The Double Empathy Problem: Rethinking Social Difficulties in Autism

For most of the history of autism research and clinical practice, social difficulties in autistic people were understood through a single lens: autistic people lack the capacity for social understanding. They have deficits in "theory of mind" — the ability to understand that other people have thoughts, feelings, and perspectives different from their own.

This framework produced a body of therapeutic intervention aimed at teaching autistic people social skills — how to read neurotypical facial expressions, how to make the right amount of eye contact, how to take turns in conversation, how to signal interest in ways that neurotypical people recognize.

And then, in 2012, a researcher named Damian Milton proposed something that changed the picture entirely.

What the Double Empathy Problem says

Milton, who is autistic himself, proposed that the social difficulties in autism are not a one-way deficit. They are a bidirectional mismatch.

Neurotypical people, it turns out, are just as bad at understanding autistic people as autistic people are at understanding neurotypical people. They misread autistic facial expressions, misinterpret autistic communication styles, and fail to attribute accurate thoughts and feelings to autistic individuals.

Subsequent research has supported this. Studies showing that autistic people and neurotypical people both communicate more effectively with members of their own neurological group — and that the social difficulties emerge specifically in cross-neurological interaction — undermined the simple deficit model significantly.

What this means

If the social difficulties are not simply an autistic deficit but a bidirectional mismatch, then the burden of adjustment should not fall exclusively on the autistic person.

Decades of social skills training for autistic children has been aimed at teaching autistic children to behave in ways that neurotypical people find socially legible. That training has a cost — it requires significant energy, it often involves suppressing authentic autistic communication, and it may produce compliance without genuine understanding.

The Double Empathy Problem suggests a different approach: teach both groups to understand each other. Develop neurotypical people's capacity to read and respond to autistic communication styles. Build environments where both modes of communication are valued.

The practical upshot

In a school context, this means: teach neurotypical children about neurodiversity. Build peer understanding alongside individual accommodation. Create cultures where different communication styles are explicitly valued.

In a family context, this means: spend time understanding autistic communication rather than only teaching neurotypical communication. If your child communicates through scripts, through indirect means, through written rather than spoken language — learn to hear that. Meet them where they are.

The Double Empathy Problem is not an excuse to dismiss the real social challenges autistic people face. But it is a significant reframing — one that distributes the burden of adjustment more equitably, and that opens the door to communities built for genuine mutual understanding rather than one-sided performance.