Is There a Link Between Autistic People Being Perceived Unfavorably and Having a Mind That Is Difficult to Read?

Being facially expressive is socially advantageous

Individuals vary in how they move their faces in everyday social interactions. In a first large-scale study, we measured variation in dynamic facial behaviour during social interaction and examined dyadic outcomes and impression formation. In Study 1, we recorded semi-structured video calls with 52 participants interacting with a confederate across various everyday contexts. Video clips were rated by 176 independent participants. In Study 2, we examined video calls of 1315 participants engaging in unstructured video-call interactions. Facial expressivity indices were extracted using automated Facial Action Coding Scheme analysis and measures of personality and partner impressions were obtained by self-report. Facial expressivity varied considerably across participants, but little across contexts, social partners or time. In Study 1, more facially expressive participants were more well-liked, agreeable, and successful at negotiating (if also more agreeable). Participants who were more facially competent, readable, and perceived as readable were also more well-liked. In Study 2, we replicated the findings that facial expressivity was associated with agreeableness and liking by their social partner, and additionally found it to be associated with extraversion and neuroticism. Findings suggest that facial behaviour is a stable individual difference that proffers social advantages, pointing towards an affiliative, adaptive function.

Can group membership modulate the social abilities of autistic people? An intergroup bias in smile perception

Autistic adults struggle to reliably differentiate genuine and posed smiles. Intergroup bias is a promising factor that may modulate smile discrimination performance, which has been shown in neurotypical adults, and which could highlight ways to make social interactions easier. However, it is not clear whether this bias also exists in autistic people. Thus, the current study aimed to investigate this in autism using a minimal group paradigm. Seventy-five autistic and sixty-one non-autistic adults viewed videos of people making genuine or posed smiles and were informed (falsely) that some of the actors were from an in-group and others were from an out-group. The ability to identify smile authenticity of in-group and out-group members and group identification were assessed. Our results revealed that both groups seemed equally susceptible to ingroup favouritism, rating ingroup members as more genuine, but autistic adults also generally rated smiles as less genuine and were less likely to identify with ingroup members. Autistic adults showed reduced sensitivity to the different smile types but the absence of an intergroup bias in smile discrimination in both groups seems to indicate that membership can only modulate social judgements but not social abilities. These findings suggest a reconsideration of past findings that might have misrepresented the social judgements of autistic people through introducing an outgroup disadvantage, but also a need for tailored support for autistic social differences that emphasizes similarity and inclusion between diverse people.

The relationship between autistic traits, expressiveness, readability and social perceptions

This study investigated the relationship between autistic traits, expressiveness, readability (both actual and perceived), social favourability, and likability. Sixty participants designated as 'targets' were video recorded in a range of social scenarios and their autistic traits were measured using the Autism Spectrum Quotient. The videos were then shown to 106 new participants designated 'perceivers', who were split into three groups to make judgments related to readability, expressiveness, and social favourability respectively. Mediation analyses revealed that autistic traits negatively impacted both perceived likeability and social favourability, mediated by lowered expressiveness. Autistic traits also directly impacted readability, which was not mediated by expressiveness. The findings show how the level of autistic traits of a target can influence how they are socially perceived by others.

Non-autistic observers both detect and demonstrate the double empathy problem when evaluating interactions between autistic and non-autistic adults

LAY ABSTRACT

The "double empathy problem" refers to breakdowns in communication and understanding that frequently occur between autistic and non-autistic people. Previous studies have shown that autistic people often establish better rapport and connection when interacting with other autistic people compared to when interacting with non-autistic people, but it is unclear whether this is noticeable to non-autistic observers. In this study, 102 non-autistic undergraduate students viewed and rated video recordings of "get to know you" conversations between pairs of autistic and non-autistic adults. Sometimes the pairs were two autistic people, sometimes they were two non-autistic people, and sometimes they were "mixed" interactions of one autistic and one non-autistic person. Observers tended to rate non-autistic participants and their interactions the most favorably, but-consistent with the "double empathy problem"-they rated mixed interactions between autistic and non-autistic people as the least successful. They also perceived that only non-autistic people disclosed more when interacting with a non-autistic conversation partner. Autistic participants' partners in the conversations tended to evaluate them more favorably than did outside observers, suggesting that personal contact may facilitate more positive evaluations of autistic people. Furthermore, observers expressed less social interest in participants than did the autistic and non-autistic participants in the interactions. Together, these findings suggest that non-autistic observers both detect and demonstrate some aspects of the double empathy problem.

