Abstract
There is a need for strengths-based intervention approaches for autistic youth during the transition to adulthood. In the current study, we explored parent perspectives about youth strengths during adolescence. We combined data from three studies which included semi-structured interviews about parents’ perspectives on preparing for adulthood with autistic youth. Total participants included 39 parents of 41 autistic youth (ages 12–19 years, 88% male). Parents of autistic youth described many strengths of their children in the context of conversations about the transition to adulthood. Thematic analysis revealed three subthemes under the broad theme of parental perceptions of strengths: diverse strengths and skills, strengths counterbalanced by challenges, and strengths with supports. Diverse strengths and skills were further categorized using content analysis and included intelligence, creativity, physical abilities, and self-care skills, which notably include some areas often perceived as weaknesses for autistic people. The findings demonstrate that parents are an important source of information about youth strengths during transition planning processes. Understanding the types of strengths that parents observe in their autistic sons and daughters can help inform the development of strengths-based interventions capable of supporting the transition to adulthood.
Lay abstract
Autism is a condition frequently characterized by social and communication challenges. Because most research focuses on understanding and reducing challenges, less is known about the strengths of autistic individuals. This is especially true of those who are transitioning into adulthood. We designed this research study to provide information about how parents perceive the strengths of their autistic adolescent children prior to the transition. We reviewed 39 parent interviews from previous research about how they prepare their autistic sons and daughters for adulthood. Without prompting, parents identified many strengths of their autistic children. Diverse strengths and skills they identified included intelligence, creativity, physical abilities, and self-care skills. These strengths are interesting, as they cover traits that are often thought of as areas of difficulty for autistic youth. However, parents also talked about strengths alongside challenges, and how specific supports would be needed to help their sons and daughters fully realize their strengths. These findings are important, as they help us know more about the strengths of autistic youth and how strengths can be supported when preparing for adulthood. Our findings also help reveal strengths that are particularly apparent during the transition to adulthood.
Keywords
Introduction and literature review
Autism is a developmental condition associated with unique characteristics, including preference for routine and structure, heightened awareness of details, and particular ways of learning and interacting (Carter et al., 2015; National Institute of Mental Health, 2018). These and other aspects of autism are often considered to be core challenges. For example, preferences for structure may present as behavioral inflexibility, detail orientation may present as socially inappropriate preoccupations or perseveration, and other differences in learning and communication may present as social deficits and restricted/repetitive behaviors (American Psychiatric Association, 2013). However, several of these characteristics are also seen as strengths and may place autistic 1 individuals at an advantage (Mottron et al., 2013; Russell et al., 2019). Autism strengths identified in research include pattern detection, ability to direct attention, memory, visuospatial skills, attention to detail, pitch discrimination, and creativity (de Schipper et al., 2016; Happe & Frith, 2009; Mahdi et al., 2018; Meilleur et al., 2015). Counter to common descriptions of social challenges, autistic researcher Damian Milton (2014) argues that autistic people do not completely lack social awareness, but can have a distinctive sociality which is stigmatized.
Russell et al. (2019) found that moderating factors, such as social context and skill in self-regulation can influence the extent to which an autistic individual experiences their own traits as beneficial or detrimental. For example, in school settings, a tendency to focus in-depth on special interests (a common autistic trait) could be seen by teachers as a barrier to flexible thinking, but their acceptance of the trait’s potential positive influence on the child’s learning may lead to their helping the child learn to use it as a strength (Wood, 2019). As a child develops, such factors can be significantly influenced by their parents (Kerr et al., 2019). Parents of young children feel that understanding their children’s differences and strengths is important (Broski & Dunn, 2018) and parents of adolescents report that understanding and incorporating strengths into practice with autistic youth are vital for the transition to adulthood (Thompson et al., 2018). Although researchers have begun to explore the existence of parents’ influence on their children’s development and their recognition of the importance of understanding strengths, less is known about the role of parents in identifying and applying strengths for transition-aged autistic youth.
