Late-Diagnosed Neurodivergent Doctoral Students and Identity Negotiation: Masking, Disclosure, and Self-Advocacy in Higher Education

Doctoral education requires continuous identity negotiation within systems grounded in neuronormativity. Late-diagnosed neurodivergent doctoral students face unique challenges navigating masking, disclosure, and self-advocacy in academic environments that privilege conformity and penalize difference. This exploratory review of the literature addresses a critical gap in scholarship, which has primarily focused on undergraduates and early-diagnosed populations, leaving the experiences of late-diagnosed doctoral students largely unexplored. Guided by disability critical race theory (DisCrit) and self-authorship theory, this review synthesizes empirical and conceptual literature to illuminate how neuronormative structures and developmental processes intersect to shape scholarly identity construction. The review examines key identity processes—masking, shutdown, burnout, disclosure, and self-advocacy—as overlapping responses to systemic pressures. The authors reveal that sustained masking depletes cognitive and emotional resources, leading to burnout and necessitating difficult decisions about disclosure and authenticity. Recommendations for transforming institutional practices, supervisory relationships, and professional standards are offered to create neurodiversity-affirming environments in which self-advocacy serves as an act of resistance and leadership rather than mere survival.