Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

Focused interests are characterised by high attention and focus, and are commonly experienced by autistic people. While some research frames these interests as inflexible and non-social, other research has highlighted many positive impacts for autistic people. Research also shows that cultural activities, such as museum and art gallery visits, can facilitate and promote health, including mental health, in the general population. This study used an online mixed-methods survey to explore relationships between focused interests, motivation, museum/gallery attendance, and wellbeing for 45 autistic and 44 non-autistic participants. Findings include (a) both autistic and non-autistic participants reported having focused interests, which had a similar nature and served similar purposes for both groups; (b) exploring focused interests in museums/galleries related to more positive emotions during visits for both groups, but autistic individuals more frequently raised sensory and accessibility concerns; and (c) autistic participants reported significantly lower wellbeing, but focused interests, motivation, and museum/gallery attendance did not significantly impact wellbeing. Our findings highlight the deep meaning and positive impact of focused interests on autistic lives, the potential of galleries and museums to provide opportunities for the meaningful exploration of focused interests, and the importance of minimising accessibility barriers for autistic people in these spaces.

Lay Abstract

Some research says that focused interests – meaning interests to which people dedicate a lot of attention, time, and focus – are bad for autistic people, but other research indicates that focused they can be good in many ways, like helping in careers or education. Visiting galleries and museums can be good for human wellbeing, but we do not know if that works in the same way for autistic people specifically. This study looked at whether focused interests, motivation, and museum/gallery attendance contributed to better wellbeing for autistic adults. We also checked if non-autistic people had focused interests, and if there were any differences in autistic and non-autistic people's interests. We looked at the different experiences and needs of autistic and non-autistic people when visiting museums/galleries. To do this, we asked 45 autistic and 44 non-autistic adults to complete an online survey including ratings on scales and open text boxes. We analysed participants’ scale ratings using statistics, and their open answers using content analysis, which helps researchers find the most frequent categories in text. Autistic people's focused interests, motivation, and museum/gallery attendance did not impact their wellbeing in the statistical analysis, but some participants wrote that they used their focused interests to help their wellbeing and mental health. Autistic people reported focused interests more frequently than non-autistic people, but the content and purpose of their interests were similar. Both groups talked about good experiences in visiting museums/galleries and exploring their focused interests there, but autistic people specifically complained about environments that were not accessible. Our findings show that being able to explore focused interests in galleries and museums can lead to positive feelings, while barriers in the environment and accessibility issues can stop autistic people from enjoying their visits and exploring their interests.

Keywords

focused interests wellbeing museums and galleries monotropism

Introduction

Autism is a lifelong neurodevelopmental difference that influences an individual's way of communicating, socialising, and pursuing interests (Association, 2021). The diagnostic criteria for autism include the presence of focused interests, which are interests pursued with high intensity and focus (Jordan & Caldwell-Harris, 2012). It has been reported that most autistic people have focused interests (Klin et al., 2007), and the high level of focus that characterises them has been associated with the concept of ‘monotropism’ – a cognitive style where attention is highly focused on fewer stimuli (Wood, 2021), in contrast to a ‘polytropic’ cognitive style which explores a broader range of interests with less intensity and focus (Murray et al., 2005).

Focused Interests – Different Framings and Findings in Research

The theory of monotropism frames the difference in cognitive functioning between autistic and non-autistic people in a value-neutral way. However, the broader autism literature has traditionally described focused interests in a negative light, arguing that they interfere with daily activities and are harmful to autistic people's social and behavioural development (see Cho et al., 2017; Klin et al., 2007; Turner-Brown et al., 2011). Focused interests have also been described in ways that imply impairment and deficit (Wood, 2021), with the use of terms like ‘restricted’, ‘dysfunctional’, ‘obsessive’, and ‘non-social’.

Focused interests have also been viewed as a potential target of intervention, and there have been attempts to extinguish them. Boyd et al.'s (2007) study, for instance, paired focused interests with neutral stimuli to reinforce more socially desirable behaviours, ultimately aiming to extinguish the focused interest itself. In similar negative connotations, researchers have argued that autistic people's interests are less socially oriented than non-autistic peoples’ interests (Anthony et al., 2013), being generally focused on ‘non-social’ aspects of the world (e.g. mechanics, physics, the functioning of objects and vehicles), as opposed to the more ‘social’ aspects like culture and relationships (Baron-Cohen & Wheelwright, 1999; South et al., 2007). Autistic interests have also been described as rigid and inflexible, being limited to a very narrow domain, and immutable across the lifespan (see Turner-Brown et al., 2011).

In contrast, other research has found that autistic people may not display solely ‘stereotypical’ interests, also reporting what would be considered very ‘typical’ interests (Cho et al., 2017), including themes such as art, culture, psychology, belief systems, and history across studies (see Grove et al., 2018; Jordan & Caldwell-Harris, 2012). Autistic participants also reported having changed their topics of interest throughout time (Koenig & Williams, 2017), indicating that focused interests are not necessarily ‘rigid’. Recent qualitative research (Lizon et al., 2023) includes accounts of autistic people saying that their interests held personal meaning and allowed them to communicate and connect with others, providing context and structure to social interactions – which contradicts previous research arguing that focused interests are ‘non-social’.

Autistic respondents to a survey study by Koenig and Williams (2017) also reported that focused interests led to decreased anxiety, were used to engage others in conversation, and in professional/vocational pursuits. This has an important impact, when various researchers have identified higher levels of anxiety in autistic people when compared to non-autistic people (e.g. Kent & Simonoff, 2017). Similarly, Milton and Sims (2016) found that the most significant factor contributing to autistic people's sense of personal fulfilment was the ability to engage in pursuits of interest. Autistic individuals have also demonstrated more enthusiasm when talking about their interests, showing what researchers considered to be ‘improved’ communication and more motivation (Winter-Messiers, 2007; Wood, 2021).

Motivation, in fact, is another key factor in understanding the role of focused interests. Grove et al. (2018) found that autistic people tended to be more intrinsically motivated in their pursuits of interest compared to non-autistic people. Intrinsic motivation, driven by enjoyment and satisfaction rather than external rewards, contributes to the development of autonomy and competence (Ryan & Deci, 2000), and has been linked to improved wellbeing in autistic adults (Grove et al., 2018). Autistic individuals face increased risks of anxiety, depression, and suicidal behaviour (Cassidy & Rodgers, 2017; Stewart et al., 2006), making it important for research to explore factors contributing to autistic wellbeing.

It is possible that the contrasting perspectives and findings on the nature of focused interests are related to the differing views, biases, and dispositions of researchers within the autism scientific establishment. A longstanding issue in autism research is the framing of autistic behaviours through a neurotypical lens, which often leads to pathologising differences rather than a more neuro-affirming autistic lens to understand autism (Kapp et al., 2013). This has contributed to the widespread assumption that autistic functioning and sociality are inherently deficient, framing focused interests as detrimental.

Autistic scholarship, such as Milton's (2012) Double Empathy Problem theory, challenges these assumptions by suggesting that the perceived social deficits in autistic individuals are not due to an inherent lack of empathy, but rather stem from a mutual misunderstanding between autistic and non-autistic people. Framing this problem as a ‘two-way’ process, this theory shifts the narrative of autism being an inherent obstacle, calling attention to the responsibility of people, spaces, and other ecological aspects in perpetuating this dynamic. There is a body of literature demonstrating the Double Empathy Problem in practise. For instance, an experiment conducted by Crompton et al. (2020) indicated that autistic participants effectively shared information with each other, but less effective transfer happened in cross-neurotype interactions. Jones et al. (2023) conducted an experiment where non-autistic observers detected and demonstrated the Double Empathy Problem, evaluating non-autistic interactions most positively and perceiving mixed-neurotype interactions as the least successful. Similarly, Foster et al. (2025) found that all-autistic groups reported rapport as good as (or better than) all-non-autistic groups, and that autistic participants’ rapport dropped as more non-autistic people were added to the group. These findings challenge the idea that autistic people have inherent socialisation deficits, corroborating the theory that a ‘mismatch’ in cross-neurotype communication happens both ways.

