Social interaction is inherently bidirectional, but research on autistic peer interactions often frames communication as unidirectional and in isolation from the peer context. This study investigated natural peer interactions among six autistic and six non-autistic adolescents in an inclusive school club over 5 months (14 45-min sessions in total) to examine the students’ peer preferences in real-world social interactions and how the preferences changed over time. We further examined whether social behavior characteristics differ between student and peer neurotype combinations. Findings showed that autistic students were more likely to interact with autistic peers then non-autistic peers. In both autistic and non-autistic students, the likelihood of interacting with a same-neurotype peer increased over time. Autistic and non-autistic students’ within-neurotype social interactions were more likely to reflect relational than functional purposes, be characterized as sharing thoughts and experiences rather than requesting help or objects, and be highly reciprocal, as compared with cross-neurotype interactions. These peer preferences and patterns of social interactions were not found among student-peer dyads with the same genders. These findings suggest that peer interaction is determined by more than just a student’s autism diagnosis, but by a combination of student and peer neurotypes. 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.

Autistic students often struggle to engage with peers in integrated education; however, research has largely focused on individual characteristics rather than the interpersonal and environmental factors affecting peer engagement. This mixed-methods study examined longitudinal peer interactions over a school year among 17 adolescents (seven were autistic) in an inclusive school club. The quantitative phase investigated participants’ social behavior rates to identify sessions where each student demonstrated high and low peer engagement compared with their average participation levels. The qualitative phase compared social interactions and contexts between sessions of high and low peer engagement, revealing four themes regarding contextual supports and barriers to autistic peer engagement: (1) peer engagement is a participatory process where a student and their peer(s) navigate mutual understanding, shaped by both student and peer social characteristics, openness, and involvement; (2) student–peer synchronicity, such as shared interests or compatibility of social styles, was essential to autistic peer engagement; (3) peer engagement can be supported by activities facilitating joint engagement and exploration of mutual interests; (4) classroom interventions emphasizing strengths can support peer engagement, while normative behavioral standards without peer education on individual differences and diversity can perpetuate peers’ negative perceptions of autistic difficulties. Lay abstract Peer engagement is essential but often challenging for autistic students in integrated education, especially for adolescents. Although peer engagement is bidirectional and context-dependent, research has largely focused on individual characteristics rather than the interpersonal and environmental factors affecting peer engagement. This mixed-methods study examined peer interactions over a school year among 17 adolescents (seven were autistic) in an inclusive school club at a public middle school in the Northeastern United States. The study began with a quantitative phase identifying sessions in which each student was socially engaged with peers more or less often than usual for them. We then qualitatively compared the social interactions and contexts between sessions where each participant experienced high and low peer engagement. Thematic analysis revealed four themes regarding contextual supports and barriers to autistic peer engagement: (1) peer engagement is a participatory process where a student and their peer(s) navigate mutual understanding, shaped by both student and peer social characteristics, openness, and involvement; (2) student–peer synchronicity, such as shared interests or compatibility of social styles, was essential to autistic peer engagement; (3) peer engagement can be supported by activities facilitating joint engagement and exploration of mutual interests; (4) classroom interventions emphasizing strengths can support peer engagement, while normative behavioral standards without peer education on individual differences and diversity can perpetuate peers’ negative perceptions of autistic difficulties. The findings have implications for better inclusive practice to support autistic social participation by modifying the peer environments, activities, and classroom interventions.

Many youth on the autism spectrum possess interests and strengths for STEM-related postsecondary pathways, yet there are few research-based programs to support those interests and competencies including complex problem solving and social communication. This qualitative study explored the experiences and perceived outcomes of students, teachers, and parents participating in an inclusive, strength-based, extracurricular engineering design program entitled the IDEAS Maker Club. Twenty-six students, 13 parents, and nine teachers in the program completed interviews and program logs while researchers conducted classroom observations over 2 years. Thematic analysis identified five common themes: (1) positive student experience and engagement, (2) skills acquisition, (3) development of interest in STEM and related careers, (4) social relationships and community, and (5) safe spaces that supported self-determination.

Social participation in schools is critical to student academic and psychosocial outcomes. Neurodivergent students, however, often experience environmental barriers to social participation, such as lack of awareness and negative attitudes among peers and school staff, including teachers. Although authentic social participation is composed of dynamic interactions between a person and the external environments, occupational therapy’s role in addressing student social participation primarily focuses on internal social characteristics. Barriers within school environments often remain unaddressed, with no clear role for occupational therapy practitioners. We advocate an expansion of occupational therapy’s role to address school environments, especially the social, physical, and policy aspects, to promote social participation and inclusion. We also discuss the need for change and present a framework guiding intervention in school environments.

No abstract