Mindreading beliefs in same- and cross-neurotype interactions

LAY ABSTRACT

Autistic people are often characterised as having problems with mindreading, which refers to understanding other people's thoughts, beliefs and feelings. However, it has recently been suggested that mindreading difficulties may be a two-way issue between autistic and non-autistic people. This would imply that autistic people may not have difficulty reading the minds of other autistic people, whereas non-autistic people may struggle to read autistic people effectively. In this study, we created a survey in which we asked a relatively large sample of autistic and non-autistic people to rate their own and others' mindreading abilities in relation to autistic and non-autistic others, respectively. Both groups believed that they were better at reading others in their own group than the other group. The autistic respondents reported levels of mindreading skill at least commensurate with the non-autistic respondents when the mind to be read was specified as autistic. Thus, both groups of participants' responses were consistent with the notion that mindreading abilities are relational. Although self-reports are subjective, such beliefs could have important consequences for well-being and intergroup relations.

What can neurodiversity tell us about inner speech, and vice versa? A theoretical perspective

Inner speech refers to the experience of talking to oneself in one's head. While notoriously challenging to investigate, it has also been central to a range of questions concerning mind, brain, and behaviour. Posited as a key component in executive function and self-regulation, inner speech has been claimed to be crucial in higher cognitive operations, self-knowledge and self-awareness. Such arguments have traditionally been supported with examples of atypical development. But variations in inner speech - and in some cases, significant diversity - in fact pose several key challenges to such claims, and raises many more questions for, language, thought and mental health more generally. In this review, we will summarise evidence on the experience and operation of inner speech in child and adult neurotypical populations, autistic people and other neurodivergent groups, and people with diverse experiences of linguistic and sensory development, including deafness. We will demonstrate that the relationship between inner speech and cognitive operations may be more complex than first assumed when explored through the lens of cognitive and neurological diversity, and the implications of that for understanding the developing brain in all populations. We discuss why and how the experience of inner speech in neurodivergent groups has often been assumed rather than investigated, making it an important opportunity for researchers to develop innovative future work that integrates participatory insights with cognitive methodology. Finally, we will outline why variations in inner speech - in neurotypical and neurodivergent populations alike - nevertheless have a range of important implications for mental health vulnerability and unmet need. In this sense, the example of inner speech offers us both a way of looking back at the logic of developmental psychology and neuropsychology, and a clue to its future in a neurodiverse world.

'Maybe we just seem like easy targets': A qualitative analysis of autistic adults' experiences of interpersonal violence

LAY ABSTRACT

Research has consistently shown that autistic children are more likely to be victimised than non-autistic children. More recently, studies have also found that autistic adults report experiencing more violence than non-autistic adults however the circumstances surrounding these incidents and the reasons for this are not clear. We wanted to learn more about violence during adulthood for autistic people including what led up to these incidents and what happened afterwards. We spoke to 22 autistic adults who had experienced violence and analysed what they told us to look for common themes. They told us that violence was commonplace in their own lives and in the lives of other autistic people that they know, so much so that they had even come to expect it to happen. They also talked about the negative effect these experiences had on their mental health, the way they felt about themselves and their ability to trust people. This was made worse if people did not believe them when they disclosed what had happened to them. They told us that certain autistic characteristics might make them more vulnerable like being too trusting or going along with people just to please them. They thought that some of these characteristics had been shaped by their experiences, especially being told that that their thoughts, feelings or behaviours were wrong and being pressured to change the way they behaved to 'fit in'. These findings are important in helping us to understand how to improve the personal safety of autistic people.

Autism, Discrimination and Masking: Disrupting a Recipe for Trauma

Outcomes of discrimination for autistic people include masking, social isolation and exclusion, trauma, and mental health problems. This discursive paper discusses the discrimination experienced by autistic people in health, education, employment, and media settings; and considers how to reduce the impact of discrimination. Addressing the impact of discrimination requires an improved understanding of the lived experience of the autistic person, the embedding of inclusive practices in communities, developing the person's life skills and supports, and enabling the person to work through their psychological trauma. Further research can aid in minimizing and preventing discrimination against people with autism.

