Somewhere in the Middle: Understandings of Friendship and Approaches to Social Engagement Among Postsecondary Students with Autism Spectrum Disorder

Jason Manett

A thesis submitted in conformity with the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy Department of Human Development and Applied Psychology Ontario Institute for Studies in Education University of Toronto

Jason Manett

Doctor of Philosophy

Department of Human Development and Applied Psychology Ontario Institute for Studies in Education University of Toronto

2020 Abstract

This study examined the social experiences and understandings of friendship of postsecondary students with autism spectrum disorder (ASD). Ten students from Ontario postsecondary institutions participated in semi-structured interviews and data were analyzed according to the principles of modified grounded theory.

Participants’ responses indicate that they had conventional understandings of friendship that included compatible interests and aspects of intimacy. They expressed confidence about their strengths, personalities, and social abilities, and were motivated to develop and maintain friendships and participate in social activities with their peers. They also described experiencing communication challenges and difficulty engaging in various social environments.

Participants positioned themselves as “somewhere in the middle” of peers with and without ASD in terms of social functioning, viewed supports as appropriate for others with ASD but not themselves, and employed strategic approaches to socializing in order to balance their desire for social connection with the impacts of the challenges that they experienced. They described areas

ii of satisfaction and dissatisfaction or ambivalence with regard to their social lives. They expressed positive views about their friends, social activities, and ability to manage social situations, and described feelings of discomfort, concerns about making social errors, being evaluated negatively by others, the number of friends they had and how much time they spent with them.

Participants’ descriptions revealed two pathways in terms of context selection, social engagement, and satisfaction that correspond with gender. Females prioritized maintaining contact with friends from before postsecondary and described higher levels of social engagement and satisfaction than males who emphasized socializing with peers from postsecondary. The relationship between context selection and level of social engagement on satisfaction was mediated by actively pursuing social goals and having a gradual approach to social development.

The findings of this study have implications for research, advocacy, and support provision. These include the importance of accounting for differences among individuals with ASD in terms of their experiences, perspectives, skills, and goals, and the extent to which they identify with their diagnoses. Supports may also vary in relation to characteristics such as gender and cognitive abilities, and factors such as life stage and environmental contexts.

iii Acknowledgements

The process of completing this dissertation and PhD program has taken slightly more than 10 years and has contributed to this being one of the top five most challenging decades of my life. I appreciate the many people who have influenced, tolerated, and supported me prior to and during this time.

I am grateful to the members of my committee who accidentally completed a hybrid marathon- relay race. I wish to thank Michel Ferrari who agreed to complete the anchor leg. Words cannot express how thankful I am to Patricia Harris, Barbara Muskat, and Judith Wiener. Thank you for your ongoing support, insights, suggestions, and endurance. I apologize for delaying your retirements. I also acknowledge (and shake my fist at) Esther Geva for encouraging me to apply to the doctoral program in the first place as well as Eric Helleiner, Deborah White, and the late Morgan Baker, who I was fortunate to learn from during my undergraduate studies at Trent University and graduate studies at the University of Victoria.

I am grateful to my colleagues at Camp Winston, the Redpath Centre, and Accessibility Services at the University of Toronto. I have been influenced by many colleagues, but Denise Fruchter, Patricia Harris, Carolyn Heil, Pearl Levey, Jane Rothschild, and Kevin Stoddart warrant specific mention. Each of you has trusted me to grow into the roles that I have been blessed to have. You have mentored me with direct instruction, by example, by providing the space to make and learn from mistakes, and by challenging me to acknowledge my strengths and improve upon my weaknesses. You have each done so much to improve the experiences of the campers, clients, and students who you support. Working alongside you has been an honour and has inspired me personally, professionally, and intellectually.

I am grateful to my mother, Marcia David, who has been a constant source of love and support, as well as Debra, Pearl, and Sol David. Any success that I have had as an adult would not be possible without Aviva Wade, whose selfless willingness to take me in still astounds and humbles me. I am also indebted to Simon Kalkstein -- a father figure and friend who has played a major role in my personal life, shaped my moral and intellectual development, and inspired my academic and professional pursuits.

iv I am thankful to my wife, Anne Kobayashi, and children, Matti and Mikko, who have made enormous sacrifices that have allowed me to pursue my academic and professional goals. I am also thankful to my mother-in-law, Betty Kobayashi, for her support and the motivation inspired by her inimitable way. I would also like to thank Daniel Alexander, Christine Boucher, Min Kang, and Mike Meth for their friendship, and to acknowledge Cameron Disch, my best friend from childhood. We may not be in contact, but I think of you often and your influence endures.

I also wish to acknowledge an anonymous donor who provided substantial financial assistance during my undergraduate studies as well as Ron and Nancy Clark who created the Clark Bursary Fund to assist youth in care and former crown wards in Ontario to pursue their academic and career goals. Your generous financial support allowed me to develop the skills required to succeed academically and professionally.

Finally, this dissertation is dedicated to the campers, clients, families, and students with ASD, including the students who participated in this study and members of the Social Association for Students with Autism (SASA), who I have known over the years. Thank you for trusting me enough to work with and for you, for sharing your time and experiences with me, for the laughter, debate and conversation, and for all that you have taught me. My hope is that this dissertation reflects the respect and admiration that I have for you.

v Table of Contents

Acknowledgements ...... iv

List of Tables ...... xii

List of Figures ...... xiii

List of Appendices ...... xiv

Foreword: Identity Versus Person-First Language ...... xv

Chapter 1: Introduction ...... 1

1.1 Purpose ...... 1

1.2 Description of the Study Problem ...... 1

1.3 Research Questions ...... 3

1.4 Organization of the Dissertation ...... 4

Chapter 2: Literature Review ...... 5

2.1 Friendship ...... 5

2.1.1 Behavioural Components of Friendship ...... 6

2.1.2 Functions of Friendships ...... 6

2.1.3 Gender ...... 7

2.1.4 Age ...... 8

2.1.4.1 Childhood and pre-adolescence ...... 8

2.1.4.2 Adolescence and young adulthood ...... 9

2.1.5 Complex Social Dynamics ...... 10

2.1.5.1 Gossip ...... 10

2.1.5.2 Social media and text-based communication ...... 10

2.2 Autism Spectrum Disorder ...... 12

2.2.1 Autism Spectrum Disorder Without Intellectual Disability ...... 12

2.2.2 ASD-NoID and Adaptive Functioning ...... 14

vi 2.2.3 ASD-NoID and Social, Employment, Educational, and Mental Health Outcomes ...... 14

