1.1 “A role model for difference”.

Several autistic participants spoke of the responsibility they felt to be open and honest about their autistic identity in the workplace. Participants expressed a desire to unmask (i.e., stop concealing their true identity and traits) in order to set a positive example for other autistic colleagues and “make things better for the next generation” (A-397). ‘Unmasking’ was also referenced as a way for participants to exhibit their autistic strengths to non-autistic colleagues and improve the acceptance of autistic differences in the workplace: “if people know about your autism, [it] can help reduce stigma surrounding the condition” (A-309).

1.2 The Freedom that diagnosis Affords.

Both autistic and non-autistic neurodivergent participants recognised the importance of having a formal diagnosis when choosing to unmask in the workplace. Following a diagnosis, participants reported that they felt a reduced obligation to mask: “I honestly don’t really bother to mask–getting a diagnosis gave me permission to wear comfy shoes, stop making eye contact if it’s uncomfortable etc.” (ND-012). Although diagnosis gave participants the confidence to unmask, they also acknowledged the difficulty of doing so after masking for so long: “Since my diagnosis, I am trying to not mask as frequently. This isn’t easy. Sometimes, I cannot recognise that I’m masking in the first place” (A-432).

1.3 A genuine acceptance of difference.

The varying degree to which participants experienced acceptance and understanding of their differences was also referenced as a reason to selectively unmask. For example, one non-autistic neurodivergent participant commented that they did not mask as they were “not ashamed of being different” (ND-152). Most participants, however, attributed this acceptance externally, citing the positive role that friends and family members played in the decision to unmask: “Socially I don’t have to do it as much because my friends and family know who I am, that I’m autistic, and don’t expect me to be different or more” (A-409). However, participants rarely recounted this level of understanding in the workplace. As such, one neurotypical participant noted that “with work… I am more careful [to not unmask]” (NT-074). Even positive experiences were recognised as not being ubiquitous. One participant, as a result, expressed their worries about the prospect of changing employers in the future: “At [my organisation], colleagues were supportive when I once had a meltdown… I’m just scared of moving to another [organisation] in the future in case they don’t understand” (A-274).

2.1 Fitting in with the norm.

Participants across all three groups spoke of masking as one way to achieve social inclusion at work: “In the workplace, you mask to fit in” (NT-085). Though most participants felt that masking their differences was essential to be perceived as ‘normal’, the extent to which they wanted to fit in varied across the sample. While some merely sought to blend in and avoid being noticed while at work, others expressed a strong desire to be included in their team: “I wanted to be part of the team and so put a huge amount of effort into at least seeming to be like them” (A-235).

Participants cited two sources of motivation to fit in within the workplace–the self and others. While these two sources of motivation appeared to be distinct from one another, some participants endorsed both when reporting their reasons for masking at work. Self-oriented motivations for masking were expressed by participants as a desire to achieve social acceptance: “you want to feel accepted as you already sometimes feel weird enough” (A-255). Conversely, when discussing motivations that were other-oriented, participants were driven to appear normal to make it “easier” (A-250) for their colleagues: “It makes moment-to-moment interactions easier [and] it keeps people happy” (ND-106). However, participants expressed that this level of acceptance was superficial and only served to benefit them in the short term: “Masking has no advantages except very short-term ones of apparently being accepted into a group” (A-286).

2.2 Connecting with others.

The desire to form connections with colleagues was a key motivation behind workplace masking. Participants felt that masking made them more relatable to other colleagues, enabling them to form friendships: “I got curiosity out of people and quite an emotional connection with them. This was unique for me” (A-324). Indeed, the ability to be “liked, popular, [and] engaging” (NT-065) was highlighted as an advantage of workplace masking by many participants.

While some participants felt that masking was necessary to maintain the relationships formed with colleagues (“I don’t want to ruin social relationships [by unmasking]”; ND-107), others only employed masking strategies during initial interactions. In this respect, masking was used by autistic participants as a temporary tool to initiate workplace relationships and to avoid colleagues perceiving them “through the lens of autism” (A-435): “The advantage of masking is that people do not take an instant dislike to you, so it is possible over time… to get those who work with you to understand you before they pre-judge you based on their concept of acceptable behaviour” (A-463).