Is camouflaging autistic traits associated with defeat, entrapment, and lifetime suicidal thoughts? Expanding the Integrated Motivational Volitional Model of Suicide

INTRODUCTION

The current study explored whether camouflaging autistic traits is associated with defeat and entrapment and lifetime suicidal thoughts, as predicted by the Integrated Volitional Model of Suicide (IMV model).

METHODS

180 UK undergraduate students (76.7% female 18-67 years) completed a cross-sectional online survey from February 5 to March 23, 2020, including self-report measures of defeat and entrapment (SDES), autistic traits (AQ-10), depression (PHQ-9), anxiety (GAD-7), camouflaging autistic traits (CAT-Q), and lifetime suicidal thoughts and behaviors (SBQ-R item 1).

RESULTS

After controlling for age, gender, current depression, and anxiety symptoms, autistic traits accounted for significantly more of the variance in defeat and entrapment (1.1%), and camouflaging accounted for a further 3.2% of the variance. The association between autistic traits and lifetime suicidality was significantly mediated by camouflaging, defeat, and entrapment. After controlling for age, gender, current depression, and anxiety symptoms, defeat and entrapment (but not camouflaging) accounted for significantly more variance in lifetime suicidal thoughts. The interaction between camouflaging, defeat and entrapment predicted significantly less variance in lifetime suicidal thoughts than either variable alone.

CONCLUSION

Results suggest that camouflaging autistic traits is a transdiagnostic risk factor for lifetime suicidality, relevant to the defeat and entrapment constructs of the IMV model.

I see you, you see me: the impact of social presence on social interaction processes in autistic and non-autistic people

Environments that require social interaction are complex, challenging and sometimes experienced as overwhelming by autistic people. However, all too often theories relating to social interaction processes are created, and interventions are proposed, on the basis of data collected from studies that do not involve genuine social encounters nor do they consider the perception of social presence to be a potentially influential factor. In this review, we begin by considering why face-to-face interaction research is important in this field. We then discuss how the perception of social agency and social presence can influence conclusions about social interaction processes. We then outline some insights gained from face-to-face interaction research conducted with both autistic and non-autistic people. We finish by considering the impact of social presence on cognitive processes more broadly, including theory of mind. Overall, we demonstrate that choice of stimuli in studies assessing social interaction processes has the potential to substantially alter conclusions drawn. Ecological validity matters and social presence, in particular, is a critical factor that fundamentally impacts social interaction processes in both autistic and non-autistic people. This article is part of a discussion meeting issue 'Face2face: advancing the science of social interaction'.

Seeing past different signals in the job interview: information improves ratings of candidates on the autism spectrum

Purpose

The authors used signaling theory to explain negative perceptions of individuals on the autism spectrum (IotAS) in the job interview and explored whether parasocial contact could improve perceptions.

Design/methodology/approach

Participants were randomly assigned across six experimental conditions. Some received information that IotAS' social and communication differences prevent them from attaining jobs they could perform (information), some received this information and watched a video showing IotAS working competently (parasocial contact) and others were exposed to neither information nor video (control). Participants then watched a mock interview of a job candidate presenting as an IotAS or neurotypical and gave their first impressions of him, perceptions of his job suitability and selection decision.

Findings

Participants had less favorable first impressions of the IotAS-presenting candidate and perceived him as having lower job suitability and were therefore less likely to select him. Parasocial contact had no effect. However, participants who had received information that IotAS' differences keep them from being hired for jobs they could do perceived the IotAS-presenting candidate as more suitable for the job and had greater intentions to interact with and select him.

Originality/value

The authors enhance understanding of autism in the workplace by explaining how IotAS' signaling behavior during a job interview impedes their selection. The authors also provide evidence that a brief message that IotAS' social and communication differences keep them from securing jobs they could perform can promote IotAS' selection by focusing decision-makers on their job-relevant qualifications.

Neurodiversity and Autism Intervention: Reconciling Perspectives Through a Naturalistic Developmental Behavioral Intervention Framework

Proponents of autism intervention and those of the neurodiversity movement often appear at odds, the former advocating for intensive treatments and the latter arguing that autism must be accepted as a form of diversity. The history of behavioral intervention has understandably outraged many in the Autistic community, though many still value supports focused on quality of life. This commentary argues that Naturalistic Developmental Behavioral Interventions (NDBIs) hold promise for bridging the gap between early intervention and the neurodiversity movement. However, we recognize NDBIs have much room to grow and suggest multiple strategies for improvement. We believe these updates are not only feasible for clinicians and researchers to implement but will ultimately lead to improved quality of life for Autistic individuals.