As awareness of autism has grown and diagnostic criteria have changed over the past decades, the reported prevalence of autism has increased (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 2018; Zablotsky et al., 2015). For autistic individuals, a particularly vulnerable time is the transition to adulthood, and evidence suggests that post-secondary outcomes of autistic adults often do not align with desired outcomes (Steinhausen et al., 2016). Examples of desired outcomes may include a successful experience in higher education and/or development of a career (Anderson et al., 2016; Kirby, Schneider, et al., 2019). Autistic adults, however, are less likely to enroll in post-secondary education than those with most other disabilities (Wei et al., 2013). Furthermore, autistic adults had one of the lowest employment rates among disability groups in their early 20s (Roux et al., 2015).
While there are several studies addressing the strengths-based approach with parents and younger children, there are fewer in the domain of transition to adulthood (Meng-Hsin & Ling-Yi, 2020; Steiner & Gengoux, 2018). Parents are often very involved in helping autistic youth to navigate the process of preparing for adulthood (Anderson et al., 2018). The role of parents may be seen as either supporting or hindering progress during transition, depending on the parental perspectives, knowledge, and opportunities available. For example, Kirby (2016) identified parent expectations for autistic youth as a significant mediator of transition outcomes. Evidence suggests that parents with higher expectations raise autistic youth who engage in more transition preparation activities (Holmes et al., 2018) and ultimately achieve more independent outcomes in adulthood (Kirby, 2016). Thus, it is important to understand parent perspectives and consider how they can best support the transition process to promote better outcomes for autistic adults.
Promising directions for effectively supporting autistic youth include the use of strengths-based approaches. Most of the current literature focuses on reducing core autism characteristics (French & Kennedy, 2018) and one study (Riosa et al., 2017) found that only 11.4% of research on the well-being of autistic individuals used a strengths perspective. Additional research has found that misinterpretation of autism challenges, strengths, and abilities can complicate assessment of autistic individuals, including cognitive assessment, causing underestimation of intellectual ability (Courchesne et al., 2015; Dawson et al., 2007). Inclusion of strengths-based methodology and the understanding of individual autistic strengths may significantly improve current practices (Mottron, 2017; Patten Koenig, 2020). During the transition into adulthood, cultivation and use of strengths may be essential to achieving success in careers, relationships, and community involvement (Carter et al., 2015). Lee and Carter (2012) note that focusing on strengths is one of seven elements that create a successful transition service for autistic individuals. Understanding of these strengths and application of them within the structure and expectations given to an autistic adult by an employer can make for a more supportive work environment, increasing the employee’s job satisfaction (Pfeiffer, Brusilovskiy, Davidson, & Persch, 2018). An autistic adult who is knowledgeable about their own strengths and is experienced in applying them in practical settings may also reasonably be more successful in finding viable work within a chosen career in the first place. Despite such potential benefits, few research studies identify strengths in autistic individuals, including parent-identified strengths (Riosa et al., 2017; Urbanowicz & Nicolaidis, 2019).
Given the need for more alignment between desired and actual outcomes for autistic adults, the close involvement of parents during the transition to adulthood, and the promise of strengths-based interventions, there is a need to examine parent perspectives about youth strengths during adolescence. Parents are valuable informants on their children’s strengths due to lifelong experience with their children and the resulting insight into their characteristics. Understanding how parents consider strengths among their autistic children can help inform the development of strengths-based interventions capable of supporting the transition to adulthood. In the current study, we conducted an analysis of qualitative parent interviews. The interviews were conducted within three different studies with slightly differing exclusion criteria (see the “Methods” section for more detail); however, the majority of adolescents whose parents were interviewed did not have a co-occurring intellectual disability and were anticipating receipt of a high school diploma. We conducted this research to answer the question: How do parents consider youth strengths when preparing for adulthood with their autistic adolescent children?