2.2.4 Social Camouflaging in Adults with ASD-NoID ...... 16

2.2.5 Gender Differences Among Individuals with ASD-NoID ...... 17

2.2.6 Social Motivation ...... 20

2.2.7 Obstacles to Friendship ...... 22

2.2.7.1 Conceptual issues ...... 22

2.2.7.2 Inflexibility ...... 23

2.2.7.3 Enactment/pragmatic issues ...... 24

2.2.7.4 Nonverbal communication issues ...... 24

2.2.7.5 Content issues ...... 24

2.2.8 Social Challenges for Individuals with ASD During Adolescence and Young Adulthood ...... 25

2.2.9 Social Media, Text-Based Communication, and ASD ...... 26

2.3 Postsecondary Environments ...... 29

2.3.1 Postsecondary Students with ASD ...... 30

2.4 The Social Model of Disability ...... 31

2.5 The Neurodiversity Movement ...... 32

2.6 Summary ...... 35

Chapter 3: Methodology...... 39

3.1 Rationale for Qualitative Research ...... 39

3.2 Rationale for a Modified Grounded Theory Approach ...... 40

3.3 Reflections on My Background and Potential Biases ...... 42

3.4 The Interview Protocol ...... 45

3.5 Participants ...... 49

3.6 Data Collection Procedures ...... 57

vii 3.7 Methods Used to Ensure Trustworthiness ...... 60

3.7.1 Credibility ...... 60

3.7.2 Transferability ...... 62

3.7.3 Dependability ...... 62

3.7.4 Confirmability ...... 62

3.8 Data Analysis Procedures ...... 63

3.8.1 Preliminary Observations ...... 63

3.8.2 Data Analysis ...... 63

Chapter 4: Findings ...... 68

4.1 Section 1—Conventional Understandings of Friendship ...... 71

4.1.1 Maintaining Regular Contact ...... 71

Spending time together ...... 71

Keeping in touch ...... 72

4.1.2 Compatible Interests ...... 72

4.1.3 Intimacy ...... 73

4.1.4 Variation: Gender Differences in Emphasizing Intimacy ...... 76

Intimacy vs. activity emphasis ...... 76

Intimacy vs. practical emphasis ...... 78

Friendship requiring work ...... 80

4.1.5 Variation: Gender Differences in Maintaining Regular Contact ...... 81

Social media and phone use ...... 84

4.1.6 Summary ...... 86

4.2 Section 2—Social Challenges ...... 87

4.2.1 Interaction Level Concerns ...... 87

4.2.2 Social Setting Concerns ...... 89

viii 4.2.3 Uncertain Relationship Status ...... 90

4.3 Section 3—Motivating Factors ...... 90

4.3.1 Motivation ...... 91

4.3.2 Areas of Confidence ...... 93

4.4 Section 4—“Somewhere in the Middle” Part 1 ...... 95

4.4.1 Positioning Self in Relation to Others With and Without ASD ...... 95

Comparisons to others with ASD ...... 96

Comparison to others without ASD ...... 96

4.4.2 Orientations to Support ...... 99

4.5 Section 5 – Strategies for Social Engagement ...... 110

4.5.1 Context Selection ...... 110

4.5.2 Variation: Gender Differences in Context Selection ...... 112

4.5.3 Limited Number of Friends ...... 112

4.5.4 Managing Social Situations ...... 113

4.5.5 Gradual Approaches to Social Development ...... 115

4.6 Section 6 – “Somewhere in the Middle” Part 2: Satisfaction with Social Life (“Satisfied But …”) ...... 117

4.6.1 Areas of Satisfaction ...... 118

4.6.2 Areas of Dissatisfaction or Ambivalence ...... 119

4.6.3 Gender Variation ...... 122

4.6.4 Summary ...... 125

Chapter 5: Discussion ...... 126

5.1 Conventional Understandings of Friendship ...... 128

5.2 Social Challenges ...... 129

5.3 Social Motivation ...... 131

5.4 Orientations to Support and Identity ...... 133

ix 5.5 Factors Influencing Social Satisfaction: Context Selection, Level of Social Engagement, and Approach to Social Development ...... 136

5.5.1 Vulnerability to Social Isolation: Selectivity, Challenges Associated with ASD, and Characteristics of Postsecondary Institutions ...... 138

5.5.2 Context Selection ...... 139

5.5.2.1 Emphasis on engagement with peers from postsecondary ...... 139

5.5.2.2 Emphasis on engagement with peers from before postsecondary ...... 139

5.5.2.3 Benefits of emphasizing both contexts ...... 140

5.5.3 Mediating Factors: Approaches to Social Development ...... 141

5.5.3.1 Self-efficacy ...... 141

5.5.3.2 Self-determination ...... 142

5.5.3.3 Mastery goals ...... 143

5.5.4 Summary ...... 143

5.6 Gender Differences ...... 144

5.6.1 Intimacy Emphasis and Maintaining Contact ...... 144

5.6.2 Online Communication ...... 145

5.6.3 Context Selection, Socialization, and Social Skills ...... 147

5.6.4 Characteristics of High School Social Environments ...... 148

5.6.5 Characteristics of Postsecondary Social Environments ...... 149

5.6.5.1 Maintaining existing friendships ...... 149

5.6.5.2 Developing new friendships ...... 150

5.6.6 Summary ...... 150

5.7 Limitations ...... 151

5.8 Implications ...... 154

5.8.1 Directions for Future Research ...... 154

5.8.2 Implications for Advocacy ...... 157

x 5.8.3 Implications for Practice ...... 159

5.8.3.1 What practitioners and support staff should anticipate...... 159

5.8.3.1.1 The need to meet more than once...... 159

5.8.3.1.2 Experiencing social interactions as effortful...... 160

5.8.3.1.3 Complex relationships with ASD diagnoses...... 160

5.8.3.1.4 Ambivalent views of support...... 161

5.8.3.2 Considerations regarding the focuses and characteristics of support..162

5.8.3.2.1 Emphasizing enactment ...... 162

5.8.3.2.2 Social media use ...... 163

5.8.3.2.3 Maintaining contact with existing friends ...... 163

5.8.3.2.4 Gender differences ...... 164

5.8.3.2.5 The importance of individualized support...... 164

5.9 Conclusion ...... 166

References ...... 167

Appendices ...... 198

xi List of Tables

Table 1. Key Interview Questions...... 47

Table 2. Study Participants ...... 51

Table 3. Data Analysis: Categories and Dimensions ...... 67

xii List of Figures

Figure 1. Understandings of friendship, social engagement, and satisfaction among postsecondary students with autism spectrum disorders ...... 69

Figure 2. The influence of context selection, level of social engagement, and approach to social development on postsecondary students’ satisfaction with their social lives ...137

xiii List of Appendices

Appendix A. Terminology and Diagnostic Classification of ASD Without ID: Background and Debates ...... 199

Appendix B. Interview Protocol ...... 205

Appendix C. Introductory Email Message to Directors of Disability Offices ...... 209

Appendix D. Recruitment Flyer ...... 210

Appendix E. Email to Potential Participants ...... 211

Appendix F. Information Form for Participants (College Version) ...... 212

Appendix G. Information Form for Participants (University Version) ...... 213

Appendix H. Email to Potential Participants Not Selected ...... 214

Appendix I. Informed Consent Form ...... 215

Appendix J. Member Checking Email ...... 218

Appendix K. Coding Process Memo 1 ...... 219

Appendix L. Coding Process Memo 2 ...... 220

Appendix M. Recoded Categories and Dimensions Version 1 ...... 222

Appendix N. Category Development Process Memo ...... 225

Appendix O. Recoded Categories and Dimensions Version 2 ...... 227

Appendix P. Ellen’s Selective Engagement Story ...... 230

xiv Foreword Identity Versus Person-First Language

There has been considerable debate about the use of person-first language (i.e., person with autism) versus identity-first language (i.e., autistic person) to describe autism. Self-advocates generally prefer identity-first language and it is increasingly used by community organizations, researchers, and in academic journals (e.g., Autism in Adulthood; L. Brown, 2011; Kapp et al., 2013; Kenny et al., 2016; Singer, 1999). Although the use of identity-first language was considered, person-first language is used throughout this dissertation.

Proponents of identity-first language argue that autism is an essential or “all-pervasive” feature of autistic people/people with autism and that person-first language implies that autism is inherently negative and that people can be separated from how their brain functions (L. Brown, 2011; Singer, 1999). The statements of participants in this study indicate that they view autism as part of themselves, as affecting how they relate to others, and do not view it as constituting a character flaw. However, some participants’ statements indicated attempts to de-emphasize characteristics of ASD, and with one exception, their statements do not indicate that they viewed autism as an essential feature of themselves as people or as central to their identity.

The use of person-first language in this dissertation is not intended to suggest that autism is distinct from personhood, a flaw to be corrected, or that the use of identity-first language is inappropriate; it is an attempt to accurately reflect the perspectives of the participants in this study.

Chapter 1 Introduction 1.1 Purpose

The purpose of this study is to examine the social experiences and understandings of friendship of postsecondary students with ASD. The study is informed by theory and research from the fields of autism and friendship, and is influenced by aspects of the social model of disability (Oliver, 1990) and neurodiversity paradigm (Broderick & Ne’eman, 2008; Sinclair, 1993; Singer, 1999). A qualitative approach influenced by the principles of modified grounded theory was employed to examine how postsecondary students with ASD define and what they view as important in terms of friendship, the nature of their social priorities and activities, their perceived social weaknesses or concerns, and their perceptions of what would be helpful to them with regard to supports.

A model describing approaches to social engagement and satisfaction among postsecondary students with ASD emerged from the analysis. This model is applicable to identifying and developing effective supports for current and prospective postsecondary students with ASD to pursue their social goals. The findings of this study also have broader implications for research, theory, clinical practice, advocacy, and policy development. These include the importance of better understanding and accounting for distinctions between individuals with ASD in terms of their experiences, perspectives, skills, goals, and the extent to which they identify with their diagnoses. This involves considering variations based on characteristics such as gender, age, and cognitive abilities as well as factors such as life stage and environmental contexts.

1.2 Description of the Study Problem

Friendship, in the context of psychology, is conceptualized as varying around the dimensions of liking and knowing and is generally understood as being marked by reciprocity and intimacy (Newcomb & Bagwell, 1995). Friendships are a type of peer relationship that involves the presence of a close, affective tie between individuals that includes mutual liking, trust, honesty, respect, commitment, safety, support, generosity, mutuality, understanding, and acceptance (Bauminger & Kasari, 2001; Bukowski, Motzoi, & Meyer, 2009; Hartup & Stevens, 1997; LaGaipa, 1977; Monsour, 1997; Newcomb & Bagwell, 1995). Friendship development is

1 2 important in terms of quality of life. Having friends is associated with having a greater sense of self worth and higher levels of psychological well-being (Bagwell, Bender, Andreassi, Montarello, & Muller, 2005).