Focused Interests, Wellbeing, and Museum/Gallery Attendance

Attending recreational and cultural activities is associated with good health, good satisfaction with life, and low anxiety and depression scores in the general population, indicating that cultural spaces, such as museums and art galleries, can play a crucial role in promoting public health (Cuypers et al., 2011). There is also evidence of museum and art gallery engagement contributing to improved wellbeing, including reduced stress and enhanced mood (Dupuy et al., 2024; World Health Organization, 2019).

In the general population, museums and galleries are a common form of leisure. Reports issued by the UK Government indicated that 43% of adults in England reported visiting a museum or gallery between 2023 and 2024, with participation highest among younger adults and lowest among those aged 85 and over (Department for Culture, Media and Sport, 2024a). Most reported reasons for visiting were interest in the subject matter and spending time with family and friends (Department for Culture, Media and Sport, 2024b). However, disabled adults (which includes autistic people) were less likely to visit than non-disabled adults (37% vs. 46%) (Department for Culture, Media and Sport, 2024c).

Research about autistic peoples’ museum and gallery attendance is scarce and mostly focuses on the experiences of parents and families). Parent reports indicate that autistic children participate in museum activities about one-third as often as their peers, and report negative emotions three times more frequently (Antonetti & Fletcher, 2016). However, accommodations and adaptations can make a difference: Fortuna et al.'s (2024) study interviewing families of autistic children showed that pre-visit materials, such as social stories and accessibility maps, can be useful in facilitating more meaningful and accessible engagement. Langa et al. (2013) found that the main motivation for museum attendance in families with autistic children was related to pursuits of interest, as museums were a good way to encourage children to engage with their interests and share their enthusiasm for learning.

Concerning adults, a study by Billstedt et al. (2011) found that the only variable positively correlated with good or very good quality of life in autistic people was having regular recreational activities, which allow for the exploration of interests. However, a qualitative study by Bagatell et al. (2022) showed that sensory processing differences significantly shaped autistic adults’ choices about community activities, with participants stressing how environments with intense sensory stimulation can be overwhelming. Regarding museums specifically, a recent co-design initiative highlighted that incorporating an autistic perspective in the design of museum facilities can lead to significant improvements in the experiences of autistic visitors and their families, with participants stressing the usefulness of autism-friendly resources and environments (Watchorn et al., 2025). A recent doctoral thesis (Fletcher, 2025) exploring neurodivergent adults’ experiences in museums found that autistic people would go to museums more often if they were more accessible to their needs, highlighting a range of barriers (e.g. inaccessible sensory environment and lack of neurodiversity understanding), which could be addressed with often straightforward actions.

These findings indicate that museums and galleries could play a role in promoting wellbeing for autistic adults by allowing them to meaningfully engage with their topics of interest, but mitigating barriers and providing access to environments and resources that support their needs is crucial. The present study aims to investigate the relationships between focused interests, museum attendance, motivation, and wellbeing among autistic adults. Additionally, it seeks to compare the experiences of autistic and non-autistic individuals regarding their focused interests and museum attendance. Specifically, this study explores the following research questions (RQs):

RQ1. Are focused interests unique to autistic people? If not, do autistic and non-autistic people's focused interests differ in nature, content, and/or purpose?

RQ2. Do autistic people who have focused interests report better wellbeing?

RQ3. Is museum/gallery attendance linked to higher wellbeing for autistic people?

RQ4. Are autistic people more motivated in their pursuits of interest, particularly in terms of intrinsic motivation, compared to non-autistic people?

RQ5. Is higher intrinsic motivation related to better wellbeing in autistic individuals?

RQ6. Is being able to explore focused interests in museums/galleries related to more positive feelings during visits?

RQ7. How do the experiences and needs of autistic and non-autistic people differ in museums and galleries?

Methods

Recruitment

We aimed to recruit an even sample of both autistic and non-autistic adults living in the United Kingdom, allowing for the exploration of differences across both groups which were relevant to our research questions. Because we wished to understand various factors related to museum in/attendance, including both positive and negative experiences, we indicated in our recruitment materials that we were interested in the perspectives of people who visited/enjoyed visiting museums, as well as those who did not. We also indicated that self-diagnosed autistic people were eligible to take part. Including self-diagnosed participants is an increasingly common practice in autism research, with researchers arguing that these groups can bring a diversity of views and experiences to research samples, as many autistic people may wish not to pursue diagnosis or may not have access to it due to systemic barriers – especially those who are intersectionally marginalised (see Ardeleanu et al., 2025). We have, however, included a non-diagnostic measure of autistic traits in the survey (see the Data Collection and Analysis section), and all self-diagnosed participants have scored above the cut-off score.

Participants

Eighty-nine adults (45 autistic and 44 non-autistic) participated in an online mixed-methods survey hosted on ‘Qualtrics', which was advertised on the social media platform X and in flyers distributed to visitors in various museums and galleries in Central Scotland. The mean age of participants was 39.11 years (SD = 15.5; range 18–79). The autistic group included 32 females (66.5%), 7 males (15.5%), and 6 people identifying as other gender identities (e.g. non-binary and genderqueer). The non-autistic group consisted of 26 females (59.1%), 17 males (38.7%), and 1 non-binary individual. Most participants were white, with 75.6% of the autistic and 61.4% of the non-autistic group identifying as ‘English, Welsh, Scottish, Northern Irish or British’. In terms of socioeconomic status, 42.2% of the autistic and 52.3% of the non-autistic group identified as working class.

Data Collection and Analysis

Data was collected through a mixed-method online survey hosted on 'Qualtrics', which included demographic questions, pre-established quantitative scales, and open-ended questions. Quantitative data obtained from participants' ratings of the scales were analysed through statistical analyses using the SPSS software. Participants’ qualitative responses to the open-ended questions were analysed using qualitative manifest content analysis (Bengtsson, 2016). The following domains were included in the survey:

1. Demographic information: Participants reported their age, level of education, ethnicity, gender, and whether they identified as working class.

2. Autism and Autistic traits – The Ritvo Autism & Asperger Diagnostic Scale (RAADS-14, Eriksson et al., 2013): This scale includes a list of statements about behaviours, feelings, and thoughts related to autistic traits. The score ranges from a minimum of 0 to a maximum of 42, with higher scores indicating more autistic traits. This scale was not used for diagnostic purposes, and all participants who self-identified as autistic scored above the cut-off score for this scale. Research on this scale's validity has demonstrated good psychometric properties in autistic samples (see Eriksson et al., 2013).

3. Focused interests and motivation to engage with them – Motivation for Special Interest Scale (SIMS; Grove et al., 2016): This measure is composed of five subscales, of which two compose the score for intrinsic motivation, and three compose the score for extrinsic motivation. Participants get two separate scores, one for extrinsic and one for intrinsic motivation. Higher scores indicated higher motivation (intrinsic or extrinsic) to engage with focused interests. This scale was developed and validated with autistic participants, and extensive factor analyses indicated its reliable assessment of motivations to engage in special interests.

4. Wellbeing – The Warwick-Edinburgh Mental Wellbeing Scale (WEMWBS; Tennant et al., 2007): In this scale, participants rate on a scale of 1 (none of the time) to 5 (all of the time) how each statement presented describes their experiences concerning factors relate to wellbeing (e.g. ‘I’ve been feeling good about myself’). Scores range from a minimum of 14 to a maximum of 70 points, with higher scores indicating higher levels of mental wellbeing. Although this scale was not developed with/for autistic populations specifically, it has demonstrated strong construct validity in research with autistic populations (Maitland et al., 2021; Stimpson et al., 2021) and good internal consistency and reliability in autistic samples (Stimpson et al., 2021).

