Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39989258›Full record

ArticleAutism : the international journal of research and practice2025

Rapport in same and mixed neurotype groups of autistic and non-autistic adults.

Sarah J Foster, Robert A Ackerman, Charlotte Eh Wilks, Michelle Dodd, Rachel Calderon, Danielle Ropar, Sue Fletcher-Watson, Catherine J Crompton, Noah J Sasson

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Autism : the international journal of research and practice, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

8 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Growing-up autistic: Sharing autistic children's experiences and insights.Autism : the international journal of research and practice · 2026
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Rapport in same and mixed neurotype groups of autistic and non-autistic adults.Autism : the international journal of research and practice · 2025
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

Sarah J FosterThe University of Texas at Dallas, USA.ORCID 0009-0008-4545-7350
Robert A AckermanThe University of Texas at Dallas, USA.
Charlotte Eh WilksUniversity of Nottingham, UK.
Michelle DoddThe University of Edinburgh, UK.
Rachel CalderonThe University of Texas at Dallas, USA.
Danielle RoparUniversity of Nottingham, UK.
Sue Fletcher-WatsonThe University of Edinburgh, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-2688-1734
Catherine J CromptonThe University of Edinburgh, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-5280-1596
Noah J SassonThe University of Texas at Dallas, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-3676-1253

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Although autistic adults may establish better dyadic rapport with autistic relative to non-autistic partners, it is unclear whether this extends to group settings. The current study examined whether rapport differs between autistic groups, non-autistic groups, and mixed groups of autistic and non-autistic adults, and whether differing diagnostically from the rest of the group results in lower rapport. One hundred and forty-three adults were assigned to one of four group types of four participants each: all-autistic, all-non-autistic, non-autistic majority (three non-autistic, one autistic), and autistic majority (three autistic, one non-autistic). Groups participated in a 5-minute building activity and afterwards completed a 5-item rapport measure assessing their experience. The all-autistic groups did not differ on overall rapport from the all-non-autistic groups and had significantly higher rapport on two items (enjoying the interaction and friendliness of the group) than both types of mixed groups. At the individual level, autistic participants expressed more ease and enjoyment when interacting with other autistic adults relative to non-autistic adults, and their rapport declined as more non-autistic participants were included in the group. In contrast, rapport for non-autistic participants remained relatively consistent regardless of group composition. We discuss potential reasons why autistic participants were more affected by group composition than non-autistic participants.Lay abstractAutistic adults sometimes get along better with other autistic people compared to non-autistic people, but so far this has only been studied in two-person interactions. This study examined how well autistic and non-autistic people develop rapport in a group setting and whether rapport differs when group members share or do not share a diagnosis. We assigned 143 adults to 36 groups of four adults each. Some groups only had autistic members, some only had non-autistic members, and some were "mixed" groups of autistic and non-autistic members. Groups participated in a tower-building task for 5 minutes and afterwards completed a survey about rapport with the group. The groups of all-autistic participants expressed that their interactions were more enjoyable and friendly than the mixed groups. Autistic participants reported lower rapport when interacting with non-autistic adults, while non-autistic participants reported similar rapport whether interacting with autistic or non-autistic group members. Overall, findings are not consistent with a social deficit model of autism, as autistic adults often established rapport with partners in a group setting. Their level of rapport, however, depended strongly on the social context, particularly whether other autistic people were also in the group.

Indexed as

Autistic DisorderInterpersonal RelationsSocial InteractionAdolescentAdultAutism Spectrum DisorderFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedYoung Adultautismdouble empathygroup interactionneurotyperapport

Identifiers

PMID39989258
PMCPMC12159336

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.