Methods
Our guiding methodological approach was based in a realist/essentialist qualitative framework, whereby our participants’ words reflect their experiences of reality (Terry et al., 2017). Data used in this study were gathered from semi-structured, qualitative interviews conducted within three separate studies in two US states overseen by the same principal investigator. Each of these studies sought to learn about the preparation of autistic youth for adulthood and included individual interviews with youth (n = 41) and, separately, with their caregivers (n = 39). Only parent interviews are described in this article; a portion of the youth interviews are described elsewhere (see Kirby, Schneider, et al., 2019). Across studies, inclusion criteria included the receipt of a diagnosis of autism in the community. During the same visit as the interviews, parents provided demographic information and completed the Social Responsiveness Scale (1st edition (Constantino & Gruber, 2005) for Study A; 2nd edition (Constantino & Gruber, 2012) for Studies B and C).
The first study (Study A) was descriptive and examined youth and parent expectations for adulthood among seven families (eight youth) in North Carolina (also described by Kirby, Schneider, et al., 2019). The second study (Study B) aimed to understand family experiences in preparing for adulthood during secondary school among 14 families (15 youth) in Utah; interviews were conducted at the commencement of a longitudinal, mixed-methods project on the topic (Kirby et al., 2017). The third study (Study C) involved individual interviews with 18 parents and 18 youth in Utah prior to engagement in intervention groups focusing on preparing parents and youth for adulthood (Kirby, Feldman, et al., 2019). Although the specific purpose was slightly different in each study, many of the interview questions were consistent across the three studies. Each study was approved by the University of Utah and/or the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill Institutional Review Board (IRB). The current study is a qualitative, secondary data analysis using only the parent interviews from the three described studies.
Participants
Thirty-nine parent participants (95% female (n = 37)) completed interviews about their autistic adolescent children (88% male (n = 36)). See Table 1 for additional information about parent participants and their autistic offspring. Demographics of our sample are roughly reflective of state demographics in which the studies were conducted. All parent participants were primary caregivers of an adolescent who had an autism diagnosis. Youth ranged in age from 12 to 19 (M = 15.7). Inclusion criteria varied slightly across the three studies. For Study A, youth were required to be ages 12–18 years and have the verbal capacity to participate in an interview. For Studies B and C, participating youth with an intellectual disability were excluded. All participants in Study B and most in Study C were anticipating a high school diploma, rather than a completion certificate, because this requirement was included on recruitment materials (though it was waived following IRB permission for two participants).
Participant demographic information.
SD: standard deviation.
This table includes data merged across the three studies. Autism severity derived from the Social Responsiveness Scale (Constantino & Gruber, 2005, 2012); mild/moderate combined in alignment with the first edition.
Procedure and data collection
Participants of the three studies were recruited through emails and distribution of paper and/or electronic flyers to local organizations (including clinics and schools) serving autistic youth and their families. Interviews were conducted at a university clinic or at the participant’s home. The principal investigator or a trained research assistant conducted each of the interviews, which lasted an average of 31 min (SD = 17 min).
The interviews were semi-structured to allow participants to give flexible and detailed responses. The interview questions addressed parents’ expectations for their child’s life after high school, their concerns about the future, and preparations for the youth’s entry into adulthood. Some of the specific questions asked were: Tell me about what you currently imagine life after high school will look like for your child; Are there aspects of your child’s future that you are especially unsure of or concerned about right now? Tell me about what sorts of things you, your child, and the rest of your family have been doing to prepare for your child’s adult life. Although the current study analyzes parental perceptions of the strengths of their youth, interviewers did not directly ask about strengths.
Data analysis
The interviewer audio recorded the interviews, which the principal investigator or research assistants then transcribed. The research team for the current study consisted of six members in total: two graduate students and four faculty members. We broadly took an inductive, sematic approach using thematic analysis (Braun & Clarke, 2006; Clarke & Braun, 2018). The thematic analysis process focused on identifying themes, beginning first with identifying descriptive codes followed by organization and interpretation (Braun & Clarke, 2006).