5. Museum/art gallery attendance: Participants were asked how often in the last 6 months they had attended a museum/art gallery. Participants also responded to a question assessing how often they can explore their focused interests when visiting a museum or gallery, with answers ranging from 1 (most of the time) to 5 (not at all).

6. Subjective experience in museums/art galleries – Positive Affect Negative Affect Scale (PANAS – short version; Thompson, 2007): Using a scale of 1 (not at all) to 5 (exactly), participants rated the extent to which 10 adjectives (e.g. ‘inspired’ and ‘nervous’) explained how they generally felt when visiting a museum or art gallery. This scale generates two separate scores, one for positive affect and one for negative affect, with higher scores indicating a higher positive/negative affect. Although the PANAS scales were not developed with/for autistic people and psychometric research in autistic populations is limited, PANAS and its short forms have been implemented in studies with autistic people across different age groups (e.g., Dallman et al., 2022; Russell et al., 2017), as well as in research about museum wellbeing (Thomson & Chatterjee, 2014).

7. Open-ended questions: Questions explored participants’ subjective experiences with their focused interests and museum attendance, including:

Why do you go to museums/galleries?

Can you give an example of a visit to a museum/gallery in which you could explore your focused interests? How did the visit go?

What could museums or galleries do to improve your overall experience?

Results and Findings

Focused Interests

Quantitative Results

In regard to RQ1, most autistic participants (93.3%, n = 42) reported having focused interests, with only three reporting no focused interests. Within the non-autistic group, 30 participants (68.2%) reported having focused interests, while 14 participants (31.8%) reported no focused interests. Chi-square analysis confirmed a significant group difference between autistic and non-autistic groups and the presence of focused interests (χ² (1) = 9.108, p = .002), indicating that autistic people reported focused interests significantly more frequently than the non-autistic group.

Qualitative Findings

Sixty-eight (n = 68) participants, of whom 40 were autistic and 28 were non-autistic, reported their topics of interest. Twenty categories were identified within the answers through content analysis. Five of those categories (‘animals’, ‘social issues and activism’, ‘people’, ‘belief systems’, and ‘focused interests as dynamic’) were unique to the autistic sample; and one category (‘gastronomy’) was unique to the non-autistic sample. The most frequent categories of interest within the autistic sample were ‘History and Archaeology’, ‘Art and Culture’, ‘Animals’, ‘Sciences’, ‘Creative activities and crafts’, ‘Music’, and ‘Psychology’. The most frequent categories of interest within the non-autistic group were ‘Art and Culture’, ‘Sciences’, ‘Music’, ‘Sports and Physical Activities’, and ‘History and Archaeology’. The categories identified, their frequency, and examples of answers can be found in Table 1.

Table 1.

Topics of Focused Interests Reported by Autistic and Non-Autistic Participants.

Category	Examples – Autistic Participants (n = 40)	N	Examples – Non-Autistic Participants (n = 28)	N
Animals	‘horses’, ‘dogs’, ‘birds’	12	None	0
Art and Culture	‘art’, ‘museums’, ‘operettas’	14	‘musical theatre’, ‘fashion’, ‘art’	12
History and Archaeology	‘Archaeology/history – particularly of Scotland’, ‘Irish history’, ‘World War 1’	16	‘Archaeology, particularly prehistoric Scotland’, ‘History’	8
Sciences	‘Science’, Geology’, ‘Astronomy’	10	‘Geography’, ‘Science’, ‘Astronomy’	12
Literature	‘English Literature’, ‘Classic Literature’, ‘Books’, ‘Reading’	8	‘Literature’, ‘Reading’, ‘Fantasy’, ‘Fanfiction’	9
Music	‘Music (specific bands)’, ‘British Music’, ‘Playing the piano’	9	‘DJing’, ‘music composition’, ‘music’, ‘classic music’	10
Languages	‘Japanese’, ‘Scots Gaelic’, ‘Languages’	5	‘Languages’	1
Films and TV Shows	‘Films’, ‘various TV shows’, ‘British films’	4	‘Film’	2
Creative Activities and Crafts	‘Handcrafts – especially knitting and woolen work’, ‘drawing’, ‘scrapbooking’	9	‘Handicrafts’, , ‘Painting’	4
Psychology	‘Human minds’, ‘Social psychology’, ‘Human thinking, feeling and behaviour’, ‘Autism’, ‘Psychology in general’	9	‘Psychology’	1
Gardening and Nature	‘Gardening’, ‘nature and the natural world’, ‘houseplants’, ‘cacti’	7	‘Gardening’, ‘making our gardens as friendly as possible for insects bees, butterflies, and the like’	2
Social Issues and Activism	‘How it is that societies cannot do the right things’, ‘LGBTQ rights’, ‘disability justice’, ‘Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion.’	7	None	0
Sports and Physical Activities	‘Swimming’, ‘martial arts’, ‘hillwalking’, ‘cricket’	6	‘sports in general’, ‘football’, ‘calisthenics’	10
Science Fiction	‘Science fiction and fantasy’, ‘Harry Potter’, ‘Star Wars’	6	‘Marvel’	1
People	‘John William Waterhouse’, ‘Tamara de Lempicka’, ‘William Turner’, ‘Terry Pratchett’	5	None	0
Technology	‘technology’, ‘Learning to python to code’, ‘VR’, ‘AI’	5	‘technology’	1
Belief Systems	‘religion’, ‘Greek mythology’	2	None	0
Gastronomy	None	0	‘coffee’, ‘baking’	2
Travelling	‘travelling’	1	‘travelling’	1
Focused Interests as Dynamic	‘They change and new ones pop up’, ‘I tend to have specific focused interests for two to three years and then lose interest’	3	None	0

When asked what focused interests meant to them, sixty-eight (n = 68) participants, of which 40 were autistic and 28 were non-autistic, contributed answers. Five overarching categories were identified in both autistic and non-autistic participants’ responses, as described below:

I. Important and meaningful. This category was mentioned in responses from 10 autistic and 6 non-autistic participants, who emphasised how their focused interests held deep personal meaning (‘They are important to me in order to have a meaningful life’; ‘They give meaning to my life that I wouldn’t have otherwise’) and were essential in their lives (‘They are as important to my survival in daily life as eating and drinking’/ ‘Music is something I couldn’t live without’).

II. Generate positive feelings. This category comprised of four sub-categories depicting a variety of positive feelings generated from participants’ engagement with their focused interests, including the subcategories ‘Relaxation, calm, and immersion’, ‘Enjoyment and stimulation’, ‘Stability and safety,’ and ‘Sense of purpose and fulfilment’.

Relaxation, calm, and immersion (n = 29). This sub-category was the most frequent for both autistic (n = 19) and non-autistic (n = 10) participants, who described how focused interests were used as a means to disengage from external stress and induce relaxation (‘They are a respite from an overwhelming world. I can delve into them and feel relaxed’/‘They help me to relax and block out the rest of the world’).

Enjoyment and stimulation (n = 20). Twelve autistic participants and 8 non-autistic participants’ described an uplifting and engaging aspect of focused interests, which fostered feelings of enjoyment (‘I get great enjoyment from my activities’/‘They spark joy and satisfaction when I can indulge them’) and stimulation (‘They energise me’/‘I use them to keep alert and my brain active’).

Stability and safety (n = 9). Autistic participants (n = 7) reported more often than non-autistic participants (n = 2) that their focused interests had a comfortable familiarity about them, fostering feelings of stability and safety (‘I feel like I know them and trust them’/‘They comfort me, make me feel secure’/‘Safety’).

