Original Research (Proposed)

Relationship Between Climate, Disclosure Behavior, Accommodation Experience, Workplace Masking, and Brain Health Among Neurodivergent Employees

Meagan V. AngelucciCapella University, MS Industrial-Organizational Psychology2026

ABSTRACT

This capstone research concept proposes a quantitative investigation of how neurodiversity-affirming organizational climate influences disclosure behavior, accommodation experience, workplace masking, and brain health outcomes among neurodivergent employees in Canadian workplaces. The study uses a sequential parallel mediation model grounded in the Job Demands-Resources (JD-R) framework, minority stress theory, social identity theory, and Goffman’s stigma management model.

The study addresses a critical gap: no validated measurement framework captures the relationship between organizational climate, disclosure behavior, and brain health outcomes for neurodivergent employees. Existing disclosure scales focus on general mental health conditions or autism-specific contexts — none comprehensively measure disclosure across neurotypes (ADHD, autism, dyslexia, dyspraxia) in occupational settings.

Four new workplace measurement instruments were developed as part of this research: the Neurodiversity-Affirming Climate Scale (NDACS), the Disclosure Behavior Scale (DBS), the Workplace Accommodation Experience Scale (WAES), and the Masking at Work Scale (MAWS). All instruments were developed following DeVellis and Thorpe (2022) psychometric methodology with content validity indexing.

KEY FINDINGS

What the research shows.

Developed four new workplace measurement instruments: the Neurodiversity-Affirming Climate Scale (NDACS), the Disclosure Behavior Scale (DBS), the Workplace Accommodation Experience Scale (WAES), and the Masking at Work Scale (MAWS)

Proposed sequential parallel mediation model: ND-affirming climate predicts disclosure behavior (M₁), which predicts two parallel second-stage mediators — accommodation experience (M₂a) and workplace masking (M₂b) — both predicting brain health outcomes

Dual-perspective study design surveys both neurodivergent employees (N=200+) and HR/disability management practitioners (N=200+) to identify perception gaps that inform targeted interventions

Literature review of 18+ empirical studies revealed no existing research testing the complete climate–disclosure–accommodation–masking–health pathway, confirming the novelty of this integrated model

METHODOLOGY

How this research was conducted.

Quantitative, non-experimental, correlational design with sequential parallel mediation analysis (Hayes PROCESS macro)

Integrated theoretical framework: Job Demands-Resources (JD-R) model, minority stress theory, social identity theory, Goffman’s stigma management

Scale development following DeVellis & Thorpe (2022) psychometric methodology with content validity indexing

Dual-perspective sampling: neurodivergent employees and HR/disability management practitioners

Comprehensive literature review synthesizing neurodiversity employment research (2015–2025)

LEARN MORE

See how this research translates into platform capabilities.

Subscribe to the Brief

Cite this work

Angelucci, M. V. (2026). Relationship between climate, disclosure behavior, accommodation experience, workplace masking, and brain health among neurodivergent employees [Master’s integrative project]. Capella University.

RELATED RESEARCH

Continue exploring.

Evidence Synthesis

Evidence-Based Disability Case Management Framework for Canadian Private Insurance: An Integrated Approach

This comprehensive evidence-based framework integrates findings from three systematic evidence syntheses examining 697 peer-reviewed studies across workplace accommodation effectiveness (284 studies), supervisor training effectiveness (156 studies), and organizational culture change (257 studies). The framework uses GRADE methodology for quality assessment and was developed through a seven-stage process including expert review (n=15), stakeholder focus groups (n=7), and pilot testing (n=3 organizations, 150 cases).

Meagan V. AngelucciRead

Evidence Brief

Evidence Brief: Why Engagement Surveys Don’t Measure What Matters

Engagement surveys have become the default tool for measuring workplace culture. Organizations spend over $2 billion annually on them. But the evidence shows they measure sentiment — how employees feel in the moment — not the structural conditions that actually predict turnover, disability claims, absenteeism, and psychological safety.

CultureIQ LabsRead

Framework Overview

The A.R.T. Framework: Acknowledge, Reclaim, Thrive

The A.R.T. (Acknowledge, Reclaim, Thrive) framework is CultureIQ Labs’ proprietary methodology for translating evidence into organizational intervention. It maps the 697-study evidence base to three integrated phases that build on each other sequentially.

CultureIQ LabsRead

See how this research becomes practice.

Every engagement at CultureIQ Labs is anchored in peer-reviewed evidence. The practice is currently not accepting new engagements — subscribe to the Brief to be notified when capacity returns in 2027.

Subscribe to the Brief See the services

§ Loading

Loading the next page…