2.3 An attempt to avoid ostracism.

Without masking, autistic and non-autistic neurodivergent participants felt that they were at risk of social rejection within the workplace: “Obviously everyone has to filter themselves a bit at work, but I feel if I don’t do the right balance of masking, just being myself will end up getting me pushed away, alienated and kicked out” (A-294). Participants frequently drew on their previous experiences of marginalisation, both within and beyond the workplace, to inform their decision to mask around colleagues: “I always felt like an outsider and struggled to fit in” (ND-023). In an effort to avoid social rejection, autistic participants in particular emphasised the importance of hiding their true selves while working: “I worry that I will get shunned if I act myself and chat about my own interests, so I try to go along with what other staff are chatting about” (A-290).

3.1 A matter of personal safety.

Participants in all groups were concerned that they may be subject to workplace “abuse [and] bullying” (ND-003) if they failed to mask: “In my previous workplace, I was less aware of my difficulties and therefore masked less–and was bullied almost to extinction” (A-266). As many attributed this bullying to their perceived differences, masking reportedly worked as an effective strategy to reduce this risk. The strict social expectations shared amongst colleagues, participants felt, fostered a culture of bullying within the workplace which targeted those who did not adhere: “The unwritten rules of social interaction and NT [neurotypical] etiquette in the workplace are rigid and expected. If you deviate, you’ll be… bullied” (A-397). In response, participants felt that masking enabled them to blend in sufficiently with their colleagues and avoid the bullying which resulted from being different: “The more noticeable you are the more open to bullying you are” (NT-134).

3.2 Others’ negative perceptions.

Masking was frequently employed by participants as a strategy to avoid the negative judgements formed by colleagues and employers: “I worry that I will be judged [if I don’t mask]” (NT-076). For many autistic and non-autistic neurodivergent participants, masking was employed to avoid the stereotypical beliefs that colleagues and employers held about their condition: “I have OCD and I don’t want my senior managers to make judgements based on that” (ND-057). A source of judgement that was commonly described amongst autistic participants was the discrepancy between their intentions and others’ interpretations of their behaviour, which often resulted in them being perceived as ‘rude’, ‘weird’ or ‘difficult’: “Once a customer misinterpreted my lack of eye contact as a dirty look… If I’d been masking maybe it wouldn’t have happened” (A-190).

3.3 To be treated as an equal.

Participants shared instances in the workplace during which they felt they had been treated as ‘less’ or ‘disabled’ because of their differences: “I worry about being pitied and being kept out of the loop. I know people are often more nervous after I disclose, less willing to take on board something I’ve said or laugh at a joke” (A-322). Participants felt that masking enabled them to circumvent this issue, allowing them to be treated without bias both socially and professionally in the workplace (“I don’t think I am viewed as the Dyslexic, I am viewed for what I can contribute”; ND-082) and be “seen just as me” (NT-118).

3.4 An insufficient understanding.

A lack of knowledge about neurodiversity amongst colleagues and managerial staff meant that autistic and non-autistic neurodivergent participants felt that masking was necessary to avoid “embarrassing conversations” (A-265) in the workplace. Indeed, masking was used by several participants as a strategy to avoid the burden of educating colleagues and employers about their neurodivergent experience:

I mask because I do not feel comfortable explaining my condition to people. The general perception of ADHD is that it is ‘just’ hyperactivity, and since this is not one of my main symptoms I find people can be dismissive or struggle to understand (ND-097).

As a result, many participants highlighted a need for colleagues and employers to learn more about neurodiversity, though an absence of open discussion in the workplace made that difficult: “I feel that my condition is known but never explicitly mentioned. This precludes any discussion of how it manifests and its impact on my daily life” (A-385). In addition, some autistic participants felt that while their organisation purported to support their autistic employees, this was often not translated into practice: “Despite working for an organisation that supports autistic people, I do not feel confident that they would understand” (A-330).

4.1 Obtaining and maintaining employment.

For many participants, their ability to secure and sustain employment was felt to be intrinsically linked to their ability to mask successfully in the presence of employers. The financial pressure that participants felt to maintain employment strongly influenced their decision to mask: “the risks of being different [at work] can effectively change your life as they are linked to your income” (ND-031). In many cases, this pressure was perceived as more important than the personal expenses incurred due to masking: “I value being able to sustain myself over my ability to be comfortable at work” (A-279)–and participants frequently shared their worries about the financial ramifications of not masking in the workplace. As a result, many emphasised the “higher stakes” (ND-023) that were involved in workplace masking: “The need to look professional and holding down the job means that people are less likely to expose all their thoughts in the workplace. In other areas of social life, people may not be so worried about how they are perceived” (NT-109).