Sense of purpose and fulfilment (n = 5). Four autistic people and 1 non-autistic person talked about focused interests allowing them to cultivate a sense of purpose and obtain personal fulfilment (‘A way to make a positive contribution’/ ‘They provide me a purpose outside of work, entertainment and fulfilment’).

III. Positive impact on life. This category describes various ways in which focused interests made participants’ better, which were grouped into four sub-categories: focused interests were seen by both groups as a tool for ‘Navigating life and making sense of the world’, improving and maintaining ‘Mental health and wellbeing’, providing opportunities for ‘Connecting with others’, and being beneficial for ‘Learning, skills and career’ pursuits. These sub-categories are described below:

Navigating life and making sense of the world (n = 8). Six autistic and 2 non-autistic participants described how their focused interests helped them navigate everyday life, manage life's demands, and better understand the world around them (‘Focused interests to me are ways of making sense of and managing the world around me’, ‘I manage better if I engage in them’/‘Some of them are also lenses through which I view and understand the world’).

Mental health and wellbeing (n = 7). Four autistic people and 3 non-autistic people talked about the role of focused interests in improving and maintaining their mental health and wellbeing (‘They mean I can live well and look after my wellbeing’/‘They allow my health and well-being to grow positively’), including using them as a source of self-care and emotional processing (‘I use creative writing as a way of processing trauma’).

Connecting with others (n = 9). Autistic people (n = 7), more often than non-autistic people (n = 2), reported that sharing their focused interests provided them with opportunities for socialising and having meaningful social interactions (‘Opportunities for real-world social encounters with people with either similar or different focused interests)/‘They are topics which can be shared with friends and likeminded people’).

Learning, skills, and career (n = 11). Four autistic and 7 non-autistic people talked about focused interests motivating their continuous learning and self-improvement (‘Trying to get the techniques right to play the [chess] pieces well’/‘Actively reading and getting educated about the area’). They also discussed vocational and professional experiences that were related to, or a product of, their focused interests (‘My interest in archaeology led to a degree and work in that subject’/‘I have a long career in UX design so I'm lucky to have an interest that is saleable’).

IV. Shape my self-concept (n = 15). This category pertains to accounts of focused interests being tied to participants’ sense of self and identity, often leading to a more positive self-regard. Two sub-categories, namely ‘Introspection and Identity’ and ‘Pride and self-worth’, were found:

Introspection and identity (n = 8). Seven autistic participants and 1 non-autistic participant talked about focused interests shaping their identities (‘It becomes a feature in which my friends lovingly tease me that it is part of my personality trait’ /‘I wouldn't be the same without them’) and influencing the way they internally perceived themselves and others (‘A way to understand other people and my own identity and opinions’).

Pride and self-worth (n = 7). Three autistic and 4 non-autistic participants described focused interests and the accomplishments they inspired as a source of personal pride (‘They give me a sense of accomplishment, satisfaction and help me feel good about myself’/‘They give me self-worth’/‘They give me something to accomplish and be proud of’).

V. Dynamic and absorbing (n = 10). This category encompasses descriptions of how participants experienced the nature of their focused interests, with the sub-categories ‘Dynamic’ and ‘Absorbing’ being coded to reflect two broad ways in which participants perceived this nature.

Absorbing (n = 7). Six autistic participants and 1 non-autistic participant described their focused interests as intensely absorbing, including mentions of both joys (‘I can never get bored or fed up with it, it's something I can keep going back to and it makes me very happy’) and challenges related to this highly immersive nature (‘I find it very hard to do things other than things specifically focused on my focused interests’/‘I try to focus on other things that need done, but I will ditch my to do list to go back to thinking/researching/engaging with them’).

Dynamic (n = 3). Two autistic and 1 non-autistic participant talked about focused interests as nuanced and dynamic, discussing how their content and intensity can vary in different contexts or change over time (‘I add to my interests all the time and they change’; ‘Varies a bit, depending on mood and context!’).

Wellbeing and Motivation

Quantitative Results

Regarding RQ2, a two-way ANOVA demonstrated a significant effect of autism (F (1, 84) = 7.755, p = .007) on wellbeing, showing that overall autistic participants (M = 38.58, SD = 8.11) reported lower rates of wellbeing than non-autistic participants (M = 43.76, SD =7.60) However, there was no significant effect of focused interests on wellbeing (F (1, 84) = 0.215, p = .644), and no significant interaction between autism and focused interests on wellbeing (F (1, 84) = 1.523, p = .221).

To answer RQ3, participants who reported attending museums/galleries ‘three to five times’ or ‘more than six times’ in the 6 months prior to the survey were combined into the group ‘high attendance’, and participants who answered ‘not at all’ or ‘one or two times’ were combined into the group ‘low attendance’. A two-way ANOVA demonstrated no significant effect of museum attendance on wellbeing (F(1, 84) = 0.547, p = .462) and no significant interaction between autism and museum attendance on wellbeing (F(1,84) = .725, p = .397).

In response to RQ4, an independent samples t-test demonstrated that non-autistic participants (M = 74.10, SD = 11.97) reported higher total motivation (t(70) = 3.090, p = .003) compared to autistic participants (M = 64.21, SD = 14.29), but primarily due to higher extrinsic motivation (t(70) = −3.873, p < .001) in the non-autistic group (M = 43.53, SD = 10.24) compared to the autistic group (M = 33.35, SD = 11.48). Intrinsic motivation scores had no significant difference between groups (t(70) = .258, p = .781), and mean scores were similar between autistic (M = 30.85, SD = 5.52) and non-autistic participants (M = 30.56, SD = 3.24). In answer to RQ5, linear regressions demonstrated that extrinsic motivation scores were not significant in predicting wellbeing for neither the autistic (t = −.668, β = −.115, p = .509) nor the non-autistic group (t = 1.416, β = .301, p = .169); and intrinsic motivation scores were also not significant in predicting wellbeing for neither the autistic (t = .909, β = .157, p = .369) nor the non-autistic group (t = −.195, β = −.041, p = .847).

Qualitative Findings

Autistic (n = 43) and non-autistic (n = 40) participants shared personal motivations for visiting museum and gallery spaces, with four overarching categories being identified in their responses. These are described below:

I. Because I have a positive experience there. Within is category, participants described positive aspects of visiting museums/galleries, with four sub-categories identified: ‘experiencing positive feelings’, ‘enjoying the physical/sensory environment and atmosphere’, ‘being able to learn and explore interests’, and ‘having access to specific content’.

a. ‘Experiencing positive feelings’ (n = 46). Twenty seven autistic participants and 17 non-autistic participants described that they usually go to museums because it is an enjoyable experience that generates positive subjective feelings, such as calm and inspiration (‘I often go to observe and enjoy the calming effect that being in this type of space can have on me’/‘It helps me feel engaged with the world which is a rare feeling’/‘Inspiring, well-being, calming’).

b. ‘Enjoying the physical/sensory environment and atmosphere’ (n = 17). Fourteen autistic and 3 non-autistic participants described positive experiences related to the pleasant environment and atmosphere of museum and gallery spaces (‘Places of sanctuary: usually quiet, with soft lighting and rich but gentle sensory experiences (e.g. subtle scents of old objects’)/ ‘I enjoy the atmosphere, the calm environment’/‘to be immersed in the beauty of the art around me’).

c. ‘Being able to learn and explore interests’ (n = 46). This was the most frequently mentioned sub-category, with an equal number of autistic (n = 23) and non-autistic (n = 23) participants reporting going to museums for learning experiences and exploring their interests. Participants described how they enjoyed learning new things (‘I enjoy learning about different subjects’) and how museums/galleries allowed them to meaningfully engage with topics of interest (‘It allows me to engage with an interest in a different way’/ ‘being somewhere which is a physical manifestation of my hyperfixations’).

d. Having access to specific content (n = 18). Eight autistic and 10 non-autistic participants reported going to museums and galleries to gain access to specific content and unique objects (‘Specific exhibits’/ ‘I go to museums because they are full of objects that intrigue me’).

