By Matt Harrington, BCBA · Behaviorist Book Club · April 2026 · 12 min read

A Comprehensive Guide to Neurodivergent-Affirming Social Skills Instruction

Overview & Clinical Significance

The way applied behavior analysts approach social skills instruction is undergoing a fundamental transformation. Traditional social skills programs have long been a staple of ABA service delivery, particularly for autistic individuals. However, growing evidence and the lived experiences of neurodivergent people have revealed that many traditional programs are built on neurotypical standards that may cause more harm than good when applied to neurodivergent learners. Implementing neurodivergent-affirming approaches to social skills instruction is not merely a philosophical shift; it is a clinical imperative supported by research on the long-term effects of social masking, the double empathy problem, and the mental health outcomes of neurodivergent individuals who undergo traditional social skills training.

The clinical significance of this issue is substantial. Research has documented that many neurodivergent individuals, particularly autistic people, engage in social masking or camouflaging, which involves suppressing their natural communication and socialization styles to conform to neurotypical expectations. While masking may produce short-term social acceptability, it is associated with significant long-term consequences including increased anxiety, depression, burnout, loss of identity, and suicidal ideation. When behavior analysts teach social skills using neurotypical standards as the benchmark for success, they may be inadvertently training masking behaviors that undermine the very well-being they aim to promote.

The double empathy problem, which challenges the traditional view that social communication difficulties lie solely within the autistic individual, has significant implications for social skills instruction. This framework suggests that social communication breakdowns between autistic and non-autistic people are bidirectional, resulting from a mismatch in communication styles rather than a deficit in one party. When social skills programs treat neurodivergent communication styles as deficits to be remediated rather than differences to be understood and bridged, they place the entire burden of social accommodation on the neurodivergent individual.

Nicole Stewart's workshop on neurodivergent-affirming social skills, presented as a collaboration between Strong Connections and Supervision Reimagined, addresses these concerns directly by providing practitioners with real-world examples and strategies for respecting neurodivergent communication and socialization styles while still promoting meaningful relationship-building. This balance, supporting genuine social connection without imposing neurotypical conformity, represents the clinical frontier of social skills instruction in behavior analysis.

Background & Context

Social skills instruction has been a core component of ABA services for decades, particularly for individuals with autism. Traditional programs typically identified deficits in social behavior by comparing the individual's performance to neurotypical norms and then taught specific social behaviors such as eye contact, conversational turn-taking, recognizing facial expressions, and understanding social cues. These programs were developed with good intentions and often produced measurable improvements in the targeted social behaviors.

However, the neurodiversity paradigm, which views neurological differences as natural variations in the human genome rather than disorders to be cured, has challenged fundamental assumptions underlying traditional social skills programs. Autistic self-advocates have articulated that many of the social behaviors targeted in traditional programs are not genuinely necessary for social connection but are instead markers of neurotypical social conformity. For example, making eye contact during conversation is a neurotypical social norm that many autistic people find physically uncomfortable or cognitively distracting. Teaching eye contact as a social skill requirement imposes a neurotypical standard that may not serve the neurodivergent individual's actual social needs.

The context for this shift includes accumulating research on the negative consequences of social masking. Studies have found that autistic adults who engage in extensive social camouflaging report higher levels of anxiety, depression, and exhaustion compared to those who mask less. Some research has linked social camouflaging to suicidal ideation. These findings challenge the assumption that teaching neurodivergent individuals to behave more neurotypically is inherently beneficial and suggest that the costs of conformity may outweigh the benefits in many cases.

The research on social interaction between autistic people has also provided important context. Studies have found that autistic individuals often communicate effectively and form meaningful social connections with each other, even when their communication styles differ from neurotypical norms. This finding challenges the assumption that neurodivergent social communication is inherently impaired and suggests that the problem may lie in the mismatch between communication styles rather than in the neurodivergent individual's abilities.

The current state of the field reflects a tension between traditional ABA approaches to social skills, which emphasize teaching specific behaviors that align with neurotypical expectations, and neurodivergent-affirming approaches, which prioritize the individual's well-being, respect their natural communication style, and focus on building genuine social connections rather than surface-level social conformity. Nicole Stewart's workshop represents the growing movement within ABA to resolve this tension by developing approaches that maintain behavioral rigor while genuinely serving the interests of neurodivergent learners.