This article specifically focuses on a central theme we identified across interviews: parental perceptions of strengths (i.e. our central organizing concept; Clarke & Braun, 2018), with three subthemes. The subthemes describe how parents spoke about the strengths of their autistic adolescent children. Within our primary subtheme (diverse strengths and skills), we further analyzed the data and conducted a summative content analysis (Hsieh & Shannon, 2005) to specifically outline the categories of strengths that were described by parents (i.e. what they said); this approach included counting the frequencies of codes to demonstrate the breadth of these categories (Maxwell, 2005). For both thematic and content analysis approaches, two team members separately read the interviews and recorded descriptive codes, then met in-person with other members of the research team to discuss organization, emergent themes and categories, and interpretation. Our analysis followed what Clarke and Braun (2018) describe as a “medium Q” thematic analysis, using a codebook to offer a structured approach within an in-depth qualitative approach. Each interview was formally coded using the codebook we developed. The researchers chose quotes to represent each theme and a member of the research team who had not been involved in the data analysis reviewed the themes, categories, and quotes for disconfirming evidence to increase trustworthiness (Brink, 1993). To enhance credibility in the analytic process, we included verbatim quotes as representations of findings throughout the “Results” section (Brantlinger et al., 2005).
Community involvement
Autism community members were not directly involved in the design or implementation of this study.
Results
Under the central theme of parental perceptions of strengths, we identified three subthemes: diverse strengths and skills, strengths counterbalanced by challenges, and strengths with supports. Throughout this section, the names of participants have been replaced with codes consisting of letters that represent the study (i.e. Studies A, B, and C) and a random number.
Diverse strengths and skills
The primary subtheme we identified was diverse strengths and skills. Summative content analysis revealed eight categories of strengths and skills that parents reported for their autistic adolescent children: (1) cognitive and learning skills, (2) structure and routine, (3) independence/self-determination, (4) arts and creativity, (5) technology, (6) social and relational skills, (7) positive character traits, and (8) physical/sensory-motor ability. See Table 2 for an overview of this subtheme with examples coded under each category.
Summary of strengths and skills categories.
The cognitive and learning skills category reflects enhanced cognitive ability, intelligence, and learning. This was the most frequent category and was addressed by 24 participants (62%). Over half of the comments parents made within this category addressed academic success in specific areas, including language arts, math, science, geography, writing, test-taking, and general good grades. Parents also reported their youth as being smart, analytical, or logical, and having “very good memory” (participant 9A). Participant 20B shared that her son “talks about going to grad school and I really think he could. He’s very, very intelligent.”
The structure and routine category reflects an ability to thrive in organized and structured settings. This category was addressed by 20 participants (51%) and it was the second most frequent category. While some parents noted challenges in this category, many expressed that their youth flourished with clear expectations, guidelines, and consistency. Participants reported their autistic sons and daughters as being skilled in using a calendar or schedule, functioning with clear expectations, and following rules. Participant 33C said, “I can tell [my son] what to do, and he will do it, he will follow through . . . If anyone tells him to do something, he will follow through and do it.”
The independence/self-determination category reflects self-awareness, independent living skills, and future goals. This category was addressed by 19 participants (49%). Parents who identified strengths within this category specifically mentioned motivation toward higher education and career, cooking talent, general independence, taking initiative, staying on task and following through, general motivation, and the ability to self-advocate. Regarding self-advocacy, participant 37C said of her son, “[He] is really good at advocating for himself . . . he’s very clear and will speak politely to somebody if he doesn’t like something.”
The arts and creativity category reflects a variety of artistic ability and imaginative patterns of thinking. This category was addressed by 19 participants (49%). Those whose comments fell into this category shared that their youth were creative and imaginative, had good ideas, and were talented in music, dance, and drawing. Participant 19B said her son had earned a music award by both arranging the music for and performing within a drum line. She stated, “He actually arranged the music for the percussion ensemble to perform, and then he had to know all his major and minor scales, and he did all that.”
The technology category reflects skills related to several kinds of technology and fields of practice in which they are used. This category was addressed by 18 participants (46%). Specifically, participants identified their youth as having engineering minds, talent in videos games and game design, and significant computer skill, including programming, design, and coding. Several held affinities for anything related to the computer, while others found specific niches in video games and programming. Participant 12A said of her daughter, “She definitely has expressed interest in computers . . . At first it was coding and now it is . . . animation.” Another participant (20B) said of her children, “Well, both of them but just fascinated by technology and mechanics . . . I mean they just could be fantastic mechanical engineers. They got great ideas.”
