Emotion recognition difficulties are considered to contribute to social‐communicative problems for autistic individuals. Prior research has been dominated by a focus on forced‐choice recognition response accuracy for static face presentations of basic emotions, often involving small samples. Using free‐report and multiple‐choice response formats, we compared emotion recognition in IQ‐matched autistic (N = 63) and nonautistic (N = 67) adult samples using 12 face emotion stimuli presented in three different stimulus formats (static, dynamic, social) that varied the degree of accompanying contextual information. Percent agreement with normative recognition responses (usually labeled “recognition accuracy”) was slightly lower for autistic adults. Both groups displayed marked inter‐individual variability and, although there was considerable overlap between groups, a very small subset of autistic individuals recorded lower percent agreement than any of the nonautistic sample. Overall, autistic individuals were significantly slower to respond and less confident. Although stimulus type, response format, and emotion affected percent agreement, latency and confidence, their interactions with group were nonsignificant and the associated effect sizes extremely small. The findings challenge notions that autistic adults have core deficits in emotion recognition and are more likely than nonautistic adults to be overwhelmed by increasingly dynamic or complex emotion stimuli and to experience difficulties recognizing specific emotions. Suggested research priorities include clarifying whether longer recognition latencies reflect fundamental processing limitations or adjustable strategic influences, probing age‐related changes in emotion recognition across adulthood, and identifying the links between difficulties highlighted by traditional emotion recognition paradigms and real‐world social functioning. Lay Summary It is generally considered that autistic individuals are less accurate than nonautistic individuals at recognizing other people's facial emotions. Using a wide array of emotions presented in various contexts, this study suggests that autistic individuals are, on average, only slightly less accurate but at the same time somewhat slower when classifying others' emotions. However, there was considerable overlap between the two groups, and great variability between individuals. The differences between groups prevailed regardless of how stimuli were presented, the response required or the particular emotion.

Emotion recognition difficulties are considered to contribute to social-communicative problems for autistic individuals and awareness of such difficulties may be critical for the identification and pursuit of strategies that will mitigate their adverse effects. We examined metacognitive awareness of face emotion recognition responses in autistic (N = 63) and non-autistic (N = 67) adults across (a) static, dynamic and social face emotion stimuli, (b) free-and forced-report response formats, and (c) four different sets of the six "basic" and six "complex" emotions. Within-individual relationships between recognition accuracy and post-recognition confidence provided no indication that autistic individuals were poorer at discriminating correct from incorrect recognition responses than non-autistic individuals, although both groups exhibited marked inter-individual variability. Although the autistic group was less accurate and slower to recognize emotions, confidence-accuracy calibration analyses provided no evidence of reduced sensitivity on their part to fluctuations in their emotion recognition performance. Across variations in stimulus type, response format and emotion, increases in accuracy were associated with progressively higher confidence, with similar calibration curves for both groups. Calibration curves for both groups were, however, characterized by overconfidence at the higher confidence levels (i.e., overall accuracy less than the average confidence level), with the non-autistic group contributing more decisions with 90%-100% confidence. Comparisons of slow and fast responders provided no evidence of a "hardeasy" effect-the tendency to exhibit overconfidence during hard tasks and underconfidence during easy tasks-suggesting that autistic individuals' slower recognition responding may reflect a strategic difference rather than a processing speed limitation. Lay SummaryIt is generally considered that autistic individuals may have difficulty recognizing other people's facial emotions. However, little is known about their awareness of any emotion recognition difficulties they may experience. This study indicates that, although there is considerable individual variability, autistic adults were as sensitive to variations in the accuracy of their recognition of others' emotions as their non-autistic peers.

Although the ability of autistic adults to recognize others' emotions has been extensively studied, less attention has been given to how they respond to these emotions. We examined two aspects of autistic and non‐autistic adults' responsiveness to the emotional expressions of non‐autistic actors: their perspectives on the appropriate way of responding to others' emotions and their awareness of others' perceptions of the likely appropriateness of such responses. Autistic (N = 63) and non‐autistic (N = 67) adult samples viewed videos of 74 dyadic social interactions displaying different examples of 12 emotions expressed by one actor in response to the behavior of the other. After each video, participants (a) nominated the emotion expressed by the first actor, (b) offered their perspective on what would constitute an appropriate empathic response by the second actor, and (c) indicated their confidence in that response. Although the autistic group provided fewer appropriate empathic responses—operationalized via a panel's interpretations of normative responses—than the non‐autistic group, within‐group variability was marked, and the effect was weak and largely confined to basic emotions. Autistic individuals were, however, considerably less confident in their responses. Examination of the relationships between confidence in and the appropriateness of empathic responses provided no indication in either group of reliable discrimination of appropriate from inappropriate empathic responses or finely tuned metacognitive awareness of variations in appropriateness. In sum, autistic adults' perspectives on the appropriate empathic reactions to non‐autistic adults' emotions were not unilaterally or markedly different to those of non‐autistic adults.