Delay versus deviance in autistic social behavior.

Christian et al. (1997) looked at Vineland scores of autistic kids and typical kids.

They asked: is the low score a simple delay, or is the pattern jagged and odd?

More scatter inside a child’s own profile means deviance, not just slow growth.

Autistic children had much more scatter in Communication and Socialization.

Each child’s own highs and lows were spread out, not just lower across the board.

The scatter looked different from child to child, so one size won’t fit all.

Journal et al. (2024) extend this idea. They used cluster analysis on toddlers and found three clear preverbal profiles that predict different paths later.

Taylor et al. (2017) seem to disagree. They showed that autistic preschoolers can regulate emotions with family the same way younger typical kids do, calling it delay, not deviance. The clash fades when you see L et al. used broad Vineland scatter, while J et al. watched one skill in one lab task.

Granieri et al. (2020) flip the script. They found that autistic youth rate atypical communication as likeable within autism-only groups, so deviance can be a social strength, not a flaw.

Stop treating all low scores as global delay. Check each child’s scatter. If one domain is far below the others, teach that domain with unique targets, not just slower typical lessons. Use peer groups that value neurodivergent styles when social success is the goal.