The social and relational skills category reflects strengths in social skills and relationship development. This category was addressed by 17 participants (44%). It included recognition of general social skills, awareness of emotions and facial expressions, ability to form deep relationships, being good with kids, willingness to socialize with adults, humor, and being good with animals. While social performance was also noted as a challenge, parents shared that specific social situations were often strengths. Some expressed their youth’s affinity for customer service, ability to relate exceptionally well to adults, or formation of very strong relationships with family or friends. Participant 36C shared that her son was “a very loving child, and he formed very deep bonds with people . . . his family . . . even people he’s worked with and grows to trust.”
The positive character traits category reflects positive mental and moral qualities. This category was addressed by 16 participants (41%). Traits identified by participants included a willingness to work hard, a willingness to try hard, helpfulness, and high self-esteem. One participant (23B) associated her son’s helpfulness with obedience and dependability, saying, “He is just such a good kid for me. Like I tell people all the time like he’s my most obedient child. And he really is . . . I can count on him.”
The physical/sensory-motor ability category reflects physical abilities and spatial awareness. This category was addressed by 15 participants (38%). The category included visual–spatial skills, such as tactile work, spatial awareness, construction ability, and the ability to create from visual observation. Concerning the latter strength, parent 24B said, “He’s very visual, he’s very good at looking at something, and then being able to recreate it.” This category also included some talent in sports, especially individual sports. About her child, one parent (19B) stated, “He did take tae-kwon-do for four years, got to the point where he was recommended for black belt . . . Board breaking is good, he’s got a lot of strength there.”
Strengths counterbalanced by challenges
Despite the many strengths outlined by parents, they did also frame some strengths alongside challenges that the youth faced. When spoken about together, parents provide context about their concerns. They illustrate that although their youth have many strengths, they are concerned that strengths may not be able to be realized because of challenges. For example, one mother stated concerns about future career success: “[He’s] got great ideas. [He’s] creative . . . but, um, I do I worry hugely about his ability to handle stress on the job to be able to be independent and just jumping on things.” (20D). Another described concerns about living in the community: “He’s totally self-reliant. Like he loves to be alone and we can leave him and he takes care of himself. He feeds himself when he’s hungry ya know, cleans up after himself. He showers, but he’s, just struggles socially” (23D). These challenges present challenges to their broader visions for their youth’s future, even with their identified strengths. Another parent said, “I see his gifts, I see how brilliant he is, but if he took an IQ test, it wouldn’t come out that way” (34E), articulating how her son’s test-taking skills and his ability to demonstrate his intelligence may limit his success. Finally, parents also described how some characteristics could be viewed as both strengths and challenges. For example,
If something needs to happen in [a particular] order, he is going to do it to a T, he will never vary from it. So he’s—he’s very dedicated, he is very loyal. He has a lot of empathy. I think he will do fabulous . . . But at the same time that can be a little bit of a down side. He has a hard time controlling his emotions. (8B)
Strengths with supports
Parents also emphasized that to fully realize youth strengths, there may need to be particular supports in place. For example, one parent spoke generally, saying, “he is so smart. But he requires so much support” (28D). Another shared, “[He’s] obviously a gifted person. So, it was just a matter about, you know, tweaking things and helping him just get to where other people can understand him” (38E). When considering potential for attending college, 16C said,
I would hope that he would go to college, because I think that he’s really smart. And I think, um, given the right settings and tools and supports . . . I think he would be successful with that. But I think its gonna take a lot of support.
When envisioning future employment, a parent said, “But I think that he’s analytical enough that with enough time and support he could, um, become proficient at something more analytical” (30D). Another mother described the need for a supportive manager in order for her son to be successful at work:
He has great, like, customer service skills, ya know, he’s very personable, and he greets people, and ya know, is always willing to help . . . [he just needs] some kind of manager who’s willing to really teach him what he needs to do. (37E)
Parent discussions of strengths identified in this study suggest that it is important to understand the unique individual strengths of transition age autistic youth and to create supportive and autism-friendly contexts to promote success in adulthood.