Clinical Implications

Implementing neurodivergent-affirming social skills instruction requires behavior analysts to rethink several core clinical practices, from assessment through intervention and outcome measurement.

Assessment practices must evolve beyond comparing the individual's social behavior to neurotypical norms. Rather than using standardized social skills assessments that define deficits based on neurotypical expectations, behavior analysts should assess the individual's social functioning within their own context. Key assessment questions include: Does this person have meaningful social connections? Are they able to communicate their needs and preferences effectively? Do they experience loneliness or social isolation? What social skills, if any, would improve their quality of life from their own perspective? This kind of assessment may identify different targets than a traditional norm-referenced approach.

Target selection must be guided by the individual's actual social needs rather than by a predetermined list of neurotypical social skills. Some social skills that are routinely targeted in traditional programs, such as making eye contact, responding to greetings in a specific way, or suppressing stimming in social contexts, may not be appropriate targets when viewed through a neurodivergent-affirming lens. Instead, targets might focus on skills that genuinely facilitate connection, such as identifying and communicating personal boundaries, initiating interactions with people who share their interests, managing social energy to prevent burnout, advocating for their communication needs, and navigating conflict in relationships.

Intervention strategies should respect and leverage the individual's natural communication style rather than replacing it with neurotypical behavior. For example, rather than teaching an autistic person to make eye contact, a neurodivergent-affirming approach might teach them to explain their communication preferences to others or to find alternative ways to signal attention and engagement. Rather than teaching scripted conversational exchanges, the approach might focus on helping the individual identify social contexts where their natural communication style is valued and on developing skills for navigating contexts where accommodation is needed.

The role of masking in social skills instruction must be explicitly addressed. Behavior analysts should help individuals understand the concept of masking, its potential benefits and costs, and how to make informed decisions about when and how much to mask. This is a fundamentally different approach than simply teaching masking behaviors without acknowledging their costs. It respects the individual's autonomy and supports informed decision-making about their own social presentation.

Environmental modification should be considered alongside individual skill-building. Rather than placing the entire burden of social accommodation on the neurodivergent individual, behavior analysts can work to modify the social environment to be more inclusive. This might include educating neurotypical peers and adults about neurodivergent communication styles, advocating for sensory accommodations in social settings, and creating opportunities for neurodivergent individuals to interact with others who share their communication preferences.

Ethical Considerations

Neurodivergent-affirming social skills instruction raises important ethical considerations that behavior analysts must navigate thoughtfully. The BACB Ethics Code for Behavior Analysts (2022) provides guidance, though applying it in this context requires nuanced interpretation.

Code 2.01 establishes that behavior analysts should provide services that are in the best interest of the client. When traditional social skills programs produce behavior change that increases social conformity but also increases masking-related distress, behavior analysts must carefully evaluate whether the intervention is truly in the client's best interest. The evidence linking extensive masking to anxiety, depression, and burnout suggests that interventions which primarily teach masking may not meet this standard, even when they produce measurable increases in neurotypical-appearing social behaviors.

Code 2.09 requires involving clients and stakeholders in treatment planning. In the context of social skills instruction, this means that the neurodivergent individual's own perspective on their social goals must be actively sought and prioritized. For individuals who can articulate their preferences, this means directly asking what social skills they want to develop and what aspects of their social communication they do not want to change. For individuals who cannot articulate preferences verbally, behavior analysts should use alternative assessment methods to gauge preferences and monitor for behavioral indicators of distress during social skills instruction.

Code 2.14 on least restrictive procedures is relevant when considering the intrusiveness of social skills interventions. Programs that require individuals to suppress natural behaviors like stimming, avoid preferred communication styles, or repeatedly practice social behaviors that cause distress may represent more restrictive approaches than is necessary. A neurodivergent-affirming approach seeks the least restrictive path to genuine social connection, which often involves modifying the environment and building on the individual's natural strengths rather than remediating perceived deficits.

Code 1.07 on cultural responsiveness extends to neurodivergent culture. Many autistic individuals identify with autistic culture and community, and their communication preferences are part of that cultural identity. Behavior analysts who view neurodivergent communication styles as deficits to be fixed rather than cultural differences to be respected may be violating the spirit of cultural responsiveness requirements.