II. For social reasons. Another reason participants frequented museums or galleries was for socialising and connecting with others. Nine autistic participants and 4 non-autistic participants mentioned museums as a good space to connect with friends and partners (‘good places to go when deepening friendships: items can open doors to unexpected and meaningful thoughts and feelings’ / ‘As a social event (e.g. as a date, with friends)’) and to benefit their families and children (‘I have a 5 years old son, who loves to explore new things’).

III. Pandemic impact. Five participants (3 autistic and 2 non-autistic) also talked about the pandemic and how it affected their attendance in museums and galleries, explaining that they would attend those spaces more frequently in normal circumstances and that Covid was a reason for diminished attendance (‘Before covid I would go much more frequently’).

Museum Experience

Quantitative Results

In regards to RQ6, a two-way ANOVA indicated a significant main effect of exploring focused interests in museums/galleries on the Positive Affect Scale scores (F(3, 67) = 14.693, p < .001), and repeated contrasts using Bonferroni analyses showed only significant differences between the groups reporting the levels ‘not at all’, ‘a little’, and ‘quite a bit’ of being able to explore focused interests, but no significant differences between the groups ‘quite a bit’ and ‘a lot’. There was no significant effect of autism (F (1,67) = 0.536, p < .467) and no significant interaction between exploring focused interests in museums/galleries and autism on the Positive Affect Scale scores (F (1,67) = 1.811, p < .155). This shows that both autistic (M = 9.69, SD = 4.22) and non-autistic (M = 17.45, SD = 3.45) groups experienced more positive feelings during their visits to galleries and museums, which happened if they were able to explore those interests to some extent – not necessarily ‘a lot’.

Testing whether the reverse was also true – that is, if no/little exploration of focused interests in museums/galleries related to more negative emotions during the visit – a two-way ANOVA demonstrated no significant effect of exploring focused interests in museums/galleries on Negative Affect Scale scores (F (3, 67) = 0.659, p = .580). However, there was a significant effect of autism (F (1, 67) = 15.699, p < .001), with autistic participants reporting overall more negative emotions while visiting museums/galleries. There was no significant interaction between exploring focused interests in galleries/museums and autism on the Negative Affect Scale scores (F (3, 67) = 17.125, p = .301), suggesting that autistic participants (M = 9.69, SD = 4.22), overall, reported more negative emotions than non-autistic participants (M = 6.54, SD = 2.42) while visiting museums/galleries, but that the level of exploration of focused interests in those spaces was not a significant factor involved in the negative emotions experienced.

Qualitative Findings

When asked about what museums/galleries could do to improve the experience of autistic visitors, 7 non-autistic people who reported having autistic family members and 15 autistic people contributed answers. Alternatively, 29 non-autistic people without autistic family members answered the question ‘what could museums/galleries do to improve your overall experience?’. Participants' answers were divided into the two overarching categories: ‘it is already good’ and ‘implement changes’:

I. Already good. Participants, including 7 non-autistic and 3 autistic, mentioned aspects of their experiences in museums/galleries that were satisfactory, not suggesting any improvements (‘I can’t think of anything – I really enjoy everything about museums and art galleries’/‘it is just perfect’).

II. Implement changes. Within this category, participants discussed how museums could improve their experience. Four subcategories were identified, namely: ‘in the physical/sensory environment’, ‘in the content displayed and how it is displayed’, ‘in the information and resources available’, and ‘in the opening times and occupation limits.’

In the physical/sensory environment (n = 16). Mostly autistic participants (n = 12) suggested implementing changes in the physical environment of the museum that would minimise sensory overload and lead to a better experience (‘Some interactive exhibits can be quite challenging if they use lights and sounds, so a warning before the exhibit and/or a route to avoid it could be useful’/ ‘Have an area you can escape to if overwhelmed that isn’t the toilet.’) Non-autistic participants (n = 4) also mentioned other aspects of the physical environment that would make their visits more pleasurable, like sitting and restauration (‘Quality cafe’/ ‘Places to sit for a while’).

‘In the content displayed and how it is displayed’ (n = 16). Ten non-autistic and 6 autistic participants discussed the collections and information were displayed in museums/galleries and suggested improvements. Answers discussed the delivery of the content to visitors and suggested changes in aspects such as the captions/descriptions of the objects and pictures presented (‘It would be good if museums [could] offer a two-tier information system. One with bullet point information and one with more detailed accounts if required’ / ‘all the information we could possibly want, docents who are knowledgeable on the subject to talk with’), as well as suggestions for different content (‘Exhibitions on less commercial subjects’/’Include exhibits from a diverse range of places and cultures’).

‘In the information and resources available’ (n = 13). Ten autistic and 3 non-autistic participants suggested improvements in aspects such as signposting directions and in the resources available within the museum (‘make sure everything's always well signposted and you have floorplans scattered about in obvious places so we don't get lost while we're distracted by all the cool stuff!’ / ‘events, study spaces, social media and online resources should be explored, in addition to exhibitions’/‘I think that allowing people to book online rather than phoning up, and providing information to people in advance (e.g. layout and sensory environment)’).

‘In the opening times and capacity limits’ (n = 15). Ten autistic participants and 5 non-autistic participants contributed comments on the negative impact of busy museums and big crowds in their experience, suggesting the offering of quiet sessions (‘advertising quiet hours when there's less people and low lighting/low volume of music’), as well as suggestions for longer opening hours and regulating museum capacity (‘Possibly having limits on numbers to avoid excessive noise’/‘Be open a little bit longer’).

To gain a deeper understanding of the impact that exploring focused interests can have on people's experiences in museums/galleries, participants were asked to talk about a visit to a museum/gallery in which they could explore their focused interests, with 37 autistic and 21 non-autistic participants answering this question. Two overarching categories were identified in the answers: ‘not able to explore focused interests in museums/galleries’, and ‘able to explore focused interests in museums/galleries’. Within this last category, the subcategories ‘good experiences and/or positive aspects of the visit’, ‘disappointing experiences and/or negative aspects of the visit’, and ‘neutral experiences’ were identified.

I. Able to explore focused interests in museums/galleries.

Good experiences and/or positive aspects of the visit (n = 41). Twenty six autistic and 15 non-autistic participants described visits to museums/galleries in which they were able to explore their interests (‘There was an exhibition at a museum a few years ago that was based around my focused interest – that was great to see, especially because my focused interest (play) is often undervalued’ / ‘It was so wonderful to immerse myself into my interest by simply being in the museum’). Autistic participants more often talked about environmental aspects that made their visits enjoyable, such as emptier rooms (‘Was just after a lockdown so restricted numbers and I could see the pictures properly and in peace.’ / ‘I could get up close and the galleries weren't crowded. I felt comfortable being on my own and taking as long as I wanted to look at each picture’) and reduced sensory input (‘Lighting was low which helped’ / ‘It was quiet so I can take my time to enjoy the experience without feeling harassed or overstimulated’).

Disappointing experiences and/or negative aspects of the visit (n = 9). Seven autistic and 2 non-autistic participants contributed answers about factors that made their visits less enjoyable, including considerations of the environment (‘I enjoy more a quiet museum so I can explore serenely’), content (‘the advertisement didn't make it clear that the curated items focused on twentieth century abstract quilts’) and layout (‘didn’t make for a very coherent or flowing experience’). Autistic participants most frequently mentioned sensory aspects in a museum/art gallery space that negatively impacted their experiences, such as the excessive amount of visual and auditory stimuli (e.g. ‘There was also too much to see and read’; ‘The museum as a whole was a bit overwhelming, as there's a lot going on visually plus all the people and noise of them around you. It made me feel uneasy the whole time’).