ASD is a neurologically based developmental disorder with an estimated prevalence of 1.5 percent in developed countries (APA, 2013; Lyall et al., 2017). It is characterized by challenges in verbal and nonverbal areas of social communication and interaction as well as restricted patterns of behaviour, interests, or activities (APA, 2013). These challenges are associated with individuals with ASD having lower levels of engagement in social activities, fewer peer relationships, fewer friendships, and limited opportunities for social learning, all of which significantly restrict the scope of their social experiences (Jennes-Coussens, Magill-Evans, & Koning, 2006; Orsmond, Krauss, & Seltzer, 2004) and are associated with poor psychosocial outcomes in adulthood (Barnhill, 2007; Howlin, 2000; Krasny, Williams, Provencal, & Ozonoff, 2003; Smith, 2007).

Students with ASD represent a small but rapidly growing segment of the American and Canadian postsecondary population (Alcorn MacKay, 2010; Ames, McMorris, Alli, & Bebko, 2016; Shattuck, Narendorf, et al., 2012). Prevalence estimates for ASD among postsecondary institutions in the United States range from 0.7-1.9 percent (White, Ollendick, & Bray, 2011). In Ontario, the estimated number of identified students with ASD attending postsecondary institutions has increased substantially from 400 to 1600 students between 2009 and 2017 (Alcorn MacKay, 2010; Gordon, 2017).1 Although postsecondary students with ASD may have stronger intellectual abilities than others with ASD, intellectual ability is not a strong predictor of positive outcomes in the areas of mental health, social relationships, or quality of life among this population (Howlin & Moss, 2012). Existing research examining the experiences of postsecondary students with ASD indicates that they have less social contact with peers, fewer friends, lower levels of satisfaction, more mental health concerns, and are less likely to successfully complete their programs than their peers regardless of intellectual ability and

1 This estimate is derived from Alcorn MacKay’s (2010) study, which indicates that in 2009, approximately 400 students with ASD were enrolled in Ontario postsecondary institutions and registered with their disability office and a public statement made by Mitzie Hunter, the provincial minister of education, in 2017 stating that the number had increased fourfold since 2009 (Gordon, 2017).

3 comfort with academic material (Buote et al., 2007; Jackson, Hart, Brown, & Volkmar, 2018; White et al., 2011).

Postsecondary students are at an age during which friends become a primary source of companionship and social support (Glennon, 2001). In addition, the nature of students’ social networks, relationships and activities impact their academic success as well as attitudes, social relationships, employment, and health outcomes later in life (Marmaros & Sacerdote, 2002; McCabe, 2016). The increasing numbers of postsecondary students with ASD, the importance of social engagement and friendship development during adolescence and young adulthood, the challenges that they face in terms of social integration, and the corresponding negative educational and mental health outcomes that they experience suggest a need to develop more effective supports and interventions for them. This study aims to account for the subjective experiences of postsecondary students with ASD based on the assumption that effective interventions that promote social connections, alleviate loneliness, and improve quality of life can be developed and implemented if they reflect and are evaluated according to the understandings and priorities of the population that they are intended to help. This requires examining their understandings of friendships, the ways that they conceptualize and enact their social lives, and their perspectives about support.

1.3 Research Questions

The questions that guided this study include:

1. How do postsecondary students with ASD understand and define friendship?

2. What factors (e.g., activities, communication, interests, personality traits) do postsecondary students with ASD consider important in terms of friendship?

3. What social difficulties and/or concerns do postsecondary students with ASD identify?

4. What social interventions, if any, do postsecondary students with ASD identify as potentially helpful?

Each of these four questions was explored in further depth by examining the sources of response variation within this population (e.g., gender, degree of social experience, history of social interventions, socioeconomic background, ethnicity).

1.4 Organization of the Dissertation

This dissertation consists of five chapters. Chapter two contains a review of the literature related to the concept of friendship and the characteristics and social challenges of adolescents and adults with ASD without co-occurring intellectual disability. The role of peer interactions and the experiences of students with ASD within postsecondary environments are described. The social model of disability and neurodiversity paradigm are also discussed. Chapter three contains the design and methodology of the study, including a review of grounded theory, participant profiles, and details of data collection and analysis. Chapters four consists of the findings of the study including the themes that emerged from the analysis as well as thick description and quotes from the participants. Chapter five contains a discussion of the findings of the study, its limitations, and future directions in terms of research and practice.

Chapter 2 Literature Review

This chapter consists of five sections. The first reviews the literature related to friendship including its definition, the behaviours associated with enacting it, its functions, and variations related to gender and age. The increasing complexity of social interactions during adolescence and young adulthood is emphasized. The second section outlines the characteristics of individuals with ASD, the specific challenges that they face with regard to friendship development, and debates about the extent to which they are socially motivated. The unique characteristics and challenges of individuals with ASD without intellectual disabilities are emphasized. The third section discusses the influence of peer interactions and friendship on students’ personal development and ability to manage the challenges of postsecondary education, as well as the experiences of students with ASD within these environments. The fourth and fifth sections include an outline and analysis of the social model of disability and neurodiversity movement respectively.

2.1 Friendship

Friendship is a universal phenomenon that varies according to cultural factors, historical era, and economic and social conditions (Du Bois, 1974; Pahl, 2000). The term itself describes a range of relationships and does not necessarily distinguish between types of friendship or degree of exclusivity, closeness, or permanence and can imply casual acquaintances, limited to sharing activities, or a relationship characterized by reciprocity and caring (G. A. Allan, 1989; Dickens & Perlman, 1981; Du Bois, 1974).

In contemporary Western society, friendship is generally viewed as private, voluntary, and occurring spontaneously between autonomous individuals based on sentiment, affection, and motive and is associated with emotional support, advice, and material assistance (Carrier, 1999). Friendship is a type of peer relationship that involves the presence of a close, affective tie between individuals that includes mutual liking, trust, honesty, respect, commitment, safety, support, generosity, mutuality, understanding, and acceptance (Bukowski et al., 2009; Hartup & Stevens, 1997; La Gaipa, 1977; Monsour, 1997; Newcomb & Bagwell, 1995). Similarly, friends

5 6 are described as supportive, dependable, understanding and accepting (Bauminger & Kasari, 2001).

2.1.1 Behavioural Components of Friendship

There are three key differences between friends and non-friends in terms of behaviour. The first is the degree or quantity of positive engagement, which includes time spent together voluntarily, anticipating shared activities, reciprocal verbal exchange, demonstrating positive affect (i.e., smiling and laughing), sharing, cooperating, and helping (Bauminger et al., 2008; Newcomb & Bagwell, 1995). The second is more frequent use of disengagement and negotiation to manage conflict. The third involves relationship properties, which include equality in exchange, affirmation, mutual liking, loyalty and closeness, and demonstrating attachment (Bauminger et al., 2008; Newcomb & Bagwell, 1995).

In adult relationships specifically, the importance of behaviours associated with intimacy have been emphasized. While shared activities and the quantity of interactions are important during the earlier stages of friendship development, intimacy level, personal involvement, and self- disclosure increase most significantly as friendships develop and become closer (Altman & Taylor, 1987; Bukowski et al., 2009; Hartup & Stevens, 1997; Hays, 1984; La Gaipa, 1977).

Ochs, Kremer-Sadlik, Sirota, and Solomon (2004) argue that social interaction involves the ability to act in relation to perceived and constructed personal and positional identities and social roles while accounting for the conventions that exist within the social context in which the specific interaction is occurring. Thus, friendship development involves matching the level of disclosure to the relationship stage, as well as displaying and attending to a complex range of verbal and nonverbal signals while considering situational factors in light of broader societal conventions. Despite the complexity of enacting friendship, it is a process that is typically accomplished relatively unconsciously and successfully.

2.1.2 Functions of Friendships

Friendships are important for a number of reasons. Individuals with friends enjoy greater psychological well-being throughout adulthood (Bukowski et al., 2009; Gupta & Korte, 1994), have a greater sense of self worth (Bagwell et al., 2005; Bauminger, Shulman, & Agam, 2004), and higher self-esteem (Schwalbe & Staples, 1991; Voss, Markiewicz, & Doyle, 1999).

Conversely, individuals without friends experience loneliness, boredom, lower self-esteem and are more likely to be diagnosed with psychiatric disorders, including depression and anxiety (Bagwell et al., 2005; Bauminger et al., 2004; Carbery & Buhrmester, 1998; Orth, Robins, & Roberts, 2008).

Friendship has both practical and emotional functions. In adulthood, friends serve an instrumental function as they provide material forms of assistance, such as contributing to tasks related to role performance, and are a part of networks that provide economic and other opportunities (Adams & Allan, 1998; G. A. Allan, 1989; Bell & Coleman, 1999; Pahl, 2000). Throughout the life course, friendship also serves a companionship function in which friends play or perform different activities with one another (Bauminger et al., 2004). Friends also serve an intimacy function, which involves intersubjectivity, understanding, trust, and sharing personal issues and emotions (Bauminger et al., 2004; Hobson, 1993).

