Inferring power and dominance from dyadic nonverbal interactions in autism spectrum disorder.
Adults with autism can read dominance correctly if you give them a little more time and keep the space predictable.
01Research in Context
What this study did
Kuschefski et al. (2019) watched adults with and without autism watch short videos.
Each clip showed two people talking. The actors stood at different angles or distances.
The viewers pressed keys to say who looked more powerful. The team timed the answers and checked accuracy.
What they found
Adults with autism took longer to pick the dominant person, but their answers were just as correct.
Both groups were swayed by how the actors moved and where they stood.
Only the autism group showed an extra, small effect of room space on their choices.
How this fits with other research
Ponnet et al. (2005) seems to disagree. In live chats, adults with autism read feelings as fast and as well as anyone. The gap closes when the setting is real and unstructured.
Nickerson et al. (2015) and Arwert et al. (2020) back the slow-but-accurate pattern. They show adults with autism need more time when social rules shift or when cues are fuzzy.
M Schaller et al. (2017) extends the idea to teens. On easy, direct tests both groups score the same; on hidden, dynamic tasks the autism group lags. The adult data now match the teen data.
Why it matters
Give clients time. In job interviews or group chats, pause a few extra seconds before expecting an answer.
Use clear, stable seating plans. Small room changes matter more to adults with autism than you might think.
If you need to check social insight, pick natural, back-and-forth tasks instead of quick lab-style judgments.
Want CEUs on This Topic?
The ABA Clubhouse has 60+ free CEUs — live every Wednesday. Ethics, supervision & clinical topics.
Join Free →Before role-play, set chairs in fixed spots and tell the client they can take an extra breath before responding.
02At a glance
03Original abstract
Research studies to date have revealed conflicting results with respect to the processing of nonverbal cues from social interactions in autism spectrum disorder (ASD). Therefore, the aim of the present study was to investigate the contribution of two important factors for the perception of dyadic social interactions, namely (a) the movement contingency and (b) the spatial context. To this end, 26 adult participants with ASD and 26 age-, sex-, and IQ-matched typically developed control participants observed animations presenting nonverbal interactions between two human virtual characters enacting power relationships. We manipulated (a) movement contingency by exchanging one of the two original agents with an agent from another dyad and (b) spatial context by changing agents' spatial orientation to a back-to-back position. Participants were asked to rate dominance and submissiveness of these agents. Results showed that the movement contingency manipulation affected accuracy and consistency of power perception and that the spatial context manipulation slowed down reaction times comparably in both groups. With regard to group differences, individuals with ASD were found to judge power relationships slower compared to control participants, potentially suggesting a more explicit processing style in ASD. Furthermore, the spatial context manipulation slowed down the reaction times more in the contingent compared to the non-contingent conditions only in the ASD group. These findings contribute to the ongoing debate whether individuals with ASD have difficulties in understanding nonverbal cues in a dyadic context by suggesting that they do so in more subtle ways than previously investigated. Autism Res 2019, 12: 505-516 © 2019 International Society for Autism Research, Wiley Periodicals, Inc. LAY SUMMARY: This study shows that the ability and speed of judging who is dominant in a social interaction depends on two factors: (a) whether their movements are matched and (b) whether they are facing each other or not. This is similarly the case for participants with and without autism. Interestingly, however, individuals with autism seem to judge generally slower, suggesting a more explicit processing style. The two factors seem to interact, suggesting that nonverbal processing difficulties are subtler than previously thought.
Autism research : official journal of the International Society for Autism Research, 2019 · doi:10.1002/aur.2069