Exploring the role of interpersonal contexts in peer relationships among autistic and non-autistic youth in integrated education

The double empathy problem theory posits that autistic social difficulties emerge from an interpersonal misalignment in social experiences and expectations between autistic and non-autistic people. Supporting this, emerging research reveals better social outcomes in interactions within than across neurotypes among autistic and non-autistic people, emphasizing the need to examine the role of the interpersonal context in autistic social outcomes. However, research on peer relationships among autistic youth primarily focuses on individual characteristics in isolation from the interpersonal context. To address this, this preliminary study explored the effects of student-peer neurotype match on peer relationships among autistic and non-autistic youth in an integrated educational setting. We plotted the peer relationship networks among youth in a school club based on systematic observations of peer interactions over eight 45-min sessions. Descriptive network statistics (node degree and strength) showed that both autistic and non-autistic youth had more and stronger peer relationships with their same- than cross-neurotype peers. Assortativity coefficients revealed a tendency for youth to connect with peers of the same neurotype, rather than with peers with similar social popularity or activity. We further modeled the effects of student-peer neurotype match on peer relationships using exponential random graph models. The findings suggested that student-peer neurotype match predicted the total strength of peer relationships above and beyond the effects of student neurotype, individual heterogeneity in social popularity and activity, and the tendency of mutuality in social relationships. We discussed the strengths and limitations of this study and the implications for future research and inclusion practice.

Experiences of Friendships for Individuals on the Autism Spectrum: A Scoping Review

Friendships are vital to mental health and well-being. Understanding autistic individuals’ lived experiences of friendship is necessary to support friendship development. A scoping review exploring autistic individuals’ experiences of friendship was undertaken to understand their perspectives of friendship. Electronic database and manual reference searches identified twenty-two studies exploring autistic perspectives of friendship. Results were synthesised using a meta-ethnographic approach across the lifespan. Findings highlight the common and unique experiences of friendship among autistic individuals. While autistic individuals defined friendship based on homophily and propinquity, similar to non-autistic individuals, unique challenges including friendship insecurity, monotropism and efforts to conform to neurotypical social norms, leading to anxiety, were experienced by autistic individuals.

Peer preferences and characteristics of same-group and cross-group social interactions among autistic and non-autistic adolescents

LAY ABSTRACT

Autistic students often experience challenges in peer interactions, especially for young adolescents who are navigating the increased social expectations in secondary education. Previous research on the peer interactions of autistic adolescents mainly compared the social behaviors of autistic and non-autistic students and overlooked the peers in the social context. However, recent research has shown that the social challenges faced by autistic may not be solely contributed by their social differences, but a mismatch in the social communication styles between autistic and non-autistic people. As such, this study aimed to investigate the student-and-peer match in real-world peer interactions between six autistic and six non-autistic adolescents in an inclusive school club. We examined the odds of autistic and non-autistic students interacting with either an autistic peer, a non-autistic peer, or multiple peers, and the results showed that autistic students were more likely to interact with autistic peers then non-autistic peers. This preference for same-group peer interactions strengthened over the 5-month school club in both autistic and non-autistic students. We further found that same-group peer interactions, in both autistic and non-autistic students, were more likely to convey a social interest rather than a functional purpose or need, be sharing thoughts, experiences, or items rather than requesting help or objects, and be highly reciprocal than cross-group social behaviors. Collectively, our findings support that peer interaction outcomes may be determined by the match between the group memberships of the student and their peers, either autistic or non-autistic, rather than the student's autism diagnosis.

