Exploring the Effectiveness of a Peer-Mediated Model of the PEERS Curriculum: A Pilot Randomized Control Trial.

The team ran a small pilot RCT with high-schoolers who have autism. Half got the usual PEERS social-skills class. The other half got PEERS plus typically-developing peer mentors who practiced with them every week.

Staff taught the peers how to prompt, model, and reinforce social bids. Sessions lasted one school term. The researchers checked social knowledge and real-life social acts before, after, and four months later.

The peer-mentor group edged ahead on social-skills tests and real-world social acts. The gains were small but still visible four months later.

The standard PEERS group also improved, just not as much. No one lost skills after the program ended.

Zhang et al. (2022) and Kent et al. (2021) show bigger social gains in younger kids using peer-mediated play or PRT. The pattern tells us peer power is real, but the payoff shrinks as kids age and social rules get tougher.

Wolstencroft et al. (2021) ran PEERS with young women who have Turner syndrome and saw medium gains. Their online-plus-face-to-face format beat the small effects seen here, hinting that blended delivery may pack more punch than adding peers alone.

Lowe et al. (1995) first proved classmates can deliver PRT and create large, lasting social jumps in preschoolers. The current study echoes that spirit, but moves the idea up to high school and swaps PRT for the full PEERS curriculum.

If you run PEERS in high school, folding in trained peer mentors is worth the extra setup. The boost is modest, but it holds after the semester ends. Pair this data with the bigger preschool effects and you see a clear trend: start peer-mediated work early, keep it going, and adjust dose or format as kids age. For Monday, try adding two peer mentors to one lunch practice and track initiations for a week—you may see the same small but steady uptick.