Blame and forgiveness judgements among children, adolescents and adults with autism.
Clients with autism may not factor intent into blame or forgiveness—adjust social-skills teaching to explicitly train consideration of intent and apologies.
01Research in Context
What this study did
Rogé et al. (2011) asked people with autism and neurotypical people to judge blame and forgiveness.
The group ranged from kids to adults. All heard short stories where someone meant to help or meant to harm.
Then they picked how much blame or forgiveness the person deserved.
What they found
People with autism gave the same blame and forgiveness ratings no matter the intent.
Controls used intent: they blamed accidents less and forgave real apologies more.
The gap showed up in every age group, so it is not just a delay.
How this fits with other research
Pilgrim et al. (2000) saw a similar gap. Their autistic kids could explain odd emotions when asked, but usually did not.
Ewing et al. (2015) found the same blind spot for trust. Kids with ASD ignored trustworthy faces even though they could use reputation facts.
Together the three studies paint one picture: clients with autism can learn social cues, yet they do not pick them up on their own.
Why it matters
If you teach social skills, do not assume intent is obvious. State it plainly: “He spilled it by accident” or “She said sorry on purpose.”
Add quick intent check questions after role-play. Ask, “Did he mean to hurt you?” and teach the client to look for an apology.
These tiny steps can keep peer conflicts from growing.
Want CEUs on This Topic?
The ABA Clubhouse has 60+ free CEUs — live every Wednesday. Ethics, supervision & clinical topics.
Join Free →After each role-play, ask the learner to state whether the partner’s action was on purpose or an accident before deciding on blame or forgiveness.
02At a glance
03Original abstract
We compared the capacity of children, adolescents and adults with and without autism to use (a) intent and severity of consequences information for attributing blame to an offender, and (b) intent and apologies information for inferring willingness to forgive. Participants were presented with two sets of six scenarios obtained by combination of intent and severity (or apology) information, and instructed to indicate appropriate levels of blame (or willingness to forgive). In the blame condition, persons with autism were able to consistently use intent information but not to the same degree as their comparison counterparts. In the forgiveness condition, intent was not taken into account for judging by persons with autism, irrespective of their age.
Autism : the international journal of research and practice, 2011 · doi:10.1177/1362361310394219