Discussion
In the current study, despite not being directly asked about strengths, parents of autistic youth described their many strengths and skills in the context of conversations about the transition to adulthood. Although all parents expressed concerns and worries about the transition, they all also described strengths of their sons and daughters and how those could be supportive of the transition to adulthood. The strengths spanned across numerous areas, including intelligence, creativity, physical abilities, and self-care skills, which notably include a few areas often perceived as weaknesses for autistic people.
While parents spoke highly of the diverse strengths and skills of their offspring, we also identified that they tended to frame strengths in a broader context wherein strengths could be countered by challenges and/or would require special circumstances to fully realize their strengths. Special circumstances included employers who would support their needs and environments that allowed youth to thrive. In an interview, one parent posited that autistic people need metaphorical “ramps” (e.g. adapted environments) to enable access to the community—similar to how wheelchair users need to ramps for physical access to community buildings. This speaks to the need for person–environment fit in the context of the transition to adulthood for autistic youth. “Person–environment fit” refers to the match between the developmental needs of individuals and the opportunities afforded to them by their surrounding environments, including high school, college, workplace, and community service systems (Anderson et al., 2018). Optimizing the person–environment fit may serve to maximize the strengths identified by parents. A recent article by Pfeiffer et al. (2018) found increased job satisfaction for autistic adults when there was a more supportive work environment, suggesting person–environment fit may support both sustained employment and enhanced well-being.
Traditionally, diagnosis of autism is based upon the identification of a series of deficits in the individual being assessed (American Psychiatric Association, 2013). However, some qualities commonly seen in autistic individuals as weaknesses may also be acting as strengths in their everyday lives. In the current study, parents discussed a few traits in either a positive or a negative light, while identifying others as both a strength and a challenge. This is consistent with the findings of Russell et al. (2019), who interviewed autistic adults about their own perceptions of strengths. Through thematic analysis of interviews with autistic adults, Russell et al. (2019) found that participants experienced individual traits as either helpful or adverse depending on influences, such as social context, ability to regulate behavior, and the degree to which the trait is expressed. Together, these studies counter the traditional ways of thinking about strengths and weaknesses as dichotomous.
In the current study, one result that reflected this duality was the Structure and Routine category. A desire for structure and sameness is traditionally seen as one of the most profound challenges associated with autism (e.g. Bos et al., 2019; Konst et al., 2013; Poljac et al., 2017). Indeed, several participants saw the need for structure as limiting their child’s ability to function in situations when flexibility was required. However, several also relayed that their child succeeded in meeting expectations when instructions were clear and direct. When given a predictable and consistent routine, autistic youth were reported to have thrived in a variety of domains, from schooling to employment and independent living skills. The desire for structure, when matched with the environment, can serve as a considerable asset for the individual.
Another result that showcases the dual nature of traits is the social and relational skills category. Despite the diagnostic use of social deficits as one of the most significant symptoms of autism (American Psychiatric Association, 2013; Kasari et al., 2015), some social and relational skills were described by this study’s participants as both challenges and strengths. Some parents felt that although their child struggled with meeting new people or grasping social nuance, they were often able to form exceptionally strong relationships with those they had become comfortable.
Conversely, other traits that one might expect to be entirely positive were sometimes reported by parents as causing challenges for their sons and daughters. Cognitive skill is one such trait. Some parents shared that since their child had exceptional intellectual ability and achieved good grades in their classes, school authorities often misinterpreted this as a comprehensive measure of educational success. One parent reported that this assumption resulted in her son being denied the support services he needed to function well in school. Another parent felt her son had the strength of being loving and kind, but saw that this also resulted in his being taken advantage of by co-workers.