Greater Social Interest Between Autistic and Non-autistic Conversation Partners Following Autism Acceptance Training for Non-autistic People

Bi-directional differences in social communication and behavior can contribute to poor interactions between autistic and non-autistic (NA) people, which in turn may reduce social opportunities for autistic adults and contribute to poor outcomes. Historically, interventions to improve social interaction in autism have focused on altering the behaviors of autistic people and have ignored the role of NA people. Recent efforts to improve autism understanding among NA adults via training have resulted in more favorable views toward autistic people, yet it remains unknown whether these benefits extend to real-world interactions between autistic and NA people. The current study explores whether a brief autism acceptance training (AAT) program can improve social interactions between autistic and NA adults. Thirty-nine NA males were randomly assigned to complete AAT or a no-training control condition, then participated in a 5-min unstructured conversation with an unfamiliar autistic male (n = 39). Following the conversation, participants rated their perceptions of interaction quality, first impressions of their partner, and their interest in future interactions with their partner. In dyads where the NA individual completed AAT, both the autistic and NA person endorsed greater future interest in hanging out with their partner relative to dyads in which the NA adult did not complete AAT. However, other social interaction outcomes, including ratings of interaction quality and first impressions of autistic partners, largely did not differ between training and no-training conditions, and assessments of the interaction were largely unrelated for autistic and NA partners within dyads. Results also indicated that NA participants, but not autistic participants, demonstrated substantial correspondence between evaluations of their partner and the interaction, suggesting that autistic adults may place less weight on trait judgments when assessing the quality of an interaction. These findings suggest that the brief AAT for NA adults used in this study may increase mutual social interest in real-world interactions between NA and autistic adults, but more systematic changes are likely needed to bridge divides between these individuals. Future work with larger, more diverse samples is recommended to further explore whether interventions targeting NA adults are beneficial for improving autistic experiences within NA social environments.

Do Neurotypical People Like or Dislike Autistic People?

Background

This study investigated whether neurotypical individuals' judgments that they dislike a person are more common when viewing autistic individuals than when viewing neurotypical individuals.

Methods

Videos of autistic and neurotypical targets were presented to a group of perceivers (neurotypical adults) who were asked whether or not they liked each target and why.

Results

It was more common for perceivers to "like" neurotypical than autistic targets. The number of "likes" each target received correlated highly with perceiver ratings of target social favorability. Perceivers cited perceived awkwardness and lack of empathy as being reasons for deciding they disliked targets.

Conclusions

The findings shed light on how neurotypical people (mis)perceive autistic people. Such perceptions may act as a barrier to social integration for autistic people.

Lay summary

Why was this study done?: Previous research has found that nonautistic people tend to form less positive first impressions of autistic people than they do of other nonautistic people. These studies have tended to present questions such as "How trustworthy is this person?" or "How attractive is this person?" along with ratings scales. However, although it is known that nonautistic people tend to give lower ratings on these scales, we do not know whether this amounts to a dislike for autistic people or just lower levels of liking.What was the purpose of this study?: This study aimed to find out whether nonautistic people are less likely to say they like (and more likely to say they dislike) autistic people than other nonautistic people.What did the researchers do?: The researchers presented videos of autistic and nonautistic people to other nonautistic adults. The people watching the videos were not told that some of the people in the videos were autistic. They were asked to decide whether they liked or disliked the person in each video and to say why they had made their decision by choosing from a range of options.What were the results of the study?: Nonautistic people were more likely to say they disliked the person in the video if they were autistic, even though they did not know the diagnosis. The most common reasons for disliking a person was that they appeared awkward, and that they appeared to lack empathy.What do these findings add to what was already known?: It was already known that nonautistic people tend to rate autistic people less positively on ratings scales. This study suggests that when making judgments-of either liking or disliking-they will sometimes go so far as to say they dislike autistic people.What are potential weaknesses in the study?: All of the people in the video clips were male, while those watching the videos were mainly female. Therefore, we do not know whether the same observations would be made for perceptions of autistic females. The number of participants watching the videos was relatively small: a larger sample would give more reliable findings.How will these findings help autistic adults now or in the future?: The findings add to previous research showing nonautistic people's misperceptions of autistic people could be a barrier to social integration for autistic people. They highlight the need for interventions at the societal level aimed at reducing misunderstanding and promoting tolerance.

