What the Double Empathy Problem Is (and Is Not)

We reassert the Double Empathy Problem (DEP) as a sociological account of autistic-non-autistic (and more broadly, between individuals with differing dispositions) interaction, rather than a social-cognitive theory of autism. The DEP reframes communicative breakdowns as relational rather than solely due to autistic deficits, countering harmful deficit-based theories of autism that rest on weak evidence. Evaluating the DEP solely through positivist social-cognitive frameworks risks undermining the DEP’s original epistemological stance as a sociological and critical lens. We clarify the probabilistic framing of the DEP to emphasize that misunderstandings between autistic and non-autistic people shift with context and power. This framing invites applied inquiry into methods for increasing mutual understanding. Importantly, there is growing evidence in favor of such a probabilistic DEP, whereas there are serious validity and evidentiary concerns surrounding traditional deficit-based social-cognitive theories. By centering autistic perspectives, we argue that the DEP can promote ethical research agendas that integrate rigorous, context-sensitive methods to advance a relational, power-aware autism science that benefits the autistic community on its own terms. Community Brief Why is this topic important? Autistic people are often described as having “social deficits,” but many misunderstandings between autistic and non-autistic people come from both sides. The Double Empathy Problem (DEP) shows that communication difficulties are relational and shaped by differences in experience, expectations, and power, not individual deficits or problems within the autistic person. Understanding this helps challenge stigma, reduce blame placed on autistic people, and promote more respectful and equitable relationships. What is the purpose of this article? This article explains what the DEP is and is not, clarifies common misunderstandings about the theory, how it is studied, and its application, and shows why it should be understood as a sociological and relational framework rather than a biological or cognitive explanation of autism. It reviews existing evidence, discusses best practices for research, and argues for applying DEP-informed ideas in education, clinical work, and policy. What personal or professional perspectives do the authors bring to this topic? The authors bring a combination of lived experience, research, and long-standing expertise to this work. The authorship team includes autistic and non-autistic scholars and researchers who have originated, developed, and led theoretical and empirical work on the DEP, as well as scholars with extensive experience studying autistic–non-autistic interaction, ableism in autism research, and participatory and neurodiversity-affirming approaches. What is already known about this topic? The DEP explains that misunderstandings between autistic and non-autistic people happen because of people’s different social backgrounds, expectations, and ways of communicating, not because autistic people lack empathy or sociality. Studies have shown that: • Autistic–autistic interactions can be just as effective as non-autistic–non-autistic interactions, • Mixed (autistic–non-autistic) interactions tend to be the most challenging, and • Traditional social-cognitive theories do not reliably predict how autistic people actually interact in real life or how autistic people report their experience. It is also known that autism research has a long history of pathologizing autistic people and often overlooks autistic perspectives and qualitative evidence. What do the authors recommend? We recommend: 1. Understanding, researching, and using the DEP as a framework about relationships and social contexts, not as a theory that places communication problems inside autistic people. 2. Centering autistic perspectives and treating autistic people as equal partners in research and communication. 3. Using fairer and more rigorous research practices, including clearly defining comparison groups and studying social interactions as they occur in real life. 4. Applying ideas from the DEP in practice now, rather than waiting for a higher level of evidence than is required for other autism theories. How will these recommendations help autistic adults now or in the future? These recommendations can: • Reduce stigma by challenging the belief that autistic people are solely responsible for communication difficulties; • Validate autistic adults’ lived experiences of misunderstanding and bias; • Support more respectful and effective communication between autistic and non-autistic people; • Encourage services, clinicians, and educators to avoid harmful practices and instead build mutually supportive relationships; and • Influence future research and policy to be more just, inclusive, and grounded in autistic realities.