teams
The double empathy problem becomes useful when it changes daily practice. ABA professionals can begin with concrete steps.
Include neurodivergent perspectives
When possible, involve the learner directly. Ask what feels hard, what helps, what they enjoy, and what they want people to understand. For nonspeaking or minimally speaking learners, observe choices, approach behavior, refusal, regulation patterns, and preferred communication methods. Families can add context, but the learner’s signals still matter.
ABA teams can also learn from neurodivergent adults, advocates, clinicians, and researchers. Their perspectives can challenge assumptions that traditional training may not address.
Write goals that improve life, not just appearance
Before writing a goal, ask:
Will this help the person access something meaningful?
Does this protect safety or dignity?
Is this skill useful outside therapy?
Are we teaching flexibility to everyone involved?
Could this goal increase masking or distress?
Is there an environmental change that would reduce the need for intervention?
A goal like “will maintain eye contact for five seconds” may make others feel more comfortable, but it may not help the learner. A goal like “will indicate attention using an agreed response, such as nodding, saying yes, or selecting a card” respects different communication styles while still supporting interaction.
Build sensory awareness into behavior plans
Sensory needs are not side issues. They shape learning, behavior, and relationships.
ABA teams can support sensory-aware practice by tracking patterns without making assumptions. Look at noise, lighting, crowding, clothing, smells, movement needs, hunger, sleep, transitions, and timing. Collaborate with occupational therapists when sensory assessment or treatment is needed.
Environmental changes may include:
Quieter spaces
Visual schedules
Advance warnings before transitions
Flexible seating
Movement breaks
Reduced waiting time
Headphones or sunglasses
Clear start and finish signals
Sometimes the best intervention is not teaching the person to tolerate distress. It is changing a setting that was never designed for their nervous system.
Teach repair, not perfection
Misunderstandings will still happen. The goal is not flawless interaction. The goal is repair.
ABA professionals can teach all communication partners to use repair statements, such as:
“I think I misunderstood. Can we try again?”
“Do you want me to say that another way?”
“I need more time to answer.”
“That sounded different than I meant.”
“I can listen better if I look away.”
“Please tell me directly.”
These phrases give people a path back to connection. They also reduce shame. A communication breakdown becomes a shared problem to solve, not proof that one person failed.
How this changes the role of the ABA professional
ABA professionals are often trained to observe behavior closely. That skill is valuable. The double empathy problem asks us to observe ourselves and the environment with the same care.
We can ask:
Whose comfort is driving this goal?
Are we valuing compliance over communication?
Are we teaching the learner to hide distress?
Are we helping others change too?
Are we treating neurotypical norms as the only correct norms?
Are we listening when neurodivergent people tell us what support feels like?
This kind of reflection does not weaken ABA. It strengthens practice by aligning it with dignity, consent, and meaningful outcomes.
It also helps repair trust. Some neurodivergent people and families have had harmful experiences with ABA, especially when programs focused on normalization, forced compliance, or ignoring distress. ABA professionals cannot dismiss that history. We need to respond with humility, transparency, and better choices.
A neurodiversity-affirming ABA approach can still teach important skills. It can support communication, safety, daily living, emotional regulation, play, learning, and independence. The difference is the purpose. The aim should be to help people live well as themselves, not to make them appear less neurodivergent.
A better bridge is built from both sides
The double empathy problem gives ABA professionals a more balanced way to understand social difficulty. It reminds us that communication is relational. It happens between people, not inside one person alone.
When we teach only neurodivergent people to adapt, the burden stays unequal. When we also teach neurotypical people to listen differently, communicate clearly, respect sensory needs, and honor self-advocacy, the gap gets smaller.
That work can happen in therapy sessions, classrooms, homes, playgrounds, clinics, and community spaces. It starts with simple but powerful habits: pause before interpreting, ask what the behavior may be communicating, include the learner’s perspective, and design goals that protect dignity.
ABA professionals can be translators, teachers, and bridge builders. The most meaningful progress often begins when everyone stops asking one person to cross the whole distance alone.
Comments