"I'm Human After All": Autism, Trauma, and Affective Empathy

Academic literature has long associated autism with empathy deficits. Although this view has been attenuated over time to include only cognitive empathy, earlier perceptions continue to influence popular representations of autism and screening/diagnostic tools. As a result, empathetic autistics may be prevented from accessing diagnosis, and those with a diagnosis may experience internalized stigma or violence under the guise of therapy. There are, however, some autistics who do self-identify as having empathy difficulties. The purpose of this perspective piece was to first trouble the view of empathy "deficit" as intrinsic within autism and consider alternative explanations and, second, to more deeply consider post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) as a factor for autistic people who self-identify as having empathy difficulties. Using both literature and author narrative, we argue that autistics are more likely to experience trauma and more vulnerable to developing PTSD, but less likely to receive a diagnosis of PTSD than nonautistics, as their PTSD-related symptoms, such as a lack of affective empathy, may be conflated with autism traits. Our main recommendations are: (1) future studies should investigate the possible interactions between autism, trauma, PTSD, and affective empathy, determining whether autistic adults with PTSD may recover affective empathy following therapy; (2) clinicians should look beyond autism if their client identifies a lack of affective empathy as part of their challenges; (3) and clinicians should adapt diagnostic procedures for PTSD in autistic adults to accommodate those with alexithymia, and exercise caution when using screening tools for autism, allowing empathic autistic adults to access diagnosis.

Lay summary

What is the topic of this article and why is it important?: Many people believe that autism causes a lack of empathy. This belief is a problem because it denies the lived experience of autistic adults and makes them appear as less than human. It can also lead to violence against autistics, and it can mean that empathic autistic adults miss out on an autism diagnosis. As a result, they may not be able to access necessary supports. This situation may cause suffering for autistic adults.What is the perspective of the authors?: R.H. is an autistic woman diagnosed in adulthood, who is often overwhelmed by too much empathy. She worked as an employment mentor for autistics and is now a PhD candidate researching relationship-building between autistic service users and their support professionals. H.B. is an autistic man diagnosed in childhood. As a teenager, he was also diagnosed with post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), a mental disorder caused by trauma. He did not feel any empathy for most of his life and felt very distressed by this, as he thought that it was a permanent trait of his autism. However, he started feeling empathy after trauma therapy and falling in love. Both authors believe that autistic adults can experience all forms of empathy.What arguments do the authors make?: The authors cite research that shows other reasons which may explain the autism-empathy myth: (1) nonautistics may not recognize empathy in autistics because of mutual differences, (2) nonautistics may not believe autistics who say they have empathy because old research suggested that this is impossible, and (3) empathy research on autistics may not be correct because it uses inappropriate methods. The authors then suggest that unrecognized PTSD may be the reason why some autistics have difficulties in this area. They think so because PTSD can shut down emotional empathy. Autistics are more likely to experience trauma, more vulnerable to developing PTSD, and less likely to receive a diagnosis of PTSD than nonautistics.What do the authors recommend?: 1.Researchers should work with autistic adults who report difficulty in feeling empathy to determine whether they may have PTSD and/or recover empathy after trauma therapy.2.Professionals who support autistic adults should look beyond autism if their client identifies a lack of empathy as part of their challenges.3.Clinicians should treat questions relating to empathy with caution when using autism screening/diagnostic tools, allowing empathic autistic adults to access diagnosis and appropriate supports.How will these recommendations help autistic adults now or in the future?: We hope that this will lead to better support for autistics who have PTSD, and less biased referral and diagnostic procedures for those who do not. We also hope that autistic adults might feel less stigma by suggesting PTSD, not autism, as the underlying cause if they have difficulties feeling empathy.

What Do New Findings About Social Interaction in Autistic Adults Mean for Neurodevelopmental Research?

Deficit-based accounts of social and communication abilities continue to dominate autism research. However, emerging findings suggest that this view may be overly simplistic and discount the two-way nature of interaction. Here we discuss the reconceptualization of social cognition to consider such difficulties as examples of bidirectional, multifaceted misattunement between autistic and nonautistic individuals. Aligned with progressive theoretical frameworks, emerging empirical research indicates that mismatches in communication styles can contribute to autistic social difficulties and the important role that nonautistic difficulties play. We highlight two areas of future research with the aim of providing empirical support for the views that the autistic community has proposed over the past 2 decades. We discuss the impact of such a paradigm shift on a number of levels, including how bridging the gap between different interaction styles can reduce stigma and increase understanding. Adopting such a framework will provide radical opportunities for transformative societal changes and education around inclusion.

Autism and the double empathy problem: Implications for development and mental health

This article proposes a link between autistic people being misperceived by the neurotypical majority and their being at risk of poor mental health and well-being. We present a transactional account of development in which the misperceptions (and consequent behaviour) of the neurotypical majority influences the perceptions and behaviour of autistic people such that they become increasingly separate and indeed isolated from mainstream society. This jeopardizes their mental health and prevents autistic people from developing to full potential. The situation is not only problematical for the development of autistic people but is also to the detriment of wider society, in so far as autistic people are effectively prevented from contributing fully. This account assumes that some (not necessarily all) autistic people yearn to be included, to be productive and to be useful. It thus directly opposes accounts that view autism as an extreme case of diminished social motivation.

