La vulnerabilidad al cambio climático en ALC

Participants within this study were eight men between 21 and 29 years of age, all of whom had a formal diagnosis of AS. Smith et al. (2009) suggest that IPA works best if a small homogenous group is used. They argue that this enables some of the variation that exists to be contained within the analysis of the phenomena. Participants were also purposively sampled on the basis that they could provide an insight into the phenomena under study (Smith et al, 2009; Willig, 2012). A number of inclusion and exclusion criteria were created.

The first criterion was that all participants would have a formal diagnosis of AS or HFA. Some consideration was needed as to whether or not to exclude those who had self-identified as having AS/HFA without confirmation from a professional. It felt epistemologically inconsistent to exclude those without a formal diagnosis as the nature of objective testing assumes a positivist epistemology – that A“D is o l eal if it is o je ti el easu a le. This lea es so e u de l i g tension with the light social constructionist epistemology adopted within this project which values subjective experience (Eatough & Smith, 2008). Whilst it is not possible to resolve this tension, from a

pragmatic perspective it is these labels that are used to enable the provision of services. In order for the findings to be transferable to individuals within services who might share salient characteristics to the pa ti ipa ts i the u e t stud a d the efo e those ith e og ised s pto atolog , it felt important that participants had a formal diagnosis. Two main pieces of information were used as

o fi atio of pa ti ipa ts diag osis. Fi stl , all pa ti ipa ts e e e uited th ough spe ifi A“D services, heavily implying that participants had a formal diagnosis as this is usually a requirement for access to services. Secondly, participants were asked to complete a short version of the Autism Quotient Questionnaire (AQ-10; Allison, Auyeoung and Baron-Cohen, 2012). (See Appendix B within the background questionnaire). The AQ-10 is a 10-item rating scale that is typically used as a brief ASD screening tool for individuals without an intellectual disability. Items are designed to assess areas of social interaction, communication, attention to detail, attention switching and imagination. The AQ-10 is scored out of ten, with a cut-off point of 6 yielding a 0.85 predictive value of meeting full diagnosis (Allison et al., 2012).

A number of other questionnaires that assess ASD characteristics in adults without intellectual impairment were also considered. These included the 50-item autism Quotient Questionnaire (AQ- 50; Baron-Cohen et al., 2001), the Reading the Mind in the Eyes Test (Baron-Cohen et al., 2001), the Friendship Questionnaire (FQ, Baron-Cohen & Wheelwright, 2003) and the Empathy Quotient (EQ, Baron-Cohen & Wheelwright, 2004). The AQ-50 (Baron-Cohen et al., 2001) was initially considered most appropriate as it has undergone extensive psychometric development and evaluation, with literature supporting its reliability and validity (Wheelwright et al., 2010). Furthermore, the AQ-50 had been frequently referenced in the previous literature relating to the topic under investigation, meaning that a more significant comparison could be made when considering the current findings in relation to the existing literature. However given that participants were already being asked to complete a one- to two-hour interview, it felt that the AQ-50 might demand too much time of participants. The AQ-10 was therefore considered as it is much shorter. Furthermore, Booth et al. (2013) found that for both the AQ-50 and the AQ-10, the discriminative power, based on sensitivity, specificity and area under the curve (AUC – which provides global measure of the predictive validity of the measure) were similar. Both measures also showed good scores across all domains (AUC > 0.90, sensitivity and specificity > 0.80). This supports the use of the AQ-10 as a useful way of indicating that an individual would meet criteria for a formal diagnosis. See the table of participant background information in Appendix C for each participants score on this measure.

It was decided to exclude those with a diagnosis of autism as individuals with autism would be likely to have accompanied learning difficulties, as well as a greater degree of language impairment (APA, 2000). Given that IPA relies primarily o the ediu of la guage to gai i sight i to a i di idual s experience (Smith et al., 2009) such difficulties could potentially make it harder for individuals with autism to give an in-depth account. Additionally, excluding those with an autism diagnosis would contribute towards a greater degree of homogeneity in the participant group. Those with a diagnosis of AS and HFA were both included as research has found little or inconsistent differences between individuals with HFA and AS in cognitive, social and motor tasks (Howlin, 2003; Mayes et al., 2001; Ozonoff et al., 2002). Participants were recruited before the recently published DSM-V

APA, as pu lished, hi h epla es A“ a d HFA a si gle atego autisti spe t u diso de , i the e l published DSM-V (APA, 2013). This leaves some tension for how the findings from the current study will be transferable to those diagnosed under the new DSM criteria. These changes reflect the belief that difficulties are different in their degree, rather than their type (Frazier et al., 2012). Please refer to the introduction for a full outline of the DSM changes; for the purpose of this study, it was felt that the findings would be most transferable to those without accompanied learning or verbal impair e t a d ith a lo e s pto se e it .

The second inclusion criterion was that all participants would be male. A number of research studies have observed gender differences in the perception and experience of romantic relationships in the AS/HFA population (Henault & Attwood, 2006; Byers et al., 2013). It was therefore decided that women would not be included to maintain homogeneity within the sample. Furthermore, as a significantly larger proportion of men are diagnosed with an ASD (Brugha et al., 2011), the findings may have transferability to a larger proportion of the ASD population.

The third inclusion criterion was that participants would be aged between 18 and 30.

The e pe ie e of o a ti elatio ships i the u e t stud ight efe to hat it is like to be in a romantic relationship, to not be in a romantic relationship or perhaps to try and be in a romantic relationship. During emerging adulthood individuals have been found to explore and enter new romantic relationships more frequently than those at other stages of life (Furman & Wehner, 1994; Arnett, 2004). Arnett (2004) also argues that this is a key time for identity exploration, including the development of a romantic identity. Given that age has also been found to have an impact on the experience of romantic relationships in typically developing individuals (Furman & Wehner, 1994; Brown, 1999; Connolly & Goldberg, 1999), it was decided to only include participants within a narrow age range to enable greater homogeneity.

The final inclusion criterion was that all participants would currently be using a service that provides specialist support for people on the ASD spectrum. This criterion is mostly related to the ethical requirement of protecting participants from harm. As the interview may have brought up issues that were sensitive or difficult for the participants to talk about, it felt important that there was an existing support structure that participants could contact should they feel they needed support following the interview. All participants were recruited from specialist ASD organisations that provided support, so this ensured participants had specialist support if needed.