4.2 Fulfilling professional responsibilities.

When distinguishing between masking contexts, participants described upholding a standard of professionalism as an important part of masking in the workplace: “I find masking in the professional environment more difficult, but to me it feels more essential. As I work in a professional services environment, we need to provide a service” (ND-035). Indeed, participants believed that masking was essential to fulfil the responsibilities of their job role, such as “being polite, listening and turn taking” (A-189). For many, the ability to adequately meet professional demands heavily relied on effective communication with others in the workplace: “in the workplace… engagement and interaction is vital to the success of my role and the wider business” (NT-084). As a result, participants experienced “better working relationships” (NT-134) that were more cooperative and collaborative when masking, enabling participants to work more efficiently on shared tasks. However, many autistic participants expressed their frustration concerning the social proficiency required to do their job, sharing that “if I couldn’t fit in, I found my job harder and harder to do” (A-301).

4.3 To be perceived as competent and of value.

Participants reported engaging in workplace masking strategies in order to be perceived as a “respected and trusted member of the team” (NT-076). Masking allowed participants to manage their difficulties without compromising how others perceived them professionally. In particular, anxiety relating to the social responsibilities of participants’ job roles was an issue that many masked from colleagues and employers: “I mask that I have anxiety issues. I think it could be seen as a weakness and my colleagues would think I’m not as capable” (ND-048). While some participants used masking to maintain others’ perception of their competency, others felt that masking acted as a prerequisite to being considered capable in their job role. Participants felt that, in the eyes of employers, their non-typical behaviours would undermine their ability to meet the demands of their job: “if I were to be completely natural I would worry people’s perceptions of my behaviour may affect their trust in me to perform my duties and take on responsibilities” (A-288).

4.4 “Climbing the ladder”.

Developing a successful career was an important milestone indicated by participants, and one that many felt was only achievable by masking: “I mask in the workplace to protect my position. I think disclosing my diagnosis could reduce opportunities, slow down career progression, and effect relationships” (ND-048). Indeed, masking was felt to afford faster professional development: “[I mask] to get chartered and promoted quickly and take on more responsibility than others in my grad intake” (NT-076). Participants also expressed the belief that career progression was limited to mainstream pathways that heavily rely on conforming to typical norms and behaviours: “Things like projects and promotions often rest on emotional considerations like popularity or ‘seeming normal’, even in companies who claim that they do not” (A-457). In turn, participants often attributed their professional success in the workplace to their ability to mask successfully. However, some were resentful of this, commenting that they felt “trapped into masking” (A-351) by a desire to further their career.

5.1 Onerous and exhausting.

Extreme exhaustion was almost ubiquitously described amongst participants as a harmful consequence of masking. For many, masking in the workplace involved maintaining their mask for long periods with little to no respite. As a result, many commented that while masking “may have some short-term benefit in infrequent, short or one-off encounters [but it is] too much effort to maintain over the longer term” (NT-145).

Comparing professional and social masking, participants described the relentless fatigue they were subject to in the workplace, commenting that “in other areas of life you can take a break, or stop and listen to music for a bit. In work you have to mask constantly” (A-209). Many participants felt that the quality of their work suffered due to the energy and effort that was necessary to mask: “Masking sacrifices my abilities; I hear less, I miss things, I burn more energy, and I cannot use my mind in ways that I know I can do very well” (A-234). This extreme depletion of resources also had negative implications for participants’ personal lives, with relationships with partners, friends, and family members worsening as a result of the exhaustion they experienced from masking: “[The] disadvantage [of masking] is I am exhausted by the end of the day, I don’t want to see anyone else and I don’t want to go outside on weekends” (ND-182).

5.2 Forgoing mental and physical health.

Participants experienced worse health, both physically and mentally, as a result of masking in the workplace. Masking an array of sensory difficulties, such as harsh artificial lighting and repressed stims, often left participants feeling physically unwell:

At the end of a shift, I was so confused, frightened, overwhelmed, and anxious etc my head was so full and loud and busy with absolutely everything that had happened–all the smells, sounds, people, clothes, conversations, lights, telephones, paperwork, movement, voices, hustle and bustle of people etc. my brain constantly replaying everything I had smelt, felt, seen, heard etc. my head felt dizzy, with a high pitched ringing sound (ND-003).

When sharing the emotional costs of masking in the workplace, participants frequently described symptoms of chronic stress, depression and anxiety. Masking their true selves consistently at work created feelings of inadequacy about who they really were: “you feel your real self is worthless because if it wasn’t you wouldn’t have to pretend to be someone else” (A-423). However, participants felt that as their mental health worsened, the pressure to mask only increased, further exacerbating their deteriorating health: “You become overly concerned with how others perceive you [which] introduces more stress, which in itself becomes something you try to mask. A bit of a vicious circle” (NT-065). This growing pressure to mask while also managing their worsening mental health often resulted in participants experiencing meltdowns, shutdowns, and burnout: “[Masking] takes a lot of energy and I quickly burn out” (A-126). Consequently, many participants, reported taking extended sick leave or leaving their job permanently.