Is Camouflaging Autistic Traits Associated with Suicidal Thoughts and Behaviours? Expanding the Interpersonal Psychological Theory of Suicide in an Undergraduate Student Sample

The current study explored whether people who camouflage autistic traits are more likely to experience thwarted belongingness and suicidality, as predicted by the Interpersonal Psychological Theory of Suicide (IPTS). 160 undergraduate students (86.9% female, 18–23 years) completed a cross-sectional online survey from 8th February to 30th May 2019 including self-report measures of thwarted belongingness and perceived burdensomeness, autistic traits, depression, anxiety, camouflaging autistic traits, and lifetime suicidality. Results suggest that camouflaging autistic traits is associated with increased risk of experiencing thwarted belongingness and lifetime suicidality. It is important for suicide theories such as the IPTS to include variables relevant to the broader autism phenotype, to increase applicability of models to both autistic and non-autistic people.

Measurement Properties of the Suicidal Behaviour Questionnaire-Revised in Autistic Adults

We explored the appropriateness and measurement properties of a suicidality assessment tool (SBQ-R) developed for the general population, in autistic adults—a high risk group for suicide. 188 autistic adults and 183 general population adults completed the tool online, and a sub-sample (n = 15) were interviewed while completing the tool. Multi-group factorial invariance analysis of the online survey data found evidence for metric non-invariance of the SBQ-R, particularly for items three (communication of suicidal intent) and four (likelihood of suicide attempt in the future). Cognitive interviews revealed that autistic adults did not interpret these items as intended by the tool designers. Results suggest autistic adults interpret key questions regarding suicide risk differently to the general population. Future research must adapt tools to better capture suicidality in autistic adults.

Social Cognition, Social Skill, and Social Motivation Minimally Predict Social Interaction Outcomes for Autistic and Non-Autistic Adults

Social cognition, social skill, and social motivation have been extensively researched and characterized as atypical in autistic people, with the assumption that each mechanistically contributes to the broader social interaction difficulties that diagnostically define the condition. Despite this assumption, research has not directly assessed whether or how these three social domains contribute to actual real-world social interaction outcomes for autistic people. The current study administered standardized measures of social cognition, social skill, and social motivation to 67 autistic and 58 non-autistic (NA) adults and assessed whether performance on these measures, both individually and relationally between dyadic partners, predicted outcomes for autistic and NA adults interacting with unfamiliar autistic and NA partners in a 5 minute unstructured "get to know you" conversation. Consistent with previous research, autistic adults scored lower than NA adults on the three social domains and were evaluated less favorably by their conversation partners. However, links between autistic adults' performance on the three social domains and their social interaction outcomes were minimal and, contrary to prediction, only the social abilities of NA adults predicted some interaction outcomes within mixed diagnostic dyads. Collectively, results suggest that reduced performance by autistic adults on standardized measures of social cognition, social skill, and social motivation do not correspond in clear and predictable ways with their real-world social interaction outcomes. They also highlight the need for the development and validation of more ecological assessments of autistic social abilities and the consideration of relational dynamics, not just individual characteristics, when assessing social disability in autism.

Neurotype-Matching, but Not Being Autistic, Influences Self and Observer Ratings of Interpersonal Rapport

