Paracosms in Autism: Inner Worlds as Emotional Architecture

Paracosms - internally constructed, often highly detailed imaginary worlds - are a well-documented phenomenon in childhood. In autistic individuals (ASD), these inner worlds appear to serve important functions in emotional regulation, identity formation, and cognitive processing. While direct research on paracosms in ASD remains limited, converging evidence from studies on imaginary companions, immersive daydreaming, and emotion regulation suggests that paracosms can act as stabilizing internal systems. This article reviews current evidence, discusses developmental trajectories, and explores what may happen when such systems are disrupted.

⚠️ Disclaimer: This article presents a conceptual synthesis based on limited direct empirical research. While it draws on adjacent literature and aligns with the authors interpretation of the topic, substantial research gaps remain. The conclusions should therefore be understood as informed hypotheses rather than established consensus.

• Beyond the “Lack of Imagination” Narrative
• Defining Paracosms
• Paracosms in Autism
• Emotional Regulation and Internal Control
• Development Across the Lifespan
• Disturbance and Loss of Paracosms
• Reality Testing, Psychosis and Misconceptions
• Research Gaps and Future Directions
• References

Beyond the “Lack of Imagination” Narrative

For a long time, autism has been associated, both in scientific literature and public perception, with a supposed lack of imagination. This idea, rooted in early diagnostic frameworks, has proven to be misleading. While certain forms of spontaneous pretend play may differ in autistic children, this does not imply an absence of imagination. Instead, imagination often manifests in more structured, internally coherent, and persistent forms.

One such form is the paracosm: a self-contained inner world that evolves over time, often with remarkable internal consistency. These worlds are not fleeting fantasies. They are systems - sometimes deeply elaborated systems - that can accompany an individual for years or over the whole lifetime.

Understanding paracosms in autism therefore requires a shift in perspective: from viewing imagination as absent to recognizing it as differently organized, often more systematic, and in many cases tightly coupled to emotional and cognitive regulation. Importantly, this shift also challenges two common misinterpretations. First, paracosms should not be reduced to maladaptive daydreaming; while superficially similar, they often serve structured, functional roles in regulation, meaning-making and interaction with reality. Second, they are not forms of psychosis or loss of reality testing. In most cases, the paracosm acts less as an escape from reality and more as an interface to it - a controlled internal model through which external experiences can be processed, simulated, and made tolerable. Rather than representing withdrawal into fantasy, such systems can be understood as adaptive bridges between the external world and the individual’s cognitive and emotional architecture.

From this perspective, attempts to suppress or fight such inner worlds should not be approached. If a paracosm functions as a primary mechanism of regulation, coherence and meaning, then attacking it may not remove a problem but instead dismantle a support structure. The result can be a loss of internal coherence, a weakening of identity integration and a reduction in the individuals ability to process and tolerate external reality. Rather than being expendable or pathological, these systems may in many cases be essential components of how the individual maintains a stable sense of self and existence. A more appropriate approach is therefore not eradication, but understanding, integration and, where necessary, gentle balancing with external demands.

Note that the model is a synthesis based on limited direct evidence (see research gaps)

Defining Paracosms

A paracosm can be understood as a persistent, internally consistent imaginary world. Unlike episodic fantasy, it exhibits continuity across time, often including stable characters, locations, rules, and narratives. In developmental psychology, such worlds are most frequently described in middle childhood, where they may be expressed through play, drawing, or storytelling.

However, the external visibility of a paracosm is not a defining feature. Particularly in autistic individuals, these worlds may be largely internal, with only occasional outward expression. What defines them is not their visibility, but their structure and persistence.

Research in the general population suggests that a non-trivial proportion of children - on the order of tens of percent - engage in some form of sustained imaginary world-building during childhood[4]. These worlds often fade in their overt form during adolescence, but there is increasing evidence that their underlying cognitive style may persist. In autistic individuals, an additional factor must be considered: masking. A growing body of literature indicates that many autistic people actively suppress or conceal behaviors perceived as socially inappropriate or childish in order to avoid stigma. Within this framework, it is plausible that paracosms do not disappear, but become increasingly private. They may be maintained internally while being selectively hidden from the outside world, sometimes shared only in highly trusted and safe contexts - and in some cases not even disclosed to close partners. This suggests that the apparent decline of such inner worlds may, at least in part, reflect reduced visibility rather than true disappearance.

Paracosms in Autism

Empirical research directly addressing paracosms in autism is limited, but adjacent literature provides important insights. Studies on imaginary companions indicate that autistic children do engage in imaginative constructions, although sometimes at lower reported rates than neurotypical peers[2]. Crucially, when such companions or worlds are present, they appear to serve similar functions - particularly in providing comfort and companionship.

More recent qualitative work offers a deeper perspective. Boyle, in a doctoral study involving autistic children and adolescents aged 7 to 17, identified recurring patterns in how imaginary worlds are constructed and used[1]. While these patterns can be summarized under broad themes such as emotional regulation, control, belonging, and meaning - making, the underlying structure is more nuanced.