Neutral answers (n = 8). Four autistic and 4 non-autistic participants also mentioned visits in which they explored their focused interests, but did not talk about any positive or negative aspects of their experiences (‘I have gone to the National Museum of Scotland several times to look at their costume collection’).

II. Not able to explore focused interests in museums/galleries. A few participants (5 autistic and 1 non-autistic) said that they were not able to explore their interests in a museum or gallery (‘No, museums wouldn't teach me anything new about them so there is no point in going’).

Discussion

The present study aimed to test whether focused interests, motivation, and museum/gallery attendance were associated with better wellbeing in autistic adults. We also aimed to identify whether non-autistic people had focused interests, and, if that was the case, to understand the differences in the content and purpose of autistic and non-autistic people's focused interests. Additionally, we hoped to understand the differing experiences and needs of autistic and non-autistic people when visiting museums and art galleries, investigating whether the extent to which participants were able to explore their focused interests would impact on their feelings during visits to those spaces. Finally, we also aimed to see if autistic people would show higher motivation to engage with their focused interests compared to non-autistic people, with higher rates of intrinsic motivation specifically.

We found that autistic participants showed significantly lower rates of wellbeing than non-autistic participants, and the presence of focused interests, the levels of motivation for focused interests, and the rates of museum attendance did not have a significant effect on wellbeing for autistic participants. This points to the complexity of the issues impacting on autistic peoples’ wellbeing. For example, there is scope for minority stress (Botha & Frost, 2018). Botha and Frost argue that autistic people must deal with an additional stress burden that stems from constituting a social minority group, frequently dealing with stressors such as inaccessible spaces, everyday discrimination, and stigmatisation, which are harmful to wellbeing. In that sense, it is possible that the variables analysed in this study were not impactful enough to predict wellbeing in autistic people in the face of the complex stressors faced daily by this population.

Statistical analysis did not indicate a significant relationship between having focused interests and better wellbeing. However, qualitative accounts of autistic participants included mentions of focused interests assisting in maintaining and promoting better wellbeing and mental health, as well as helping in coping with negative emotions. These contrasting findings could be a product of the limitations of using a measure of wellbeing that was not developed for autistic people specifically – for example, there may be unique domains of autistic wellbeing which were not encompassed in this measure, but which may be enhanced by engaging with focused interests. This also indicates that the relationship between focused interests and wellbeing may be more complex and nuanced than our methodology allowed us to tap into. This complexity is echoed in the findings a of mixed-methods study by Bross et al. (2022), where participants extensively described in qualitative responses how focused interests had several positive impacts to their lives, including managing trauma, developing social skills, and fostering positive emotions such as calm and joy. However, they also reported ‘masking’ or hiding their interests to avoid shame and lack of acceptance from others. More than half of the participants in Bross et al.'s study reported experiences of bullying related to their focused interests, with quantitative results indicating that those reporting more interest-related experiences of bullying had higher depression and anxiety scores. Additionally, participants who did not have support from others in their pursuits of interest had higher stress levels than those who did.

It is possible that occasional visits to galleries and museums may not have effects on wellbeing that are long-lasting, especially if autistic people must consistently navigate the harmful and pervasive effects of minority stress described by Botha & Frost (2018). However, it is also possible that the many environmental and sensory barriers reported by autistic participants in museum/gallery spaces are hindering the potential of these spaces to be beneficial to their wellbeing. As autistic participants also reported more negative feelings during their visits than non-autistic visitors, which may be related to the also frequently reported environmental barriers, we wonder if museum/gallery spaces would have an unlocked potential for promoting autistic wellbeing if they addressed these barriers and became more accessible spaces.

In terms of focused interests, we found that most non-autistic people also reported having them. Autistic people, however, reported having focused interests at a significantly higher rate, with only three autistic participants reporting no focused interests. This is consistent with previous findings indicating that the largest part of autistic people has focused interests, but that it is not necessarily the case for every autistic individual (Klin et al., 2007). Different from the findings of Grove et al. (2018), autistic people did not show higher intrinsic motivation for focused interests in comparison to non-autistic people. However, non-autistic people showed significantly higher extrinsic motivation than autistic participants, indicating that they were overall more motivated by external factors (e.g., financial rewards, peer approval, and external feedback) than autistic people in their pursuits of interest. It is possible that autistic individuals find such external rewards less compelling or motivating than non-autistic individuals do.

Our qualitative findings contradict previous research indicating that autistic people's topics of interests are stereotypical, non-social, or inflexible (Cho et al., 2017; Turner-Brown et al., 2011), as autistic participants often mentioned many interests that could be considered ‘typical’ (e.g. art and culture, and music), often discussed the dynamic nature of their focused interests, and indicated more often than non-autistic people that they use their interests as a means of socialising and connecting with others. Additionally, our findings are compatible with previous research showing that focused interests are of high importance to autistic adults (Attwood, 2003), with participants in the present study describing them as meaningful, important, and essential to a good life. Furthermore, consistent with the findings of a study by Koenig and Williams (2017), in which autistic participants emphasised the positive and calming effects of focused interests, autistic participants in the present study also viewed their interests positively – mentioning the many ways in which they were beneficial to their lives, and frequently discussing positive subjective effects of engaging with their interests.

Similar to the findings of Milton and Sims (2016), who identified that autistic people often reported a feeling of satisfaction for being able to share their interests with others, many autistic participants in the present study also mentioned using their focused interests as a means of social connection. It is possible that previous research describing autistic interests as non-social or socially isolating were adopting neurotypical understandings of sociality as a standard. Recent research indicates that autistic people socialise in different, autistic ways, and often build meaningful social connections with people who understand their communication and socialisation style. Moreover, compatible with the possibility suggested by Klin et al. (2007) that autistic people may use focused interests as a means to navigate the demands of everyday life, autistic participants in the present study often mentioned how focused interests helped them make sense of the world and manage life better.

Being able to explore focused interests in museums and galleries at a higher rate was significantly related to more positive emotions experienced by both autistic and non-autistic people during their visits to those spaces. Similarly, a study by Grove et al. (2018) had previously found that autistic adults who have focused interests scored significantly higher in the satisfaction with leisure activity scale, also pointing to the potential benefits of connecting focused interests with leisure/recreational contexts. Interestingly, the opposite effect was not observed, and less or no exploration of focused interests in museums/galleries was not associated with more negative emotions during visits for autistic people. In fact, autistic people reported negative feelings more frequently than non-autistic people in museum/gallery spaces, and our qualitative results indicate that many autistic adults experienced environmental barriers and sensory concerns in their visits, often describing how elements such as noise and crowds can generate negative experiences. These findings reflect those of the Sensory Street project (MacLennan et al., 2023), which has sought to understand the experiences of autistic people in public spaces and the impact that the sensory environment can have. MacLennan et al. (2023) found that the sensory environment can be disabling to autistic people and that, by addressing these barriers, it could enable greater access to these spaces and improve autistic people's quality of life. Thus, it is possible that the negative emotions experienced by autistic people when visiting museum/gallery spaces are more related to sensory concerns and accessibility-related barriers, which in turn makes it harder to engage with the content of the museum and reap the benefits of potentially exploring focused interests.