Friendship contributes to social development by offering opportunities to share, express, display, and regulate affect and emotion (Bukowski et al., 2009; Newcomb & Bagwell, 1995; Parker & Gottman, 1989) as well as opportunities to experience and practice cooperation, conflict resolution, and sharing (Hartup, 1989; Newcomb & Bagwell, 1995; Pahl, 2000). Interactions between friends also enhance social skills by providing information about acceptable social practices (Bauminger & Kasari, 2001; Dickens & Perlman, 1981), the perspectives of others, including how members of the opposite sex think, feel, and behave, and how friends are supposed to act (Bukowski et al., 2009; Monsour, 1997). These factors lead to interpersonal skill development, creating, affirming, and maintaining a sense of identity and becoming comfortable in interpersonal interactions, each of which predict success in future relationships (Bagwell et al., 2005; Newcomb & Bagwell, 1995).

2.1.3 Gender

Although there is broad agreement that differences between males and females exist, these are relatively small in magnitude (Hyde, 2005; Hyde, Bigler, Joel, Tate, & van Anders, 2019; Maccoby & Jacklin, 1974; Zell, Krizan, & Teeter, 2015; see Kaiser, Del Giudice, & Booth, 2019 for opposing viewpoint) and gender is increasingly viewed as occurring along a spectrum (Hyde et al., 2019; Richards et al., 2016). Nevertheless, expectations associated with “maleness” and “femaleness” are influential in terms of behaviours and how they are interpreted (Bussey &

Bandura, 1984, 1999; Kreiser & White, 2014). In addition, gender differences in peer attachment are among the largest (Zell et al., 2015).

From an early age, boys and girls are socialized differently, are aware of their gender, recognize its social significance, develop appropriate role models, and adopt culturally acceptable behaviours in response (G. A. Allan, 1989; van Schalkwyk, Klingensmith, & Volkmar, 2015). Throughout childhood, girls tend to exhibit more sharing of emotion and intimacy within their networks, while boys focus more on shared activities (G. A. Allan, 1989; Maccoby & Jacklin, 1974; Rose & Asher, 2017).

In adolescence, girls typically express the importance of security in friendships and discuss loyalty, trustworthiness, and emotional support when describing friendships, whereas boys tend to name concrete and impersonal criteria (Dickens & Perlman, 1981; Rose & Asher, 2017; Rose & Rudolph, 2006). While boys identify kindness, cooperativeness, and controlling aggression as important, they emphasize shared activities as opposed to describing intimacy, emotional support, or security as priorities (Dickens & Perlman, 1981; Rose & Asher, 2017). These gender differences persist into adulthood to some extent as women’s friendships are considered to be more intimate and characterized by higher levels of solidarity, emotional expression, and affective displays whereas men’s are described as associative with a greater emphasis placed on shared activities (Altman & Taylor, 1987; Hall, 2011; Pahl, 2000; Voss et al., 1999; Wright, 1988; Wright & Scanlon, 1991).

2.1.4 Age

2.1.4.1 Childhood and pre-adolescence

The understanding and enactment of friendship change considerably with age. Young children’s expectations of friendship are primarily based on common activities and overt characteristics (Hartup & Stevens, 1997; Newcomb & Bagwell, 1995). By school age, children describe friends based on psychological constructs (e.g., understanding, loyal, trustworthy) and expect to spend time and engage in self-disclosure with them (Hartup & Stevens, 1997; Newcomb & Bagwell, 1995). These developments correspond with the ability to first differentiate others’ viewpoints from one’s own, followed by recognizing the possibility of multiple perspectives, then gaining the ability to coordinate these perspectives (Pahl, 2000; Piaget, 1968; Selman, 1980).

During pre-adolescence, friendship is based on intimacy and children make attributions about their friends’ behaviour based on internal traits and feelings. In addition, pre-adolescents begin to develop broader social networks and learn the necessity of conforming to norms in order to achieve social success (Dickens & Perlman, 1981; Hartup & Stevens, 1997; Newcomb & Bagwell, 1995).

2.1.4.2 Adolescence and young adulthood

During adolescence and young adulthood, friends become primary sources of companionship and practical, emotional, and social support as individuals navigate multiple transitions in areas including education, employment, and their living situations (Berscheid, Snyder, & Omoto, 1989; Carbery & Buhrmester, 1998; Carrington, Templeton & Papinczak, 2003; Glennon, 2001). The increased importance of friends for companionship and support corresponds with changing behavioural expectations, and social dynamics, relationships, and interactions becoming increasingly complex. Adolescents and young adults interact with multiple social groups, and peer groups shift from single- to mixed-sex groups that also include dating couples (Steinberg & Morris, 2001). In addition, while sharing common interests and activities remains central to friendship formation and maintenance, being perceived as understanding, supportive, and loyal becomes prominent, which corresponds with friends being described as someone to talk with and confide in (Hartup & Stevens, 1997; Monsour, 1997). These changes are associated with significant development in the areas of language, abstract thinking, emotional regulation and awareness, and cognitive empathy, which is the ability to take the perspective of others and infer their mental state (Archer & Coyne, 2005; Björkqvist, Österman, & Kaukiainen, 1992; B. Brown, 2004; Lounds Taylor, Adams, & Bishop, 2017; Matthews et al., 2015; Steiger, Fend, & Allemand, 2015). Cognitive empathy becomes increasingly important for establishing and maintaining friendships, relationships, and integrating successfully within social networks as the role of intimacy becomes more prominent (Dziobek et al., 2008; Steiger et al., 2015; Van den Brink et al., 2012). It contributes to active listening, sharing one’s own and understanding others’ thoughts and feelings, and explicitly focusing on the other person during social interactions (Steiger et al., 2015; Van den Brink et al., 2012). Cognitive empathy also contributes to effectively balancing how much time is spent speaking versus listening and talking about oneself versus others (Lounds Taylor et al., 2017; Steiger et al., 2015; Van den Brink et al., 2012).

10 2.1.5 Complex Social Dynamics 2.1.5.1 Gossip

The example of gossiping illustrates some of the ways in which social communication becomes more complex and relies on sophisticated cognitive and social skills. Gossip is characterized by talking about other people who are not present in an informal way that typically involves topics related to moral judgment (McAndrew, 2017). It becomes more prevalent during adolescence and young adulthood and engaging in it skillfully is associated with higher social status and success (McAndrew, Bell, & Garcia, 2007; McAndrew, 2017). Although gossip is often associated with manipulating others’ reputation in order to enhance one’s social status, it serves a number of other functions including gathering and validating information, social enjoyment and entertainment, protecting groups from internal and external threats, and communicating group norms (Barkow, 1992; Baumeister, Zhang, & Vohs, 2004; Beersma & van Kleef, 2012; McAndrew, 2017). McAndrew’s (2017) description of a skillful gossiper includes the ability to exercise tact and discretion to evaluate the trustworthiness of peers, the potential benefits and risks of sharing information, and to determine how much, when, and with whom to share information. Gossiping effectively contributes to developing friendships because it indicates trust and closeness. However, it can also involve the risk of creating an impression of being self- serving or disloyal (McAndrew, 2017). Consequently, the ability to infer others’ motives, anticipate their potential reactions, and identify and respond to subtle verbal and nonverbal cues are necessary to do this successfully.

2.1.5.2 Social media and text-based communication

The increasing prevalence of text-based communication and social media use also contribute to the complexity of social interactions and relationships during adolescence and adulthood. Communicating by email, text, and via social media sites such as Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, and Snapchat have become important features of peer interaction and friendship, particularly among adolescents and young adults (Boulianne, 2015; Coyne, Padilla-Walker, & Howard, 2013). Approximately 85 percent of Canadians have an account on one or more social media

11 platforms.2 Adolescents and younger adults (i.e., 18–24-year-olds followed by 25–34 year-olds) use social media more frequently than older adults, and internet and cell phone use is nearly ubiquitous among postsecondary students (CIRA, 2018; Coyne et al., 2013; Gruzd, Jacobson, Mai, & Dubois, 2018). The importance of these forms of communication is highlighted by findings that adolescents and young adults spend an average of between 90–120 minutes each day using social networking sites and making calls or texting on their cell phones (Jacobsen & Forste, 2011; Sampasa-Kanyinga & Lewis, 2015).