5.3 Worries about getting it wrong.

Unsuccessful attempts to mask were a source of concern, including concerns about whether their efforts to imitate others’ behaviour were convincing enough to go unnoticed by colleagues: “[There’s a] constant mental battle of coping with ‘what ifs’, unhelpful thinking patterns, and catastrophising that can co-occur when feelings of ‘masking gone wrong’ appear” (A-288). These worries extended to participants’ fear about the mask slipping unintentionally. Several participants described the embarrassment experienced during situations in which their mask had slipped and worried about the “reaction when the ‘mask’ is discovered” (NT-118) again in the future. These concerns, participants indicated, were more prominent following workplace masking, rather than social masking, as the consequences of getting it wrong were perceived as more costly. For many, the rumination that followed experiences of masking in the workplace meant that they “can never truly relax… I am always on edge about how people may perceive my actions. It can cause me to replay situations in my head which I wish had gone better” (ND-117). Even outside of the workplace, these worries continued to pervade participants’ thoughts, with one participant reporting that their mind continued “running over the day, processing it, [and] looking for hidden meanings” (A-282), which prevented them from being able to relax at home.

5.4 A barrier to support and understanding.

Participants felt that masking in the workplace precluded them from seeking and receiving support from employers that might otherwise be available if they unmasked. This was reflected in participants’ inability to access workplace adjustments: “You can’t have [the] adjustments you need so you have to endure sensory overload and all manner of other difficulties” (A-390). Masking such difficulties projected an inaccurate impression that participants were coping in the workplace, leaving other members of staff ignorant to their daily challenges: “People did not understand how I was feeling [because I was masking]” (NT-047). As a result, participants’ difficulties were often undetected by others for long periods of time: “By masking… I think it took a lot longer before someone realized that I did have a problem and was able to point me in the right direction to get help” (ND-138). These false impressions also had negative implications for participants who decided to disclose in the workplace, with autistic participants reporting that colleagues perceived them to be ‘less autistic’ as a result: “the more you mask and the better you are at doing it, the more people can’t equate autism and you together and completely dismiss any difficulties you may have” (A-332).

6.1 Acting the part.

When sharing their experience of masking across contexts, participants often described it to be analogous to the role of a performing actor. The role that participants performed in the workplace, however, was one many reported as being distinctively disparate from their true selves: “Masking allows you to adopt a persona and live through that persona, whether it is close to your true character or not” (NT-168). Nonetheless, this ability to adapt their persona across different situations was a source of pride for many participants, commenting that it enabled them to be more confident in situations that they otherwise wouldn’t be: “even if you’re not comfortable with something you can take on a persona that is. [Masking] allows you to go outside your comfort zone and reach new heights” (ND-089).

When differentiating between masking contexts, some participants noted that adapting their mask to accommodate different situations was easier in the workplace than in social settings. The well-defined professional expectations outlined in formal regulations and procedures meant that some autistic and non-autistic neurodivergent participants found masking in the workplace easier to implement than during social interactions: “I find [workplace masking] easier as there’s a certain predictability in a business environment and with the right knowledge you can basically learn the script for your role” (A-233). In contrast, social masking was perceived to be more unpredictable in nature, leaving some participants feeling “more at sea out of work” (A-344): “If friends gave me a written contract and ‘friend job description’ maybe I would be better at social interaction” (A-390).

6.2 “Feeling like a fraud”.

Presenting a false persona at work often left participants feeling guilty about deceiving their colleagues and employers: “it feels dishonest, and I don’t like trying to be someone I am clearly not” (A-195). As a result, many described the acceptance they experienced within their working team as undeserved and granted under false pretence. This left participants with worries about others recognising their dishonesty and being perceived as “two-faced” (A-432) and a “charlatan” (A-401). Others, in contrast, reported that the mixed messages that masking communicated to their colleagues, had tangible negative effects on their working relationships: “[You’re] less honest with your colleagues, [so] they find you less approachable [and it’s therefore] harder to build up rapport with colleagues, making teamwork harder” (NT-158). One participant felt that these difficulties were a result of the inauthentic messages which masking communicated to others: “I think sometimes masking creates a confused message to people because it is important to be genuine” (ND-005).

