Adults' versus children's perceptions of a child with autism or attention deficit hyperactivity disorder.

The team asked kids and grown-ups to read short stories. Each story described a child who acted in ways linked to autism or ADHD.

After reading, people answered questions about how much they liked the child and whether they would play with them.

The sample included children aged 7–12 and adults. All listeners saw the same stories, so answers could be compared directly.

Children said they liked the story child less and would avoid them more than adults did.

Both kids and adults felt the autistic child was “not like me.” Only kids felt the ADHD child was very different.

In short, elementary students were harsher judges than grown-ups.

DeRoma et al. (2004) ran a small trial and showed that giving peers a short “why” explanation raised acceptance. Their positive result hints that kids can soften their views if we teach them.

Nicholson et al. (2017) later asked students to judge exclusion. Most said leaving a classmate with autism out is wrong. This seems to clash with the new data, but Kristen used open questions about fairness, not liking ratings, so the measures differ.

Whaling et al. (2025) moved the question to college students. They found that young adults often blame ADHD, not autism, for odd behavior. Together the papers trace a line: child peers dislike, teen peers pity, adult peers mislabel.

If you run social-skills or inclusion groups, start by shaping peer attitudes early. Add brief explanations of why a classmate may flap or shout. Use short, concrete language such as “His ears hurt when the bell rings.” Track whether friendly approaches rise after the lesson. A five-minute story plus a why sentence can cut rejection more than waiting for maturity to fix it.