Participants described their inner worlds as spaces in which emotional states could be externalized and manipulated. Rather than experiencing emotions as diffuse or overwhelming, they could be represented through characters, narratives, or environments, allowing for a form of indirect processing. Conflicts could be replayed, modified, or resolved under controlled conditions, often with outcomes that restored a sense of balance.

A second recurring pattern was the establishment of control and predictability. In contrast to the often chaotic and ambiguous nature of real-world interactions, the paracosm provided a rule-governed environment. Social interactions, cause-and-effect relationships, and even moral structures followed internally consistent logic. This allowed participants to explore scenarios that would be difficult or risky to navigate in reality, while maintaining a sense of agency.

Belonging emerged not merely as the presence of companions, but as the construction of relational systems that were stable and reliable. Characters within the paracosm often fulfilled roles that were difficult to access in the external world, such as unconditional acceptance, understanding, or shared perspective. These relationships were not experienced as illusory, but as meaningful components of the individual’s emotional landscape.

Finally, these worlds frequently functioned as frameworks for self-understanding. Participants used them to explore identity, values, and possible versions of themselves. Rather than being detached from reality, the paracosm often reflected and reorganized real experiences, allowing them to be integrated into a coherent narrative.

Taken together, these patterns suggest that paracosms in autism are not loosely structured fantasies, but highly organized internal systems that support regulation, simulation, and integration across emotional and cognitive domains.

This suggests that paracosms in autism are not merely by-products of imagination, but functional systems. They appear to operate as internally generated environments in which emotional and social processes can be explored under conditions of predictability and safety.

Emotional Regulation and Internal Control

Difficulties in emotional regulation are widely reported in autism research. However, this should not be misinterpreted as a lack of emotional experience. In contrast to the persistent stereotype of autistic individuals as emotionless, many report emotions as particularly intense, pervasive, and difficult to filter or down-regulate. Empathy, likewise, is often strongly present, though expressed differently; while neurotypical observers may interpret autistic behavior as lacking empathy, autistic individuals frequently describe the inverse experience - being overwhelmed by emotional resonance or struggling with how to express it in socially expected ways[5].

Many autistic individuals therefore experience emotions as intense, rapidly escalating, and difficult to modulate through external means. Social co-regulation, one of the primary regulatory mechanisms in neurotypical development, may be less accessible or less reliable.

Within this context, paracosms can be understood as compensatory structures. They provide a controlled environment in which emotional states can be processed, modulated, and resolved. Events within the paracosm can be shaped, paused, revisited, or reinterpreted. Social interactions can be simulated without the unpredictability and cost of real-world interactions.

From a systems perspective, this resembles the creation of an internal regulatory loop. Instead of relying on external feedback, the individual constructs an environment where feedback is predictable and adjustable. The paracosm becomes a form of emotional infrastructure. In computational terms, it functions as an internal simulation environment with adjustable parameters.

From a mechanistic perspective, this process can be interpreted through the lens of internal modeling and predictive processing. The brain continuously constructs models of the world to reduce uncertainty and anticipate incoming stimuli. In environments that are experienced as unpredictable, ambiguous, or overwhelming, these models may become unstable or insufficient for reliable regulation. A paracosm can then be understood as an internally generated, highly structured model system in which variables are controllable and outcomes are predictable. By translating external experiences into this internally consistent domain, the individual effectively reduces uncertainty and gains the ability to iteratively simulate, modify, and re-evaluate emotional and social scenarios. In this sense, the paracosm does not replace reality, but acts as an intermediate computational layer that stabilizes perception and supports integration.

Development Across the Lifespan

In the general population, paracosms are most visible during middle childhood, with a peak around the age of approximately 8 to 12 years. During this period, children may actively engage with their worlds through play and narration. Over time, these external expressions typically diminish.

In autism, the trajectory appears to differ in important ways. Some evidence suggests that imaginative systems may emerge later or remain less visible in early childhood, but persist longer into adolescence. Boyles findings[1] indicate, that such worlds can remain active and meaningful well into the teenage years.

As individuals move into adulthood, the external perception of these systems often changes. The term paracosm is rarely used in adult research, but related phenomena, such as immersive daydreaming, structured fantasy, or narrative identity systems, appear to capture similar processes. It is important to note that these terms may, at least in part, represent a reframing rather than a fundamentally different phenomenon. In some cases, they can be interpreted as pathologizing or re-labeling the same underlying structures, particularly when such inner worlds are judged against normative expectations of adult behavior. What is considered imaginative and acceptable in childhood may be reclassified as excessive or inappropriate in adulthood, despite serving similar functional roles. The externalized play of childhood becomes internal narrative, creative production, or sustained imaginative engagement.

This continuity suggests that paracosms are not simply a developmental phase, but may reflect a stable cognitive and emotional strategy that evolves in form.

Of course not all uses of paracosms are equivalent. In many cases, they appear to be adaptive: supporting emotional processing, enabling exploration of identity, and providing a stable internal reference frame.