The tension between what families want and what is in the neurodivergent individual's best interest can be particularly acute in social skills instruction. Parents may request that their child learn to make eye contact, stop stimming in public, or behave more neurotypically in social situations. While these requests come from a place of love and concern, behavior analysts have an ethical obligation to educate families about the potential costs of these goals and to advocate for approaches that prioritize the individual's long-term well-being. This requires skill, sensitivity, and a commitment to collaborative relationships with families.

Code 1.04 on integrity requires behavior analysts to be honest about what the evidence shows. If the evidence suggests that traditional social skills approaches can cause harm through increased masking, practitioners must communicate this honestly to families and treatment teams, even when it means having difficult conversations about established practices.

Assessment & Decision-Making

Shifting to neurodivergent-affirming social skills instruction requires a structured decision-making framework that helps behavior analysts evaluate each social skill target and intervention approach through an affirming lens.

Begin with a comprehensive social assessment that includes the individual's own perspective on their social life. For individuals who can communicate their preferences, conduct structured interviews or surveys about their social satisfaction, their communication preferences, their experience with masking, and their goals for social development. For individuals with more limited communication, use preference assessments, observe their social behavior across natural contexts, and monitor for indicators of social engagement versus social distress.

For each potential social skill target, apply a critical evaluation that asks several questions. First, whose standard defines this as a deficit? If the standard is neurotypical conformity rather than genuine functional impairment, reconsider whether this is an appropriate target. Second, what is the natural consequence of this behavior in the individual's actual social contexts? If the behavior does not impede genuine social connection, it may not need to be targeted. Third, what are the potential costs of targeting this behavior? If addressing it would require the individual to suppress natural communication patterns, the costs may outweigh the benefits. Fourth, are there environmental modifications that could address the concern without requiring the individual to change?

Develop intervention plans that build on the individual's strengths and natural communication style. Identify what the individual already does well socially and build from there. Many neurodivergent individuals have strong social skills in specific contexts, such as interactions about topics of special interest, one-on-one conversations, or online communication. Rather than focusing on what they cannot do in neurotypical social contexts, focus on expanding the contexts in which their existing social strengths can be deployed.

Incorporate explicit instruction on self-advocacy and self-understanding. Neurodivergent-affirming social skills instruction should help individuals understand their own neurotype, their communication preferences, and their rights to accommodation. Skills such as explaining to others why you do not make eye contact, requesting a break when social interaction becomes overwhelming, or identifying sensory accommodations that support social participation are all legitimate social skills targets within an affirming framework.

Monitor outcomes using measures that capture genuine social well-being rather than neurotypical conformity. Track social satisfaction, social engagement in preferred activities, quality of social relationships, instances of self-advocacy, and levels of masking-related distress. When data suggest that an intervention is increasing conformity but not improving the individual's social experience, reconsider the approach.

Seek consultation from neurodivergent professionals and self-advocates when developing and evaluating social skills programs. Their lived experience provides essential perspective on which social skills are genuinely helpful and which are primarily about conformity. Many neurodivergent professionals in behavior analysis and related fields are willing to consult on program development.

What This Means for Your Practice

If you currently provide social skills instruction, now is the time to critically evaluate your approach. Review the social skill targets on your current caseload and ask: Are these targets serving the individual's genuine social needs, or are they primarily teaching neurotypical conformity? Are the individuals you serve happier and more socially connected as a result of your interventions, or are they learning to mask more effectively? These questions may be uncomfortable, but they are essential for ethical, effective practice.

Start making concrete changes. Replace eye contact goals with goals related to communicating attention and engagement in ways that are comfortable for the individual. Replace scripted social exchanges with skills for navigating authentic social interactions. Add self-advocacy goals that empower individuals to communicate their social preferences and needs. Incorporate environmental modification strategies alongside individual skill-building.

Educate the families and teams you work with about the neurodivergent-affirming approach. Many parents and teachers want what is best for the individual but may not be aware of the research on masking and its consequences. Share this information compassionately and collaboratively, framing the shift as moving toward more effective and sustainable social development rather than lowering expectations.

Seek out training and resources specific to neurodivergent-affirming practice. The field is evolving rapidly, and staying current requires intentional effort. Attend presentations by neurodivergent professionals, read literature from the neurodiversity movement, and join professional communities committed to affirming practice.

Finally, listen to the neurodivergent individuals you serve. They are the best source of information about what social support they actually need.