The Sensory Audit: Making Workplaces Safer for Individuals on the Autism Spectrum

Background:

Individuals with ASD (e.g. Baranek et al., 2006; Leekam et al., 2007; Crane et al., 2009), as well as those with high levels of autistic traits (Robertson & Simmons, 2011a, submitted), have difficulties with sensory processing.  In particular, the everyday aspects of typical working and social environments can become distressing for those with sensory sensitivities (Robertson & Simmons, 2011b, submitted).  However, there is currently no systematic way to evaluate environments that may be problematic for people with ASD.  Using a combination of survey techniques and electronic sensing, we have developed a toolkit that can be used to provide a comprehensive description of the sensory environment in a given location, as well as recommendations to reduce the impact of the identified hazards.

Objectives:

To develop the know-how and technology necessary to provide a full sensory audit for working environments for individuals with ASD.

Methods:

1) Details of problematic environments were extracted from previous studies (e.g. Robertson & Simmons, IMFAR 2010; Robertson & Simmons, IMFAR 2011). 

2) Focus groups were carried out at a local company which recruits a largely ASD-diagnosed workforce).

3) Measurement of the environment focused on three areas: vision; audition and olfaction. 

4) Visual aspects of the environment were recorded using photographs, meter-based measurements of colour, brightness and flicker.

5) Problematic noises and general ambient noise levels were recorded.  The sound levels of these noises were noted.  The loudness, sharpness, roughness and frequency composition were of each sound were analysed.

6) Olfactory aspects of the environment were assessed using participants who had been screened for typical olfactory thresholds, identification and discrimination ability. 

Results:  

1)      Detailed protocols were developed, which included:

1. Instructions on how to carry out the measurements
2. Details of how to analyse the results
3. Information about the equipment used
4. Hints and tips for amelioration of  environmental hazards.

2)      The most problematic stimuli were identified and their properties analysed

3)      A project web-site with the toolkit was developed.

Conclusions:  

1)      Particular sensory issues were identified, including:

1. Noise throughout the office from nearby building work
2. Glare and light patterns (caused by light streaming through blinds) in the exterior offices
3. Noise from the reception desk (e.g. people phoning, customers being greeted)

2)      Amelioration of the environment was offered:

1. The building contractor was contacted and the hours were adapted.
2. Those susceptible to the light were moved to an open-plan interior office space
3. Ear plugs were made freely available

3)      A standardized toolkit which details how to assess an environment and analyse the results was developed, which will soon be made available to the general public.