Patterns of emotional and behavioural disturbance associated with autistic traits in young people with severe intellectual disabilities and challenging behaviours.
Among youth with severe ID and challenging behavior, those showing autistic traits display distinctly higher anxiety, mania, stereotypy and PDD/autism scale scores on the DASH-II.
01Research in Context
What this study did
Hill et al. (2006) looked at youth who had severe intellectual disability plus serious challenging behavior. They asked: do the kids who also show autistic traits look different on a mental-health checklist?
The team gave everyone the DASH-II. This tool asks about anxiety, mania, stereotypy, and other problem areas. Then they compared scores for kids with and without autistic traits.
What they found
Kids with autistic traits scored higher on several DASH-II sub-scales. The biggest jumps were in anxiety, mania, stereotypy, and the PDD/autism scale.
In plain words, within a group that already had severe ID and tough behaviors, the autistic subgroup showed extra emotional storm flags.
How this fits with other research
Brereton et al. (2006) ran a similar same-year comparison and also saw more parent-rated problems in autistic youth versus ID-only peers. The two studies back each other up even though they used different checklists.
Cox et al. (2015) later extended the idea to special-ed adolescents. They linked higher SCQ autistic-trait scores to elevated CBCL problems in anxiety, attention, and social areas, showing the pattern holds outside the severe-ID bubble.
Ding et al. (2017) looks like a contradiction at first. In Down syndrome, 37% of kids screened positive for ASD traits yet their social deficits were milder. The difference is population: Down syndrome plus ASD shows a softer social profile than the severe-ID group Jennie studied, so the emotional spike is less intense.
Why it matters
If you assess a client with severe ID and challenging behavior, a quick screen for autistic traits can sharpen your case plan. Expect sharper anxiety, mania, and stereotypy if traits are present, and plan interventions such as sensory breaks, predictable schedules, or mood monitoring. The DASH-II gives you a ready map, and the pattern has been echoed across age groups and measures.
Want CEUs on This Topic?
The ABA Clubhouse has 60+ free CEUs — live every Wednesday. Ethics, supervision & clinical topics.
Join Free →Run the DASH-II anxiety and mania sub-scales on any new severe-ID client who screens positive for autistic traits, then add sensory or mood-regulation goals if scores are elevated.
02At a glance
03Original abstract
Emotional and behavioural disturbance was assessed in 82 individuals with severe intellectual disabilities and challenging behaviour using the Diagnostic Assessment for the Severely Handicapped-II (DASH-II). Levels of disturbance were compared firstly in individuals with and without features of autism as assessed by the DASH-II, and secondly in individuals with varying severities of autism. In both cases levels of ability and overall severity of behaviour disorder were comparable across groups. Individuals with autistic features were found to have significantly higher scores than nonautistic individuals on the DASH-II organic disorder, anxiety, mania, PDD/autism and stereotypies subscales. When participants with autistic features were separated into groups of severe and moderate autism and compared with nonautistic participants, significant effects of group were found for scores on the anxiety, mood, mania, PDD/autism, schizophrenia and stereotypies subscales. Scheffé tests were conducted to further evaluate between-group differences. Item analysis showed seven DASH-II items to have a 30% or more difference between levels of endorsement in autistic and nonautistic individuals, with six further items showing a 20% or greater difference in levels of endorsement. Findings are compared to those from previous research and implications for the conceptualisation of emotional and behavioural disorders in individuals with autism are discussed.
Research in developmental disabilities, 2006 · doi:10.1016/j.ridd.2005.07.001