Internet communication allows for sharing information without meeting in person. This has led to concerns about internet and social media use contributing to face-to-face experiences being replaced with less meaningful interactions and reduced friendship (Cummings, Butler, & Kraut, 2002; Kraut et al., 1998; Nie, 2001; Parks & Roberts, 1998). However, as internet access has increased, maintaining social networks online has become more common and online communication has shifted from platforms that typically involved conversations with strangers to social networking sites that encourage communication between existing friends (Valkenburg & Peter, 2009). Although the effects of internet use on friendship quality and social engagement are mixed, negative effects are associated with less social uses, including viewing pornography and playing online games (Padilla-Walker, Nelson, Carroll, & Jensen, 2010). In contrast, using the internet for email and to communicate through social networking sites is associated with higher rates of face-to-face communication and greater friendship quality because they are used to maintain contact and arrange to get together in person with existing friends (Coyne et al., 2013; Jacobsen & Forste, 2010; Padilla-Walker et al., 2010; Subrahmanyam, Reich, Waechter, & Espinoza, 2008; Wang, Tchernev, & Solloway, 2012; Zhao, Grasmuck, & Martin, 2008). In addition, social networking sites are used to facilitate friendship development by allowing for individuals to signal interest in relatively impersonal ways (e.g., sending a “friend request” on Facebook), and if reciprocated, progressively increase intimacy by exchanging asynchronous messages, instant messages, and arranging to speak by phone or meet in person (Yang, Brown, & Braun, 2014). As a result of these factors, the use of social networking sites is generally viewed

2 85 percent is derived from data indicating that 90 percent of Canadians use the internet (CIRA, 2018) and 94 percent of adults who are online have an account on one or more social media platforms (Gruzd et al., 2018).

12 by researchers as complementing offline communication (Coyne et al., 2013; Ellison, Steinfield, & Lampe, 2007; Kujath, 2011; Wellman, Haase, Witte, & Hampton, 2001).

2.2 Autism Spectrum Disorder

ASD is a neurologically based developmental disorder characterized by impairments in social communication and interaction as well as restricted patterns of behaviour, interests, or activities (APA, 2013). The level of functioning of individuals with ASD varies widely and is associated with the severity of these two types of challenges as well as overall cognitive ability (APA, 2013).

Challenges in the areas of social communication and interaction as well as restricted behaviours and interests are associated with individuals with ASD having lower levels of engagement in social activities, fewer peer relationships and friendships, and limited opportunities for social learning, all of which significantly restrict the scope of their social experiences (Jennes-Coussens et al., 2006; Orsmond et al., 2004).

The above impairments and social deficits are associated with poor psychosocial outcomes in adulthood (Barnhill, 2007; Howlin, 2000; Krasny et al., 2003; Smith, 2007). Adults with ASD often live alone, are unemployed, have few friends or social contacts, and require extensive support from their families and social services (Cederland, Hagberg, Billstedt, Gillberg, & Gillberg, 2008; Eaves & Ho, 2008; Engström, Ekström, & Emilsson, 2003; Howlin, 2013; Howlin, Goode, Hutton, & Rutter, 2004; Orsmond et al., 2004; Renty & Roevers, 2006). Adults with ASD also have heightened rates of clinical depression, diagnosed anxiety and related disorders, and suicidality (Barnhill, 2007; Engström et al., 2003; Szatmari, Bremner, & Nagy, 1989).

2.2.1 Autism Spectrum Disorder Without Intellectual Disability

Conceptualizations of autism have varied considerably since the early 20th century. However, identifying, understanding, and developing interventions for individuals with ASD without intellectual disabilities (ASD-NoID) has been particularly complicated and is reflected by changing estimates of the prevalence of co-occurring ASD and intellectual disability (ID),

13 multiple revisions of diagnostic classifications, and related debates about terminology (see Appendix A).

Beginning with the publication of the DSM -III in 1980, individuals presenting with symptoms of autism without intellectual disability could be diagnosed with either infantile autism or pervasive developmental disorder not otherwise specified (PDD-NOS; APA, 1980; French, Bertone, Hyde, & Fombonne, 2013). The DSM -IV was published in 1994 and included PDD-NOS (AD), as well as Asperger’s disorder (AS; also referred to as Asperger’s syndrome), which was distinguished from AD based on the absence of significant language and cognitive delay (APA, 1994). Although it was a source of considerable controversy, AS was not included when the DSM-5 was published in 2013 because it was determined that there was insufficient evidence to classify it as distinct from AD (see de Giambattista et al., 2019; Happé, 2011; Tsai, 2013). However, Asperger’s disorder and Asperger’s syndrome are still used informally, including by individuals with ASD who view the traits and characteristics associated with it as an important aspect of their identity, sometimes referring to themselves as ‘Aspies,’ and as the basis for constituting a community (Spillers, Sensui, & Linton, 2014).

Until the early 2000s, rates of ID among individuals with ASD were estimated to be as high as 75 percent (Ghaziuddin, 2000). However, greater awareness and changing diagnostic criteria and practices have led to individuals who exhibit milder symptoms receiving diagnoses (Idring et al., 2015; Keyes et al., 2011; Rosenberg et al., 2009). Consequently, more recent estimates of co- occurring ASD and ID range from 25 to 31 percent (Autism and Developmental Disabilities Monitoring Network, 2014; Chakrabarti & Fombonne, 2005).

Although it has never been an official DSM diagnosis, the use of the term high-functioning autism (HFA) has been used to describe autism without intellectual disability since the late 1980s (see Ameli, Courchesne, Lincoln, Kaufman, & Grillon, 1988; see Lincoln, Courchesne, Kilman, Elmasian, & Allen, 1988) and in practice, is often used interchangeably with PDD-NOS and AD (Ruiz Calzada, Pistrang, & Mandy, 2012). The narrow meaning associated with HFA is limited to the absence of an intellectual disability; specifically, having a full-scale IQ score greater than 70 (Chiang, Tsai, Cheung, Brown, & Li, 2014). However, HFA typically refers to milder symptom presentation, including fewer repetitive or stereotyped behaviours, fewer communication challenges (i.e., ability to speak, read, and write), as well as being able to

14 perform basic life skills (e.g., dressing and eating) independently (Attwood, 2000; Caronna, Milunsky, & Tager-Flusberg, 2008; Kenny et al., 2016; Yergeau, 2009).

2.2.2 ASD-NoID and Adaptive Functioning

Adaptive functioning refers to skills required for individuals to meet the demands of various environments, including at home and in the community. These include communication skills (e.g., expressive and receptive language), practical or daily living skills (e.g., self-care, health and safety, and food preparation), and socialization skills (e.g., interpersonal skills, social awareness, and the ability to develop and maintain personal relationships; Estabillo & Matson, 2018; Klin et al., 2007).

IQ predicts adaptive functioning among the general population, individuals with ASD and ID, as well as among populations with conditions other than ASD (Kanne et al., 2011; Klin et al., 2007; Saulnier & Klin, 2007; Shattuck, Narendorf, et al., 2012). However, higher IQ is not necessarily protective for individuals with ASD-NoID. Although they exhibit stronger adaptive skills in the areas of communication and daily living than individuals with ASD and ID, they demonstrate deficits on measures of adaptive functioning compared to peers without ASD, as well as considerable divergence between their intellectual ability and adaptive functioning, and weaker functioning in the area of socialization relative to other adaptive skills (Bal, Kim, Cheong, & Lord, 2015; Howlin et al., 2004; Howlin & Moss, 2012; Farley et al., 2009; Kraper, Kenworthy, Popal, Martin, & Wallace, 2017; Matthews et al., 2015; Saulnier & Klin, 2007). In addition, the relative difference between cognitive and adaptive functioning increases with age among individuals with ASD-NoID (Pugliese et al., 2015).

2.2.3 ASD-NoID and Social, Employment, Educational, and Mental Health Outcomes

The cognitive strengths of individuals with ASD-NoID contribute to academic success, and in some cases engagement in recreational activities with peers, particularly prior to adulthood when routines are consistent, activities tend to be structured, and support is available (Giarelli & Fisher, 2013; Shattuck, Orsmond, Wagner, & Cooper, 2011). In addition, the deficits of individuals with ASD-NoID are not necessarily apparent in community contexts, during initial encounters, or in situations that are familiar and predictable (Attwood, 2006a; Kreiser & White,

2014). However, like adaptive skills, successfully functioning in actual situations or environments is not necessarily predicted by cognitive ability or associated language skills because of the impact of factors such as sensory issues, stress, poor social skills, and the often idiosyncratic and intense nature of their interests (Barahona-Correa & Filipe, 2016; Bishop- Fitzpatrick, Mazefsky, Minshew, & Eack, 2015; Ruiz Calzada et al., 2012; Thye et al., 2018).

Transitioning to adulthood involves substantial changes across a range of areas and presents significant challenges for individuals with ASD (Hendricks & Wehman, 2009). However, the inconsistent nature of strengths and weaknesses across domains or contexts and the less obvious difficulties experienced by individuals with ASD-NoID can lead to underestimating the level of support that they require to achieve independence and succeed in conventional work, school, and social environments (Caronna et al., 2008; Kenny et al., 2016; Ruiz Calzada et. al, 2012; Yergeau, 2009). In addition, the availability of services, as well as access to funding for support is limited for adults with ASD and is often geared toward individuals with intellectual disabilities or physical challenges (Friedman, Warfield, & Parish, 2013; Stoddart et al., 2013; Taylor & Seltzer, 2011). The combination of challenges during this period and limited support corresponds with disrupted educational and vocational progress among young adults with ASD-NoID (Taylor & DaWalt, 2017) as well as limited social contact and engagement in activities in general.

