shapeofsoup
  • Monotropic Expansion
  • 1. Introduction
    • 1.1 Prevailing Deficit Framework
    • 1.2 Purpose and Goals
    • 1.3 Monotropic Expansion Model
    • 1.4 Addressing Accessibility
    • 1.5 Paper Overview
    • 1.6 Positionality and Rationale
  • 2. Model Mechanism
    • 2.1 Anchoring
    • 2.2 Iterative Context Building
    • 2.3 Cognitive Inertia
    • 2.4 Directionality and Precision
    • 2.5 Scalability and Flexibility
  • 3. Neurological Foundation
    • 3.1 Salience Anchoring and Internal Relevance
    • 3.2 Attentional Modulation and Cognitive Inertia
    • 3.3 Predictive Coding and Inside-Out Construction
    • 3.4 Neurodevelopmental Trajectories and Structural Divergence
    • 3.5 Implications for Structural Modeling and Neuroethical Practice
  • 4. Theoretical Alignment
    • 4.1 Monotropism (Murray, Lesser, Lawson, 2005)
    • 4.2 Executive Dysfunction and Attentional Flexibility
    • 4.3. Weak Central Coherence (Frith, 1989)
    • 4.4. Theory of Mind (ToM) and the Assumption of Deficiency
    • 4.5. Language Processing and Internal Narrative
    • 4.6. Trauma, Inertia, and Pattern Reinforcement
    • 4.7. Double Empathy Problem (Milton, 2012)
    • 4.8. DSM-5 Framing and Pathologized Comparison
  • 5. Implications
    • 5.1. Diagnostic Framing and the Myth of Functioning Labels
    • 5.2. Coexisting Neurodivergent Conditions and Inertial Structures
    • 5.3. Rethinking Support and Accommodation
    • 5.4. Therapy Approaches, Cognitive Models, and Ethical Misalignment
    • 5.5. Self-Perception, Identity, and Communication Disconnects
    • 5.6. Social Systems, Education, and Institutional Friction
  • 6. Reframing Autism
    • 6.1. The Structural Model of Divergence
    • 6.2. Moving Beyond Developmental Language
    • 6.3. Implications for Language, Ethics, and Research
  • 7. Conclusion
  • 8. Update Log
  • Contact & Support
Powered by GitBook
On this page

4.2 Executive Dysfunciton and Attentional Flexibility

Mainstream interpretations of autism often focus on executive dysfunction, particularly in shifting attention, managing tasks, or transitioning between activities. These traits are typically framed as impairments—failures to meet a normative standard of attentional flexibility.

The Monotropic Expansion model offers a reframing: difficulties with redirection are not inherently dysfunctional, but arise from the cognitive strain of contextual interruption. Once a focal point has anchored and begun to expand meaningfully, interruption requires cognitive re-anchoring and reprocessing of surrounding context—an effortful and often disorienting experience.

Rather than labeling this as inflexibility, the model identifies a structural inertia to cognitive investment. What appears as delayed processing or resistance may instead reflect a higher cognitive cost to disruption, not a reduced capacity for control. This distinction has implications for therapeutic support, suggesting that scaffolding transition through shared context is more effective than externally imposed task-switching.

Previous4.1 Monotropism (Murray, Lesser, Lawson, 2005)Next4.3. Weak Central Coherence (Frith, 1989)

Last updated 2 months ago