NeuroBridge: Using Generative AI to Bridge Cross-neurotype Communication Differences through Neurotypical Perspective-taking

September 27, 2025 Β· Declared Dead Β· πŸ› International ACM SIGACCESS Conference on Computers and Accessibility

πŸ‘» CAUSE OF DEATH: Ghosted
No code link whatsoever

"No code URL or promise found in abstract"

Evidence collected by the PWNC Scanner

Authors Rukhshan Haroon, Kyle Wigdor, Katie Yang, Nicole Toumanios, Eileen T. Crehan, Fahad Dogar arXiv ID 2509.23434 Category cs.HC: Human-Computer Interaction Cross-listed cs.AI Citations 1 Venue International ACM SIGACCESS Conference on Computers and Accessibility Last Checked 4 months ago
Abstract
Communication challenges between autistic and neurotypical individuals stem from a mutual lack of understanding of each other's distinct, and often contrasting, communication styles. Yet, autistic individuals are expected to adapt to neurotypical norms, making interactions inauthentic and mentally exhausting for them. To help redress this imbalance, we build NeuroBridge, an online platform that utilizes large language models (LLMs) to simulate: (a) an AI character that is direct and literal, a style common among many autistic individuals, and (b) four cross-neurotype communication scenarios in a feedback-driven conversation between this character and a neurotypical user. Through NeuroBridge, neurotypical individuals gain a firsthand look at autistic communication, and reflect on their role in shaping cross-neurotype interactions. In a user study with 12 neurotypical participants, we find that NeuroBridge improved their understanding of how autistic people may interpret language differently, with all describing autism as a social difference that "needs understanding by others" after completing the simulation. Participants valued its personalized, interactive format and described AI-generated feedback as "constructive", "logical" and "non-judgmental". Most perceived the portrayal of autism in the simulation as accurate, suggesting that users may readily accept AI-generated (mis)representations of disabilities. To conclude, we discuss design implications for disability representation in AI, the need for making NeuroBridge more personalized, and LLMs' limitations in modeling complex social scenarios.
Community shame:
Not yet rated
Community Contributions

Found the code? Know the venue? Think something is wrong? Let us know!

πŸ“œ Similar Papers

In the same crypt β€” Human-Computer Interaction

Died the same way β€” πŸ‘» Ghosted