The Double Empathy Problem suggests that communicative difficulties between autistic and non-autistic people are due to bi-directional differences in communicative style and a reciprocal lack of understanding. If true, there should be increased similarity in interaction style, resulting in higher rapport during interactions between pairs of the same neurotype. Here, we provide two empirical tests of rapport, with data revealing whether self- and observer- rated rapport varies depending on the match or mismatch in autism status within a pair. An additional opportunity afforded by these data is to examine the effect of the autism status of the rater on the perceived rapport between matched and mismatched pairs. In Study 1 72 participants were allocated to one of three dyad conditions: autistic pairs (n = 24), non-autistic pairs (n = 24) and mixed pairs (n = 12 autistic; n = 12 non-autistic). Each participant completed three semi-structured interactions with their partner, rating rapport after each interaction. Non-autistic pairs experienced higher self-rated rapport than mixed and autistic pairs, and autistic pairs experienced higher rapport than mixed pairs. In Study 2 (n = 80) autistic and non-autistic observers rated interactional rapport while watching videoed interactions between autistic pairs, non-autistic pairs, and mixed pairs (n = 18, a subset of participants in Study 1). Mixed pairs were rated significantly lower on rapport than autistic and non-autistic pairs, and autistic pairs were rated more highly for rapport than non-autistic pairs. Both autistic and non-autistic observers show similar patterns in how they rate the rapport of autistic, non-autistic, and mixed pairs. In summary, autistic people experience high interactional rapport when interacting with other autistic people, and this is also detected by external observers. Rather than autistic people experiencing low rapport in all contexts, their rapport ratings are influenced by a mismatch of diagnosis. These findings suggest that autistic people possess a distinct mode of social interaction style, rather than demonstrating social skills deficits. These data are considered in terms of their implications for psychological theories of autism, as well as practical impact on educational and clinical practice.

Neurotypical individuals fail to understand action vitality form in children with autism spectrum disorder

Action vitality forms are highly pervasive aspects of daily life and have been widely assumed to be critical for basic social interactions. Previous evidence indicates that ASD children express their own vitality forms in a way that is motorically dissimilar to TD children. Here we demonstrate that this motor dissimilarity prevents neurotypical adults from recognizing vitality forms, when observing ASD children acting gently or rudely. Although ASD children differentiate these vitality forms, neurotypical adults were remarkably inaccurate in identifying them. This indicates that difficulty in social interaction for ASD individuals should not be entirely ascribed to their lack of understanding others, as standardly assumed. The failure of neurotypical individuals to understand them plays a critical role too.

Any defects of sociality in individuals diagnosed with autism spectrum disorder (ASD) are standardly explained in terms of those individuals’ putative impairments in a variety of cognitive functions. Recently, however, the need for a bidirectional approach to social interaction has been emphasized. Such an approach highlights differences in basic ways of acting between ASD and neurotypical individuals which would prevent them from understanding each other. Here we pursue this approach by focusing on basic action features reflecting the agent’s mood and affective states. These are action features Stern named “vitality forms,” and which are widely assumed to substantiate core social interactions [D. N. Stern, The Interpersonal World of the Infant (1985); D. N. Stern, Forms of Vitality Exploring Dynamic Experience in Psychology, Arts, Psychotherapy, and Development (2010)]. Previously we demonstrated that, although ASD and typically developing (TD) children alike differentiate vitality forms when performing actions, ASD children express them in a way that is motorically dissimilar to TD children. To assess whether this motor dissimilarity may have consequences for vitality form recognition, we asked neurotypical participants to identify the vitality form of different types of action performed by ASD or TD children. We found that participants exhibited remarkable inaccuracy in identifying ASD children’s vitality forms. Interestingly, their performance did not benefit from information feedback. This indicates that how people act matters for understanding others and for being understood by them. Because vitality forms pervade every aspect of daily life, our findings promise to open the way to a deeper comprehension of the bidirectional difficulties for both ASD and neurotypical individuals in interacting with one another.

Outcomes of real-world social interaction for autistic adults paired with autistic compared to typically developing partners

Differences in social communication and interaction styles between autistic and typically developing have been studied in isolation and not in the context of real-world social interaction. The current study addresses this "blind spot" by examining whether real-world social interaction quality for autistic adults differs when interacting with typically developing relative to autistic partners. Participants (67 autism spectrum disorder, 58 typically developing) were assigned to one of three dyadic partnerships (autism-autism: n = 22; typically developing-typically developing: n = 23; autism-typically developing: n = 25; 55 complete dyads, 15 partial dyads) in which they completed a 5-min unstructured conversation with an unfamiliar person and then assessed the quality of the interaction and their impressions of their partner. Although autistic adults were rated as more awkward, less attractive, and less socially warm than typically developing adults by both typically developing and autistic partners, only typically developing adults expressed greater interest in future interactions with typically developing relative to autistic partners. In contrast, autistic participants trended toward an interaction preference for other autistic adults and reported disclosing more about themselves to autistic compared to typically developing partners. These results suggest that social affiliation may increase for autistic adults when partnered with other autistic people, and support reframing social interaction difficulties in autism as a relational rather than an individual impairment.