Postsecondary participation and graduation as well as employment rates are considerably lower among individuals with ASD-NoID than in the general population (Drake, 2014; Hendricks, 2010; Hurlbutt, 2004; Taylor & Seltzer, 2011). In addition, a substantial proportion of adults with ASD-NoID do not engage in structured daytime activities; this outcome is more common among individuals with ASD-NoID than among adults with ASD with ID (Stoddart et al., 2013; Taylor & Seltzer, 2010, 2011). In addition, adults with ASD-NoID often have close relationships with family members, and in some cases have casual friendships or acquaintances revolving around common interests. However, a considerable proportion engage in one or fewer social interactions per month and do not have any close friendships or romantic relationships (Attwood, 2006a; Barnard et al., 2000; Howlin, 2000, 2003; Stoddart et al., 2013).

The presence and severity of symptoms of stress, anxiety and depression are higher among the ASD-NoID population than individuals without ASD and among those with ASD and ID. Furthermore, the severity of symptoms is positively associated with IQ as well as the extent of

16 the difference between intellectual and adaptive functioning (Bishop-Fitzpatrick et al., 2015; de Giambattista et al., 2019; Kraper et al., 2017). This pattern has been attributed to their intellectual ability allowing for self-awareness and social comparison, which leads to frustration with the divergence between their intellectual abilities and strengths on one hand, and their limited participation in education and employment, working in jobs that are not commensurate with their education and training, and lack of social success on the other (Hedley & Young, 2006; Kraper et al., 2017; Shattuck, Narendorf, et al., 2012; Shattuck, Wagner, Narendorf, Sterzing, & Hensley, 2011; Stoddart et al., 2013; Taylor, Henninger, & Mailick, 2015; Taylor & Seltzer, 2011).

2.2.4 Social Camouflaging in Adults with ASD-NoID

Although outcomes are generally poor among individuals with ASD-NoID, many are employed, enrolled in postsecondary education, engaged in social activities, and have friends, social contacts, and romantic relationships (Anderson, Liang, & Lord, 2014; Attwood, 2006a; Bishop- Fitzpatrick et al., 2016; Farley et al., 2009; Lai, Lombardo, Pasco, et al., 2011; Stoddart et al., 2013; Strunz et al., 2017). They are able to navigate these contexts by applying their intellectual and language skills to compensate for perceptual deficits, identify social rules, manage conventional social situations, and understand others’ perspectives even if these processes are effortful (Frith, 2004; Livingston, Colvert, Bolton, & Happé, 2019; Livingston & Happé, 2017). This is often achieved by engaging in social camouflaging, which refers to exhibiting behaviours to compensate and/or mask symptoms of autism during social interactions, often with the goal of “passing” as neurotypical (Hull et al., 2017; Kenny et al., 2016).

Masking techniques are used to “fit in” and appear like peers (Hull et al., 2017). Examples of masking techniques include exhibiting passive behaviours to avoid conflict, limiting interactions or how much they speak to avoid social errors, finding excuses to leave over-stimulating environments, minimizing the visibility of self-stimulatory behaviours, as well as mimicking the behaviours, mannerisms, interests, and appearances of peers (Attwood, 2006b; Hull et al., 2017).

Compensation techniques are cognitive approaches and behavioural strategies for managing communication challenges (Hull et al., 2017; Livingston et al., 2019, Livingston & Happé, 2017). These include developing and applying rules, strategies and guidelines to understand and enact conventional social behaviours, such as procedures for identifying others’ interest in

17 interacting with them, monitoring turn length, and demonstrating interest (e.g., asking questions, making eye contact, nodding, and smiling), and creating scripts for greetings, introductions, and responses to typical questions (e.g., “how are you?,” “what do you do?”; Hull et al., 2017; Livingston et al., 2019; Livingston & Happé, 2017).

Individuals with ASD-NoID describe using their ability to camouflage to achieve positive outcomes including being included in events and activities, developing social contacts and friendships, and obtaining and maintaining employment (Hull et al., 2017). These efforts and associated successes contribute to feeling more accepted, comfortable in social situations, and self-confident. Camouflaging is sometimes conceptualized as a necessary step that allows them to get to know someone initially with the hope of not having to conceal symptoms of ASD as the relationship develops (Hull et al., 2017).

Some individuals with ASD-NoID describe feeling vulnerable to verbal or physical attacks because their differences are viewed as unacceptable. They employ camouflaging techniques as a safety measure to avoid drawing attention to themselves, making embarrassing errors, and being ostracized or excluded (Hull et al., 2017).

Many individuals express ambivalence about camouflaging because while they may be able to achieve socially desirable outcomes, the effort involved leads to social interactions being exhausting. In addition, some individuals describe feeling resentful about needing to suppress their identity, and concerned that they are being fake or deceptive and may be betraying others with ASD (Hull et al., 2017).

2.2.5 Gender Differences Among Individuals with ASD-NoID

In the past, females with ASD diagnoses exhibited more severe symptoms and intellectual impairment than males (see Eme, 1992; Lai, Lombardo, Auyeung, Chakrabarti, & Baron-Cohen, 2015; Lord & Schopler, 1987; Szatmari & Jones, 1991), which was attributed to variable genetic expression associated with chromosomal differences (see Eme, 1992).3 However, the changing

3 One prominent explanation proposed that more genetic and environmental abnormalities are required for females to develop ASD (i.e., females have a higher liability threshold than males), and that more severe clinical presentations reflect the greater number and wider range of abnormalities (Spence, 1976; Tsai & Beisler, 1983). A contrasting explanation, referred to as constitutional variability, proposed that because of having both X and Y

18 diagnostic criteria and understandings of ASD described earlier have contributed to a substantial increase in the number of females with mild symptom presentation and no intellectual impairment being identified (Lai, Lombardo, Auyeung, et. al, 2015; Mattila et al., 2011). This has led to estimates of the ratio of males-to-females with ASD changing from 4:1 (Fombonne, 2009) to 3:1 (Lai, Lombardo, Auyeung, et al., 2015; Loomes, Hull, & Mandy, 2017).

Males and females with ASD-NoID perform similarly on core measures of social cognition, including empathizing, systematizing, and mentalizing (Kopp & Gillberg, 1992; Lai, Lombardo, Pasco, et al., 2011; Lai, Lombardo, Ruigrok, et al., 2012; Lai, Lombardo, Auyeung, et al., 2015). However, despite similarities in terms of underlying symptoms, there are significant gender differences in symptom presentation. First, females demonstrate fewer repetitive or stereotyped behaviours than males (Kreiser & White, 2014; Lai, Lombardo, Auyeung, et al., 2015; Wijngaarden-Cremers et al., 2014). Second, although females frequently have abnormally intense interests, differences in this area are less obvious because their interests are more similar to their non-ASD peers than males’ (Lai, Lombardo, Auyeung, et al., 2015). Third, females exhibit stronger social communication skills than males in a number of areas including engaging in reciprocal conversations, turn-taking, providing appropriate contextual information, initiating interactions, integrating verbal and nonverbal behaviour, making and responding to social overtures, and using language conventionally (Kreiser & White, 2014; Lai, Lombardo, Pasco, et al., 2011).

Similarities in terms of intellectual ability, severity of childhood symptoms, and measures of social understanding suggest that sociocultural factors provide part of the explanation for behavioural differences between females and males in social situations (Kreiser & White, 2014; Lai, Lombardo, Auyeung, et al., 2015). Behaviours and how they are interpreted are strongly influenced by expectations associated with socially constructed gender roles, which are transmitted by family members, peers, and other agents of socialization such as institutions and

chromosomes, males demonstrate greater variability in terms of characteristics, which contributes to displaying a wider range of abnormal features in a relatively mild form whereas females only display features of ASD as a consequence of more significant pathology, for example brain damage during birthing (see Eme, 1992; James & Taylor, 1990).

19 media sources. Receiving explicit feedback and observing reactions to others’ behaviours provides information about which behaviours are acceptable, disapproved of, and sanctioned, and influences motivation and personal standards (Bussey & Bandura, 1984, 1999; Kreiser & White, 2014).

In Western societies, females are generally expected to demonstrate interpersonal sensitivity, emotional attunement, and empathy, and are more likely than males to face severe social consequences when they exhibit disruptive, aggressive, or non-conforming behaviour (Hentschel, Heilman, & Peus, 2019; Kreiser & White, 2014). During childhood, these norms are reflected and reinforced by parents’ tendency to emphasize politeness and being nurturing when speaking with their daughters, whereas when interacting with boys, parents tend to encourage independence and being adventuresome. In addition, conversations between mothers and daughters include the extensive use of supportive language and emotional references (Kreiser & White, 2014).