Accordingly, when asked about what museums/galleries could do to improve people's experiences in those spaces, autistic participants most often mentioned the physical and sensory environment of museums/galleries, recommending the minimisation of sensory overload. Despite the often commented upon sensory concerns, many participants, autistic and non-autistic, reported at least one museum/gallery visit in which they could explore a focused interest, and commented on mostly positive experiences and good aspects of those visits. Moreover, when asked about the reasons why they go to museums/galleries, most participants’ (autistic and non-autistic) answers were coded into the category ‘because I have a positive experience there’. Most frequently commented upon by autistic people were the positive feelings generated in their visits, such as states of calm. This is consistent with the growing body of research pointing to the general benefits of cultural attendance (Camic & Chatterjee, 2013), which should be further explored in research focusing on autistic people specifically.

Conclusion – Including Strengths and Limitations

To our knowledge, this is the first study to investigate the wellbeing outcomes associated with motivation, museum/gallery attendance, and focused interests in both autistic people and non-autistic people. However, there are significant limitations – some measures used in this study were not formulated for autistic populations, potentially assuming neurotypical stances that efface cross-neurotype and individual nuance. Similarly, more research is needed to include a wide variety of autistic people, as this study's sample lacked diversity in terms of gender, level of education, ethnicity, and only included autistic people with access to, or ability to engage with, online written communication. Future research should aim to include a more diverse sample of autistic people, especially with diverse communication needs, in more accessible formats like ‘easy-read’ text or using research methods that do not rely solely on verbal or written communication. Nonetheless, we believe that this study offers a novel insight into autistic people's experiences with focused interests and museum/gallery attendance, indicating that there is a potential benefit in exploring those factors together. By displaying content aligned with topics of interest in an accessible and inclusive way, museums and galleries can promote positive emotions during visits and minimise stress stemming from environmental barriers, such as sensory overload.

Footnotes

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to acknowledge and thank Dr Eilidh Cage for the guidance and advice.

ORCID iDs

Sarah Dantas

Aimee Fletcher

Ethical Approval

This study received ethical approval from the University of Stirling General Ethics Panel (GUEP).

Authors’ Contributions

SD conceptualised this study, collected and analysed the data, and wrote the original manuscript for publication. AF contributed thorough feedback to the study design – including reviewing the ethics materials and survey questions – and contributed to editing the final manuscript for publication.

Funding

The authors received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The authors declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

References

Anthony

L. G.

Kenworthy

Yerys

B. E.

Jankowski

K. F.

James

J. D.

Harms

M. B.

Martin

Wallace

G. L.

(2013). Interests in high-functioning autism are more intense, interfering, and idiosyncratic than those in neurotypical development. Development and Psychopathology, 25(3), 643–652. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0954579413000072

Antonetti

Fletcher

(2016). Parent perceptions of museum participation: A comparison between parents of children with and without autism spectrum disorders. Inclusion, 4(2), 109–119. https://doi.org/10.1352/2326-6988-4.2.109

Ardeleanu

Steinberg

Garfield

Voltaire

Shea

Brown

Chvasta

Tan

C. D.

(2025). Self-identification of autism: Why some autistic adults lack a clinical diagnosis and why this matters for inclusion. Autism, 29(9), 2344–2355. https://doi.org/10.1177/13623613241297222. Epub 2024 Nov 18. PMID: 39552426

Association

A. P.

(2021). Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-5). American Psychiatric Publishing.

Attwood

(2003). Understanding and managing circumscribed interests. In Prior

(Ed.), Learning and behaviour problems in asperger syndrome (pp. 126–147). Guilford Press.

Bagatell

Chan

D. V.

Syu

Lamarche

E. M.

Klinger

L. G.

(2022). Sensory processing and community participation in autistic adults. Frontiers in Psychology, 13. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.876127

Baron-Cohen

Wheelwright

(1999). ‘Obsessions’ in children with autism or Asperger syndrome. British Journal of Psychiatry, 175(5), 484–490. https://doi.org/10.1192/bjp.175.5.484

Bengtsson

(2016). How to plan and perform a qualitative study using content analysis. NursingPlus Open, 2, 8–14. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.npls.2016.01.001

Billstedt

Gillberg

I. C.

Gillberg

(2011). Aspects of quality of life in adults diagnosed with autism in childhood. Autism, 15(1), 7–20. https://doi.org/10.1177/1362361309346066

10.

Botha

Frost

D. M.

(2018). Extending the minority stress model to understand mental health problems experienced by the autistic population. Society and Mental Health, 10(1), 20–34. https://doi.org/10.1177/2156869318804297

11.

Boyd

B. A.

Conroy

M. A.

Mancil

G. R.

Nakao

Alter

P. J.

(2007). Effects of circumscribed interests on the social behaviors of children with autism spectrum disorders. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 37(8), 1550–1561. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10803-006-0286-8

12.

Bross

L. A.

Huffman

J. M.

Hagiwara

(2022). Examining the special interest areas of autistic adults with a focus on their employment and mental health outcomes. Journal of Vocational Rehabilitation, 57(3), 289–305. https://doi.org/10.3233/jvr-221218

13.

Camic

P. M.

Chatterjee

H. J.

(2013). Museums and art galleries as partners for public health interventions. Perspectives in Public Health, 133(1), 66–71. https://doi.org/10.1177/1757913912468523

14.

Cassidy

Rodgers

(2017). Understanding and prevention of suicide in autism. The Lancet Psychiatry, 4(6), e11. https://doi.org/10.1016/s2215-0366(17)30162-1

15.

Cho

I. Y. K.

Jelinkova

Schuetze

Vinette

S. A.

Rahman

McCrimmon

Dewey

Bray

(2017). Circumscribed interests in adolescents with autism spectrum disorder: A look beyond trains, planes, and clocks. PLoS ONE, 12(11), e0187414. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0187414

16.

Crompton

C. J.

Ropar

Evans-Williams

C. V.

Flynn

E. G.

Fletcher-Watson

(2020). Autistic peer-to-peer information transfer is highly effective. Autism, 24(7), 1704–1712. https://doi.org/10.1177/1362361320919286

17.

Cuypers

K. F.

Knudtsen

M. S.

Sandgren

Krokstad

Wikström

B. M.

Theorell

(2011). Cultural activities and public health: Research in Norway and Sweden. An overview. Arts & Health, 3(1), 6–26. https://doi.org/10.1080/17533015.2010.481288

18.

Dallman

A. R.

Bailliard

Harrop

(2022). Identifying predictors of momentary negative affect and depression severity in adolescents with autism: An exploratory ecological momentary assessment study. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 52, 291–303. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10803-021-04935-8

19.

Department for Culture, Media and Sport. (2024a). Participation Survey: Annual report, museums and galleries. UK Government.

20.

Department for Culture, Media and Sport. (2024b). Reasons for visiting museums and galleries. UK Government.

21.

Department for Culture, Media and Sport. (2024c). Participation survey: Demographic breakdowns. UK Government.

22.

Dupuy

E. G.

Vincent

Lecchino

Boisvert

Trépanier

Nadeau

De Guise

Bherer

(2024). Prefrontal engagement predicts the effect of museum visit on psychological well-being: An fNIRS exploration. Frontiers in Psychiatry, 15. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyt.2024.1263351

23.

Eriksson

J. M.

Andersen

L. M.

Bejerot

(2013). RAADS-14 screen: Validity of a screening tool for autism spectrum disorder in an adult psychiatric population. Molecular Autism, 4(1), 49. https://doi.org/10.1186/2040-2392-4-49

24.

Fletcher

A. L.

(2025). Neurodivergence in museums: making the cultural heritage sector accessible using participatory practices [Doctoral thesis, University of Glasgow]. https://theses.gla.ac.uk/id/eprint/85238.

25.

Fortuna

Chamberlain

Filice

Kurt

Porter

Twichell

Ogren

(2024). Exploring the usefulness of pre-visit materials for children with autism at a public museum. Translational Science in Occupation, 1(1). https://doi.org/10.32873/unmc.dc.tso.1.1.04

26.