6.3 “Not being true to myself”.

The benefits of masking were often described by participants as a trade-off for being oneself. For many, masking inherently discouraged them from being their authentic selves in the workplace, and instead encouraged them to present a persona congruent with employers’ expectations: “I felt I was looking out of a body that was not mine. In work I had to pretend to be someone who was very far removed from who I believed I was” (ND-003). Consequently, participants described a weak sense of belonging in their working team: “I find any aspect of pretending to be someone that I’m not to be damaging, [it] just makes me feel worse and [I] still have feelings of being an outsider” (NT-146). Routinely presenting this false persona in the workplace also had negative implications for participants’ sense of identity. In particular, many reported that they had lost the confidence to be themselves as a result of masking and frequently questioned who they truly were without the mask. “I sometimes feel like a Russian doll–there are so many layers but when they are all stripped away is there anything of the real me left inside?” (A-307).

6.4 “No one really knows you”.

Masking in the workplace undermined participants’ desire to be authentically understood by other colleagues: “some people in my life only see me masking so I sometimes feel people don’t know me as well as they think they do” (ND-186). Unable to develop genuine connections with others, participants were often left feeling socially disconnected in the workplace: “it is a slightly isolating experience. I see some people forming life long friendships, while I have worked with some people for 17 years, and never really became good friends” (NT-094). Of those participants who did develop friendships in the workplace, many expressed a dissatisfaction that these were grounded in their masking persona rather than their true self: “people don’t get to know the real you, so any friendship is based upon them liking your fake persona, not you” (A-432). This disparity between participants’ true self and others’ perceptions of them led a number of participants to doubt whether colleagues would accept them if they chose to unmask in the future.

7.1 A lack of choice in the workplace.

According to participants, a key difference between workplace and social masking was the extent to which they felt that they had a choice in the decision to mask. In social contexts, participants felt an enhanced sense of personal control concerning the frequency and length of masking, commenting that “I can opt out of situations which I find challenging or walk away if I begin to feel over stimulated” (NT-074). In the workplace, however, participants felt professionally bound to mask throughout the working day: “It is not always possible to have space [in the workplace] when I need it. In my social life I don’t have the same restrictions and can decide when enough is enough” (A-323). Moreover, in social contexts, participants were able to choose company with whom they shared commonalities, commenting that this often was not the case with colleagues.

You also have no control over the colleagues you work with. In one’s social life you are able to choose the people you spend time with, and if you can’t be yourself around them you don’t have to spend time with them. Whereas you spend the majority of your time at work and you are not in control of who your fellow employees are and their personalities (ND-105).

7.2 Exclusivity of workplace masking.

For some participants, masking was a strategy only employed in the context of the workplace, reporting that “social life masking is not required” (NT-131). Socially, participants surrounded themselves with intimate friends and family, with whom they felt able to be themselves: “With family I can be myself and, as I have only very few true friends, I can also be myself with them even when that means being unsociable or uncommunicative–something that is not possible at work” (A-260). Others reported that they did not pursue social interactions outside of the workplace: “I do not mask in other areas of ‘social life’ as I do not consider that I have anything that I would describe as ‘social life’” (ND-181).

8.1 Contextual indifference.

When asked to differentiate workplace masking from social masking, several participants expressed that there were no differences between these contexts as they “mask in all situations” (NT-158). Indeed, some participants described masking as invariant across both social and professional contexts: “It isn’t [different] really, it’s always playing a part, pretending to be neurotypical, remembering to keep eye contact, finding ways around my inability to hear with background noise, keeping a straight face when I’m screaming inside” (A-226). As such, while the demands of the social environment changed, the overarching masking strategies employed across contexts remained constant. “I’m not sure I am any different whether it’‘ in a professional environment or not, [the] same principles apply” (ND-089).

8.2 The habitual and often subconscious nature of masking.

Masking was described by many autistic and non-autistic neurodivergent participants as an automatic process that served as a daily coping strategy throughout their life. As a result, participants were often not cognisant of the routine masking strategies that they employed, commenting that it had become “second nature” (A-287) to them after so long: “Masking is something I have done for most of my life without even realising, since my diagnosis I have come to realise that masking is something I have done increasingly over the years at work to make life easier” (ND-186). Several autistic participants related this lack of meta-awareness of masking to their late diagnosis. This, in turn, left participants feeling that masking had become an integral part of who they were with no choice but to mask: “by the time you get to 47 and didn’t even know you were autistic until you were 45, [masking] is such a habit as to really not be a choice” (A-286).