Girls with ASD-NoID demonstrate a strong tendency to stay in close physical proximity to parents and friends, and imitate the behaviours of socially skilled peers (Dean, Harwood, & Kasari, 2017; Kopp & Gillberg, 1992). They are also more likely to be included in same-sex peer groups than males. As a result, females have more opportunities to engage with peers, receive direct feedback, and observe social behaviours and responses (Kreiser & White, 2014). This contributes to adopting conventional social roles, developing social scripts and conversation skills, better understanding others’ perspectives, expressing empathy, and limiting unusual or disruptive behaviours (Attwood, 2006b, 2007; Gillberg, 2002; Holliday Willey, 1999; Kalafarski, 2010). Correspondingly, despite experiencing social challenges, self- and parent- reports indicate that girls have stronger friendships and experience overt rejection by their peers less frequently than boys (Hiller, Young, & Weber, 2014; Kopp & Gillberg, 1992; Lai, Lombardo, Auyeung, et al., 2015).

By adulthood, the social trajectories of females and males are often different from one another. Females with ASD-NoID identify the importance of social interaction and express greater motivation to interact with others than males (Lai, Lombardo, Auyeung, et al., 2015). In addition, behavioural differences become more pronounced. Females make more efforts to develop skills to compensate for social communication deficits, employ social camouflaging

20 behaviour more frequently in order to emulate their peers, and manage common social situation to appear more socially typical. As a result, they exhibit more conventional observable behaviours than males and a subtler manifestation of core symptoms of ASD (Bargiela, Steward, & Mandy, 2016; Kreiser & White, 2014; Lai, Lombardo, Auyeung, et al., 2015; Tierney, Burns, & Kilbey, 2016). Although social camouflaging leads to more success in terms of navigating social situations and achieving better educational and employment outcomes, these behaviours involve exerting considerable effort, contribute to social situations being exhausting, and may limit access to support. In addition, individuals who employ these strategies may still experience distress because of core social and communication deficits, which is associated with a higher risk of internalizing problems because of negative societal reactions (Kreiser & White, 2014; Livingston et al., 2019; Livingston & Happé, 2017; Solomon, Miller, Taylor, Hinshaw, & Carter, 2012). Thus, there are tradeoffs between the successes associated with social camouflaging and the stress and potential threats to identity that it involves. In addition, because there are gender differences in terms of employing these strategies, it is possible that males and females have qualitatively distinct social experiences.

2.2.6 Social Motivation

Individuals with ASD express less interest in meeting new people, interacting with their peers, and pursuing friendships than individuals without ASD (Deckers, Roelofs, Muris, & Rinck, 2014; Sedgewick, Hill, Yates, Pickering, & Pellicano, 2016; Whitehouse, Durkin, & Jaquet, 2009). However, the extent to which limited motivation reflects the effects of social-cognitive deficits and negative social experiences as opposed to an innate lack of motivation is disputed (Chen, Bundy, Cordier, Chien, & Einfeld, 2015).

Kanner (1943) initially viewed ASD as characterized by a preference for solitude. More recently, Chevallier, Kohls, Troiani, Brodkin, and Schultz (2012) proposed a social motivation theory of autism positing that ASD can be understood as an acute case of diminished social motivation caused by biological abnormalities affecting regions of the brain associated with reward mechanisms and attention to social information including the amygdala, ventral striatum, and areas of the prefrontal cortex. They argue that individuals with ASD exhibit reduced activation

21 within the network connecting these regions in response to social stimuli,4 which is reflected by the tendency for individuals with ASD to exhibit fewer behaviours that communicate social interest, contribute to likeability, and that are consistent with developing friendships. Examples include eye contact, mimicry, concealing negative emotions, social laughter, spontaneous greetings and farewells, and audience effects (Chevallier, Kohls, et al., 2012). Based on observed patterns of behaviour among individuals with ASD and functional differences at the biological level, proponents of the social motivation theory argue that individuals with ASD are not disposed and lack the mechanisms to be motivated to preferentially attend to social information, enjoy social interactions, and sustain social relationships (Chevallier, Kohls, et al., 2012).

In contrast with the above perspective, other authors suggest that limited social motivation is a result of perspective taking challenges and difficulty identifying and responding to social cues that result from social-cognitive deficits, which contribute to social experiences being less enjoyable (Carrington et al., 2003; Roekel, Scholte, & Didden, 2010; Schroeder, Cappadocia, Bebko, Pepler, & Weiss, 2014). Individuals with ASD experience bullying and social rejection more frequently than their peers (Schroeder et al., 2014; Sterzing, Shattuck, Narendorf, Wagner, & Cooper, 2012) and their friendships are characterized by higher levels of conflict (Whitehouse et al., 2009). In addition, individuals with ASD who experience social success describe making conscious attempts to conceal their differences and act conventionally in social situations and putting forth considerable effort to develop their communication skills by observing their peers and receiving explicit instruction (Carrington et al., 2003; Jaswal & Akhtar, 2018; Müller, Schuler, & Yates, 2008). The negative experiences associated with social challenges and the effort required to compensate for them are consistent with heightened social anxiety and lower levels of enjoyment, which in turn, correspond with reduced social motivation (Spain, Sin, Linder, McMahon, & Happé, 2018).

The social challenges faced by individuals with ASD are well established and may lead to negative social experiences that impact motivation. However, a number of studies have also

4 Specifically, they argue that social orienting is mediated by the interaction between oxytocin and dopamine within the network connecting the amygdala, ventral striatum, orbital and ventromedial regions of the prefrontal cortex in response to social stimuli. Interactions modulate social salience and perceptual selectivity via the amygdala, and social reward via the nucleus accumbens within the ventral striatum (Chevallier, Kohls, et al., 2012).

22 demonstrated similarities between individuals with and without ASD in terms of their capacity for long-term friendships and the meaningfulness assigned to them (Bauminger et al., 2008; Bauminger & Kasari, 2000; Hintzen, Delespaul, van Os, & Myin-Germeys, 2010; Hobson, 1993; B. Howard, Cohn, & Orsmond, 2006; Locke, Ishijima, Kasari, & London, 2010; Müller et al., 2008). In addition, individuals with ASD describe being motivated to make friends and interact with peers, particularly during adolescence and young adulthood when they become aware of their social and behavioural differences and make more efforts to form relationships (Cage, Bird, & Pellicano, 2016; Gillespie-Lynch, Kapp, Brooks, Pickens, & Schwartzman, 2017; Jaswal and Akhtar, 2018; Kanner, Rodriguez, & Ashenden, 1972; Marks, Schrader, & Longaker, 2000; Szatmari, et al., 1989). They also express a desire for greater emotional intimacy, describe feelings of loneliness and isolation when they fail to form friendships (Bauminger et al., 2008; Bauminger & Kasari, 2000; Frith, 2004; B. Howard et al., 2006; Locke et al., 2010; Mesibov & Handlan, 1997; Müller et al., 2008; Tantam, 1991), emphasize social reciprocity, recognize the importance of responsiveness and demonstrating interest, and describe engaging in social activities and conversations with friends because they are intrinsically motivated to do so as opposed to prioritizing shared activities (Chen et al., 2015; Müller et al., 2008).

2.2.7 Obstacles to Friendship

Despite developing more sophisticated understandings of friendship and becoming increasingly motivated to engage in them, adolescents and adults with ASD continue to have limited social opportunities, few friends, and experience heightened rates of loneliness (Jennes-Coussens et al., 2006). A number of characteristics of individuals with ASD may contribute to their difficulty making friends. These include limitations in terms of conceptual understandings of friendship, cognitive inflexibility, and enactment issues within interactions in the realms of nonverbal expression, speech content, and conversational flow.

2.2.7.1 Conceptual issues

Carrington et al. (2003), conducted semi-structured interviews to better understand adolescents’ with ASD understandings and experiences of friendship. They asked participants to describe their understanding of friendship, acquaintanceship and “non-friends” in general, as well as their current and imagined future friendships. The focus of questions included characteristics of friends, their expectations of friends and what they felt their friends expected of them in areas

23 such as knowledge about each other. The authors found that their sample of adolescents with ASD had no difficulty defining and distinguishing between “not a friend” and acquaintances. Adolescents were able to correctly identify a range from active dislike to lack of shared interest in the case of “not a friend” and limited but positive contact and knowledge of each other in the case of acquaintances. However, they did not discuss issues related to friendship with the same sophistication as their peers. Their descriptions of friends included liking and doing the same activities, but did not reflect an understanding of reciprocity and sharing interests and ideas that are associated with developing it. Consequently, they concluded that the difficulty that the adolescents in their study had describing friendship and their apparent inability to use the language associated with it highlight a conceptual deficit. Specifically, while these findings may be related to perceptual issues or limited social opportunities, they may also indicate difficulty with the “idea” of friendship (Carrington et al., 2003).