However, there is also evidence - particularly from the literature on immersive and maladaptive daydreaming - that such systems can become dysregulating when they dominate attention and behavior. In these cases, engagement with the internal world becomes compulsive, time-consuming, and functionally impairing[6]. The distinction is therefore not between imagination and non-imagination, but between balanced integration and over-reliance. In autism, where external environments may be more difficult to navigate, the threshold at which a regulatory tool becomes a dependency may be particularly relevant.

Disturbance and Loss of Paracosms

What happens when paracosms are disrupted? This question has received little direct empirical attention in science.Nevertheless, the functional role of these systems allows for informed inferences.

If a paracosm serves as a primary mechanism for emotional regulation, control, and belonging, then its disturbance may have effects comparable to the removal of a stabilizing external structure. Disruption can take many forms: ridicule, invalidation, enforced suppression, or simply the loss of conditions necessary for engagement.

Given the reliance on internal consistency and predictability in autism, such disturbances may not be experienced as minor interruptions. Rather, they may be perceived as a breakdown of an internal system that provides coherence. The resulting effects may include increased anxiety, irritability, withdrawal, or attempts to intensify or protect the internal world.

In cases where the paracosm is closely tied to identity or moral structure, disturbance may resemble a loss of internal grounding. This extends beyond emotion regulation into the domain of self-coherence.

Reality Testing, Psychosis and Misconceptions

A common misconception is that strong engagement with imaginary worlds implies confusion between fantasy and reality. Available evidence does not support this interpretation. Autistic individuals are generally capable of distinguishing between internally generated and externally real scenarios.

A useful contrast can be drawn to psychosis. In psychotic states, internally generated content (e.g., hallucinations or delusional beliefs) is typically experienced as externally real and is not readily recognized as self-generated, often accompanied by impaired reality testing and reduced voluntary control[7]. By contrast, paracosms are generally experienced as internally generated, even when vivid or emotionally intense[1]. Individuals can usually enter and disengage from them, reflect on them, and relate them to real-world experiences. The boundary between inner and outer reality remains intact, even if the inner world is richly elaborated[1].

The critical variable is therefore not belief in the reality of the paracosm, but its functional role. Paracosms are typically used knowingly as internal constructs, even when they are experienced as vivid or emotionally significant.

Paracosms in autism can be understood as internally generated regulatory ecosystems. They provide structure where the external world may be unpredictable, simulate social and emotional processes, and support identity formation. More precisely, they can be conceptualized as internal models that translate overwhelming or ambiguous external input into structured, interpretable, and emotionally manageable representations. Within these systems, experiences can be re-encoded into narratives, relationships, and rule-based environments that allow iterative processing, revision, and integration. This enables not only regulation, but also the construction of continuity - linking past experiences, present states, and anticipated futures into a coherent internal framework.

Across development, their perceived form changes, but their function may remain. In childhood, this may manifest as explicit worlds, characters, and play; in adolescence and adulthood, it often becomes (at least seen from the outside, maybe even only due to masking) internalized as narrative thinking, creative systems, or structured imagination. When integrated with external life, these systems can be stabilizing and generative, supporting creativity, resilience, and meaning-making. However, this balance is delicate. When suppressed or disturbed by external events, the individual may lose an essential mechanism for organizing experience, leading to fragmentation, distress, or loss of coherence. The critical factor is therefore not the presence of the paracosm itself, but the degree to which it remains integrated with, rather than disconnected from, lived experience.

Research Gaps and Future Directions

Despite their apparent importance, paracosms in autism remain under-researched. There is a particular lack of longitudinal studies tracking their evolution across the lifespan, as well as systematic investigations into the effects of disturbance or loss. Notably, much of the existing research effectively stops at adolescence, with comparatively little attention paid to how these systems persist, transform, or are masked in adulthood. This creates a structural blind spot in the literature, where adult manifestations may be reinterpreted under different terminology or overlooked entirely.

Future research would benefit from integrating developmental psychology, autism research, and studies on immersive cognition to form a more unified framework that explicitly bridges childhood, adolescence, and adulthood.

References

• [1] Boyle, K. (2023). Understanding the Function and Nature of Imaginary Companions in Autistic Children and Young People. UCL Doctoral Thesis.
• [2] Davis, P. E., et al. (2018). Imaginary companions in children with autism spectrum disorder. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders.
• [3] Taylor, M. (1999). Imaginary Companions and the Children Who Create Them. Oxford University Press.
• [4] Root-Bernstein, Michele. (2014). The Creation of Imaginary Worlds, Michele Root-Bernstein.
• [5] Milton, D. E. M. (2012). On the ontological status of autism: the ‘double empathy problem.’ Disability & Society, 27(6), 883–887.
• [6] Somer, Eli. Calling the tune in maladaptive daydreaming: The impact of music on the experience of compulsive fantasizing. Psychology of Music 52.6 (2024): 611-627.
• [7] Shepherd A. Psychosis as a failure of reality testing. British Journal of Psychiatry. 2014;204(3):242-242.

This article is tagged:

• Psychology
• Asperger
• Autism