Interestingly, while there are sometimes clashes between perceptions and priorities of autistic self-advocates and parents (e.g. Opar, 2019), our analysis found that parents of autistic youth had similar perceptions of autistic strengths as the autistic adults interviewed by Russell et al. (2019). Specifically, both groups identified memory, tenaciousness, and creativity as strengths, while also expressing that traits act as both strengths and challenges. This is consistent with the findings of Kapp, Gillespie-Lynch, Sherman, and Hutman (2013) that there were more consistencies than differences when examining the understandings and priorities of different groups, including autistic people and parents.
Improved understanding of strengths in autistic individuals can help provide a better format for structuring transition interventions. Although the importance of strengths has been advocated for previously (e.g. Mottron et al., 2013; Russell et al., 2019; Thompson et al., 2018), many current interventions focus primarily on reducing challenges in autistic individuals (Estes et al., 2015; Hassiotis et al., 2014). However, without a complementary focus on strengths, positive traits and those perceived as negative but with potential for positive applications may be lost or diminished (Mottron, 2017; Russell et al., 2019). As such, it may be essential to format transition services to include strength recognition and development as a key component. This study provides evidence that parents can be one important source of information about youth strengths in the context of transition planning.
Limitations, strengths, and future directions
This secondary data analysis used interviews from three studies in which participants were recruited through local organizations, resulting in a convenience sample. Conse-quently, the sample size was somewhat limited in cultural and gender diversity and may not reflect the general population of parents of autistic youth. Notably, our sample of “parents” was almost entirely mothers; this is broadly seen in parenting research (Parent et al., 2017), but nonetheless should be considered when evaluating our results. Rather than generalizability, this exploratory study aimed to provide an in-depth analysis of unprompted perceptions of strengths in autistic youth. Because discussion of strengths was unprompted, participants were not asked whether they felt the traits they shared were strengths relative to their challenges or to other autistic or non-autistic youths’ abilities. Future research analyzing parent perceptions of strengths in further detail is needed for a more complete understanding.
This study has unique strengths. During the interviews in the three original studies, participants were not directly asked about strengths or challenges. Rather, these were natural points of discussion that arose from researchers asking about preparation for adulthood. As such, parents were not primed to frame certain behaviors in certain ways, allowing for a more natural discussion of the traits. The qualitative nature of the study enhanced the richer, more nuanced discussion by allowing for follow-up questions and clarification that provided a deeper understanding.
More research is needed to develop and test the application of individual strengths within transition interventions for autistic youth. However, many experts agree that strengths must be heavily considered for successful employment initiatives while also providing supports (Nicholas et al., 2019). There are some transition interventions being tested which have strengths-based features. For example, Hatfield, Murray, Ciccarelli, Falkmer, and Falkmer (2017) have pilot tested the Better OutcOmes & Successful Transitions for Autism (BOOST-A™) online program which relies on a strengths-based approach. More research is needed to develop and evaluate the evidence for strengths-based approaches in terms of both achievement of outcomes (e.g. sustained employment) and quality of life for autistic adults.
Future research should be framed within an understanding that parents observe diverse strengths among autistic youth but that they have concerns about challenges countering those strengths and about ensuring access to the types of supports needed to realize those strengths. Future studies should also proceed with a more nuanced, non-dichotomous view of the need for structure and routine, social skills, cognitive skills, and other traits as both potential strengths and potential challenges. In addition, future research may explicitly ask about traits as both challenges and strengths, and enhance the literature on this more nuanced view of such traits.
Footnotes
Acknowledgements
The authors would like to thank the organizations in North Carolina and Utah that supported recruitment and additional people worked to collect and/or transcribe the interviews included in this manuscript, including Kristina Cottle, Carly Taylor, Rachel Shackelford, Kelli Garfield, Marilyn Schneider, Jarrett Henderson, Bailey Hutchison, and McKenzie Smith. They thank most especially the parents who participated in interviews with them.
Funding
The author(s) disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: Funding to support the studies included in this manuscript came from a number of sources including a Society for the Study of Occupation (SSO: USA) Student Research Grant (Study A), a University of Utah College of Health Seed Grant (Study B), a Consortium for Families and Health Research Pilot Grant (Study C), and the American Occupational Therapy Foundation (Study C).
