Habitus, Field, and the Broader Autism Phenotype: Toward a Structural Account of Neurodivergence Beyond Diagnosis

The Broader Autism Phenotype (BAP), or “subclinical” autistic traits found in relatives of autistic individuals and the general population, has mainly been studied as a genetic endophenotype. Three decades of heritability research have developed reliable measurement tools and deepened understanding of autism’s genetic architecture, but they have left a fundamental question largely unasked: what is it like to have BAP? This paper argues that BAP is not just a “mild” form of autism, and that the structural dynamics causing disadvantages for diagnosed autistic individuals also affect those who carry these traits without a diagnosis. Recognizing this has direct implications for how researchers, clinicians, and policymakers approach this population. Using Bourdieu’s sociology of practice, particularly the concepts of habitus, field, cultural capital, and symbolic violence, along with the neurodiversity paradigm and social model of disability, we propose a social-relational framework for understanding high-BAP experiences. This model explains why individuals with high BAP often experience structural disadvantages as personal failure, why masking is a form of cultural labor rather than symptom masking, and why the lack of explanatory frameworks for BAP experience itself can be harmful. We also address the limitations of familial BAP research samples, explore what lived neurodivergence looks like within neurotypical environments, and outline implications for research methods, clinical practice, and theories of neurocognitive diversity. The paper concludes by applying the Bourdieusian perspective to psychology itself, questioning what it means that a research tradition has spent 30 years measuring traits whose human significance it has largely chosen not to examine.