Traditional qualitative interviews often privilege neurotypical expectations for:

• Linear autobiographical recall

• Rapid verbal processing

• Chronological narrative organization

• Decontextualized verbal explanation

These assumptions may obscure or distort autistic memory, particularly when recalling embodied, affective, sensory, or relational experiences.

Communication Mapping was developed to better align data generation with neurodivergent ways of remembering, processing, and communicating. It is grounded in the premise that accessibility is not supplemental to methodological rigor, but central to it.

Participant Direction

Participants choose how information is organized, represented, and prioritized.

Flexible Structure

Maps may take multiple forms including:

• Mind maps

• Categorized lists/columns

• Safe/unsafe sorting

• Custom participant-created formats

Sensory and Affective Anchoring

Prompts support recall through:

• Emotion

• Sound/rhythm

• Body sensations

• Environmental context

• Relational memory

Collaborative Interpretation

Participants are invited to guide language, framing, and thematic interpretation throughout the process.

Ongoing Consent

Participants retain control over pacing, depth, and disclosure throughout the session.

Communication Mapping emerged through iterative pilot design and reflexive refinement.

Autistic adults often use nonlinear, sensory, relational, and context-dependent means to recall childhood communication and experiences (Ochs et al., 2004; Kapp et al., 2013). There is a need for qualitative methods that support Autistic epistemologies by centering Autistic ways of remembering and making sense of communication without forcing chronological or deficit-oriented interpretation. This was a central consideration in development of the method.   

Initial use of calendar-based interviewing (Freedman et al., 1988; Belli, 1998) revealed limitations in chronological and linear approaches when a pilot participant attempted to describe sensory, associative, or relational communication memories. In response, the design shifted toward a visual, nonlinear, participant-led mapping process informed by:

• Life History Calendars (Freedman et al., 1988; Belli, 1998; Daelman et al., 2025) 

• Education Journey Mapping (Annamma, 2016; Beneke, 2021)

• Photo/Visual Elicitation (Harper, 2002; Padgett et al., 2013)

• Autism-accessible interviewing research (Courchesne et al., 2021; Norris & Maras, 2021)

• Research on Autistic autobiographical memory (Zamoscik et al., 2016; Agron et al., 2023)

This method continues to evolve through participant feedback and reflexive adaptation.

How is this different from a traditional interview?

Communication Mapping provides visual and relational scaffolds that support associative recall and participant-directed meaning-making before and during interviewing.

Is the map the data, or is the interview the data?

Both. The map functions as a co-constructed artifact and memory support, while the interview expands on meanings represented in the map.

Can this be adapted beyond echolalia research?

Potentially yes. The broader method may have applications in disability research, trauma-informed interviewing, participatory inquiry, and other contexts where traditional interviewing may create access barriers.

Meaning Beyond Words is a research and knowledge translation initiative focused on challenging deficit-based interpretations of autistic communication and advancing more just, relational, and affirming understandings of communicative competence.

Areas of focus include:

• Echolalia and scripting

• Communicative justice

• Interpretive practices in education

• Disability-centered research design

• Neurodiversity-affirming pedagogy