Foster

S. J.

Ackerman

R. A.

Wilks

C. E.

Dodd

Calderon

Ropar

Fletcher-Watson

Crompton

C. J.

Sasson

N. J.

(2025). Rapport in same and mixed neurotype groups of autistic and non-autistic adults. Autism. https://doi.org/10.1177/13623613251320444

27.

Grove

Hoekstra

R. A.

Wierda

Begeer

(2018). Special interests and subjective wellbeing in autistic adults. Autism Research, 11(5), 766–775. https://doi.org/10.1002/aur.1931

28.

Grove

Roth

Hoekstra

R. A.

(2016). The motivation for special interests in individuals with autism and controls: Development and validation of the special interest motivation scale. Autism Research, 9(6), 677–688. https://doi.org/10.1002/aur.1560

29.

Jones

D. R.

Botha

Ackerman

R. A.

King

Sasson

N. J.

(2023). Non-autistic observers both detect and demonstrate the double empathy problem when evaluating interactions between autistic and non-autistic adults. Autism, 28(8), 2053–2065. https://doi.org/10.1177/13623613231219743

30.

Jordan

C. J.

Caldwell-Harris

C. L.

(2012). Understanding differences in neurotypical and autism spectrum special interests through internet forums. Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities, 50(5), 391–402. https://doi.org/10.1352/1934-9556-50.5.391

31.

Kapp

S. K.

Gillespie-Lynch

Sherman

L. E.

Hutman

(2013). Deficit, difference, or both? Autism and neurodiversity. Developmental Psychology, 49(1), 59–71. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0028353

32.

Kent

Simonoff

(2017). Anxiety in children and adolescents with autism spectrum disorder (pp. 5–32). Elsevier eBooks. https://doi.org/10.1016/b978-0-12-805122-1.00002-8

33.

Klin

Danovitch

J. H.

Merz

A. B.

Volkmar

F. R.

(2007). Circumscribed interests in higher functioning individuals with autism spectrum disorders: An exploratory study. Research and Practice for Persons With Severe Disabilities, 32(2), 89–100. https://doi.org/10.2511/rpsd.32.2.89

34.

Koenig

K. P.

Williams

L. H.

(2017). Characterization and utilization of preferred interests: A survey of adults on the autism spectrum. Occupational Therapy in Mental Health, 33(2), 129–140. https://doi.org/10.1080/0164212x.2016.1248877

35.

Langa

L. A.

Monaco

Subramaniam

Jaeger

P. T.

Shanahan

Ziebarth

(2013). Improving the museum experiences of children with autism spectrum disorders and their families: An exploratory examination of their motivations and needs and using web-based resources to meet them. Curator: The Museum Journal, 56(3), 323–335. https://doi.org/10.1111/cura.12031

36.

Lizon

Taels

Vanheule

(2023). Specific interests as a social boundary and bridge: A qualitative interview study with autistic individuals. Autism, 28(5), 1150–1160. https://doi.org/10.1177/13623613231193532

37.

MacLennan

Woolley

@21andsensory

Heasman

Starns

George

Manning

(2023). “It Is a Big Spider Web of Things”: Sensory experiences of autistic adults in public spaces. Autism in Adulthood, 5(4), 411–422. https://doi.org/10.1089/aut.2022.0024

38.

Maitland

C. A.

Rhodes

O’hare

Stewart

M. E.

(2021). Social identities and mental well-being in autistic adults. Autism, 25(6), 1771–1783. https://doi.org/10.1177/13623613211004328

39.

Milton

Sims

(2016). How is a sense of well-being and belonging constructed in the accounts of autistic adults? Disability & Society, 31(4), 520–534. https://doi.org/10.1080/09687599.2016.1186529

40.

Milton

D. E.

(2012). On the ontological status of autism: The ‘double empathy problem’. Disability & Society, 27(6), 883–887. https://doi.org/10.1080/09687599.2012.710008

41.

Murray

Lesser

Lawson

(2005). Attention, monotropism and the diagnostic criteria for autism. Autism, 9(2), 139–156. https://doi.org/10.1177/1362361305051398

42.

Russell

Cooper

Barton

Ensum

Gaunt

Horwood

Ingham

Kessler

Metcalfe

Parr

Rai

Wiles

(2017). Protocol for a feasibility study and randomised pilot trial of a low-intensity psychological intervention for depression in adults with autism: The Autism Depression Trial (ADEPT). BMJ Open, 7, e019545. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2017-019545

43.

Ryan

R. M.

Deci

E. L.

(2000). Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being. American Psychologist, 55(1), 68–78. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066x.55.1.68

44.

South

Ozonoff

Mcmahon

W. M.

(2007). The relationship between executive functioning, central coherence, and repetitive behaviors in the high-functioning autism spectrum. Autism, 11(5), 437–451. https://doi.org/10.1177/1362361307079606

45.

Stewart

M. E.

Barnard

Pearson

Hasan

O’Brien

(2006). Presentation of depression in autism and Asperger syndrome. Autism, 10(1), 103–116. https://doi.org/10.1177/1362361306062013

46.

Stimpson

N. J.

Hull

Mandy

(2021). The association between autistic traits and mental well-being. Journal of Happiness Studies, 22(1), 287–304. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10902-020-00229-5

47.

Tennant

Hiller

Fishwick

Platt

Joseph

Weich

Parkinson

Secker

Stewart-Brown

(2007). Warwick-Edinburgh Mental Well-being Scale (WEMWBS) [Database record ]. APA PsycTests. https://doi.org/10.1037/t01628-000

48.

Thompson

E. R.

(2007). Development and validation of an internationally Reliable Short-Form of the Positive and Negative Affect Schedule (PANAS). Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 38(2), 227–242. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022022106297301

49.

Thomson

Chatterjee

(2014). Assessing well-being outcomes for arts and heritage activities: Development of a Museum Well-being Measures toolkit. Journal of Applied Arts & Health, 5(1), 29–50. https://doi.org/10.1386/jaah.5.1.29_1

50.

Turner-Brown

L. M.

Lam

K. S.

Holtzclaw

T. N.

Dichter

G. S.

Bodfish

J. W.

(2011). Phenomenology and measurement of circumscribed interests in autism spectrum disorders. Autism, 15(4), 437–456. https://doi.org/10.1177/1362361310386507

51.

Watchorn

Tucker

Hitch

Frawley

(2025). Co-designing autism-friendly museums: Insights from autistic individuals and museum professionals. Disability & Society, 1–22. https://doi.org/10.1080/09687599.2025.2494146

52.

Winter-Messiers

M. A.

(2007). From tarantulas to toilet brushes. Remedial and Special Education, 28(3), 140–152. https://doi.org/10.1177/07419325070280030301

53.

Wood

(2021). Autism, intense interests and support in school: From wasted efforts to shared understandings. Educational Review, 73(1), 34–54. https://doi.org/10.1080/00131911.2019.1566213

54.

World Health Organization. (2019). What is the evidence on the role of the arts in improving health and well-being? A scoping review. WHO Regional Office for Europe.

Focused Interests,Motivation,and Museum/Gallery Attendance – A Mixed-Methods Survey Exploring Autistic Adults’ Experiences and Wellbeing Outcomes

Abstract

Lay Abstract

Keywords

Introduction

Focused Interests – Different Framings and Findings in Research

Focused Interests, Wellbeing, and Museum/Gallery Attendance

Methods

Recruitment

Participants

Data Collection and Analysis

Results and Findings

Focused Interests

Quantitative Results

Qualitative Findings

Wellbeing and Motivation

Quantitative Results

Qualitative Findings

Museum Experience

Quantitative Results

Qualitative Findings

Discussion

Conclusion – Including Strengths and Limitations

Footnotes

Acknowledgements

ORCID iDs

Ethical Approval

Authors’ Contributions

Funding

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

References