The above findings are consistent with other studies that have reported that when describing friendship in response to open-ended questions or depictions of friendship, children and adolescents with ASD tend to describe actions, proximity, or activities as opposed to closeness, intimacy, support, reciprocity, familiarity, and togetherness (Bauminger & Kasari, 2000; Bauminger et al., 2004). According to Frith (2004), these conceptual deficits are related to a limited ability to imagine what their actions look like to others, imagining the feelings of the other person and comprehending complex social emotions such as embarrassments and pride.

2.2.7.2 Inflexibility

Individuals with ASD tend to see situations in fixed and absolute terms rather than relative to context, interpret information literally, are concerned with precision about concepts, and have difficulty with changes in plans, routines, and even slightly unexpected situations (Frith, 2004; Happé, 1993; Tantam, 2000). Flexibility is an important characteristic associated with creating and maintaining friendships, whereas higher levels of rigidity, preference for sameness, and high attention to detail are associated with more loneliness and fewer and shorter duration friendships (Jobe & White, 2007; Pahl, 2000). These cognitive characteristics likely contribute to difficulties making and keeping friends.

2.2.7.3 Enactment/pragmatic issues

During successful social interactions, participants create an interpersonal system characterized by accommodative and mutually influential behaviour, which includes physical behaviours, and verbal and nonverbal components of speech (Street & Giles, 1982). According to speech accommodation theory, communicators adjust their speech styles to express values, attitudes and intentions (Street & Giles, 1982). Successful adjustments enhance perceived intelligibility, supportiveness, predictability, and intersubjectivity, as well as perceptions of warmth, intimacy, and cooperativeness (Street & Giles, 1982). Speech accommodation is also is a way of managing and maintaining appropriate distance. Divergence is expressed through speech style, intonation, length or formality and involves a set of cues used to indicate status inequality, establish distance, and to indicate the need to adjust speech. Both convergence and divergence involve subtle shifts in tone and emphasis, reflected by pauses, vocalization durations, speech rate, pitch, intensity, duration, frequency, tempo and pronunciation (Street & Giles, 1982). Individuals with ASD demonstrate significant impairment in predicting, recognizing, and responding to these types of ambiguous cues, particularly in real life situations when responses are expected to be fast and occur in the context of multi-dimensional circumstances (Barnhill, 2007; Frith, 2004; Ochs et al., 2004).

2.2.7.4 Nonverbal communication issues

Individuals with ASD frequently demonstrate abnormal prosody of speech, intonation, pitch, and inflection (Shriberg, 2001; Szatmari, et al., 1989; Tantam, 2000) as well as difficulty using, recognizing and interpreting facial and emotional expression (Tantam, 1991). Some individuals also demonstrate abnormalities such as facial grimacing, idiosyncratic gestures and posture that are not integrated in speech, inappropriate interpersonal distance, and failure to use eye contact to signal engagement and turn-taking (Mirenda et al., 1983; Tantam, 2000). These challenges can lead to interruptions and are associated with appearing disinterested (Adreon & Durocher, 2007).

2.2.7.5 Content issues

In terms of content, individuals with ASD may ask inappropriate questions, make impolite comments (e.g., calling attention to others’ potentially embarrassing actions or physical characteristics), not respond to others’ attempts to change topics of conversation, and impose and perseverate on idiosyncratic subjects and associations (Adreon & Durocher, 2007; Ochs et al.,

2004). They may also transgress social conventions relating to age and intimacy and formality; for example they ask overly personal questions to strangers or authority figures (Tantam, 1991). In addition, they may neglect listeners’ needs for contextual detail and supply irrelevant or redundant information, which is compounded by failing to realize that they have misunderstood or have been misunderstood (Barnhill, 2007; Szatmari et al., 1989; Tager-Flusberg & Andersen, 1991; Tantam, 1991).

It is likely that inflexibility, conceptual, nonverbal, pragmatic speech, and content issues contribute independently and in concert to negatively impact social interactions. These factors significantly impact friendship development since social interactions directly contribute to making and maintaining friendships in the context of both shared activities and displays of intimacy.

2.2.8 Social Challenges for Individuals with ASD During Adolescence and Young Adulthood

Although they experience challenges with communication and perspective taking, the social skills of individuals with ASD tend to improve during adolescence and young adulthood (Howlin et al., 2004; Shattuck, Seltzer, et al., 2007). However, they often experience more pronounced difficulties integrating within peer groups and developing friendships because of heightened expectations regarding social ability, and the increased complexity of social dynamics and interactions during this period (Koegel, Koegel, Miller, & Detar, 2014; Laugeson & Ellingsen, 2014).

The changing composition of peer groups and more prominent role of intimacy within friendships correspond with social success requiring adolescents and young adults to engage in conversations about their own and their peers’ thoughts, feelings, motives, and social relationships (Steiger et al., 2015; Steinberg & Morris, 2001; Van den Brink et al., 2012). Navigating these contexts successfully involves evaluating others’ trustworthiness and exercising tact and discretion in order to share and withhold information in a way that fosters connection and closeness, and avoids undermining loyalty or appearing self-serving, hostile, or manipulative (McAndrew, 2017). Connectedly, friendship development and maintenance involve establishing emotional connection, closeness, and trust, which are consistent with displaying attentiveness, care, concern, and support. Managing information and demonstrating behaviours associated with

26 intimacy are associated with identifying, reacting to, and exhibiting nuanced verbal communication and subtle nonverbal cues in order to infer others’ motives and expectations, and predict and adjust to their responses (Steiger et al., 2015; Steinberg & Morris, 2001; Van den Brink et al., 2012). However, deficits in the areas of cognitive empathy, pragmatic language use, and nonverbal communication are cardinal features of ASD. These challenges contribute to misinterpreting others’ motives and failing to anticipate the effects of one’s actions, which can result in unintentionally violating social conventions and exhibiting inappropriate behaviours within interactions, or needing to exert considerable effort to avoid doing so (Attwood, 2007; Baron-Cohen, 1995; Hull et. al, 2017; Kim, 2014; Van den Brink et al., 2012). As a result of these challenges, individuals with ASD are vulnerable to negative social encounters as well as limited experiences of enjoyable interactions despite developing more sophisticated social skills (Baron-Cohen, 1995; Landa, 2000; Lounds Taylor et al., 2017).

2.2.9 Social Media, Text-Based Communication, and ASD

A number of authors have argued that online and text-based forms of communication are particularly useful to individuals with ASD because they reduce the impact of the communication challenges that they face (Attwood, 2006a; Dekker, 1999; Hacking, 2009; Sinclair, 2005). Communicating by email, text, or using social media sites such as Facebook allows users to control when, for how long, and with whom they interact because they can limit their availability while being able to contact others at will (Bagatell, 2010; Benford & Standen, 2009). In addition, asynchronous text-based communication reduces the need to attend to turn- taking, use and respond to nonverbal cues including facial expressions, body language, and nonverbal aspects of speech, and to monitor others’ reactions while composing messages (Bargh & McKenna, 2004; Burke, Kraut, & W illiams, 2010; Jones & Meldal, 2001; van Schalkwyk, Klingensmith, McLaughlin, & Qayyum, 2015). These factors contribute to being better able to comprehend others’ meaning and compose messages effectively because there is more time to consider others statements and edit one’s own (Burke et al., 2010; Dekker, 1999; Gillespie- Lynch et al., 2014).

Individuals with ASD also describe benefiting from online interactions because they are able to access and engage with others who share similar, and often idiosyncratic, interests (Gillespie- Lynch et al., 2014). In addition, the internet has been one of the main ways that individuals with

ASD have learned about and participated in the neurodiversity movement (Kapp et al., 2013). This has led to individuals with ASD having more opportunities to contact one another, communicate in ways that contrast with conventional norms, reveal aspects of themselves that they may suppress or de-emphasize in other contexts, and to receive and provide social support (Gillespie-Lynch et al., 2014; Sinclair, 2005; Singer, 1999).

Similar to individuals without ASD, social media use among adolescents and adults with ASD is positively associated with the likelihood of having close relationships and greater friendship quality (Mazurek & Wenstrup, 2013; van Schalkwyk, Marin, et al., 2017). However, despite the preference for and advantages of online communication and text messaging, there are a number of factors that may offset the benefits. First, individuals with ASD tend to have limited online contacts because their offline social networks are sparse and online networks generally duplicate offline ones (Burke et al., 2010; Ellison, Steinfield, & Lampe, 2007). Second, they tend to use the internet to access information, watch videos, play games, and consider fellow gamers as friends more frequently than their peers, and use it for social purposes less than their peers (Gillespie-Lynch et al., 2014; Mazurek, Shattuck, Wagner, & Cooper, 2012; Mazurek & Wenstrup, 2013; Sundberg, 2018; van Schalkwyk, Marin, et al., 2017). Third, ASD is associated with heightened rates of anxiety, which appears to mediate the relationship between friendship quality and online communication. Van Schalkwyk et al. (2017) studied the relationship between the use of Facebook and friendship quality among adolescents with and without ASD. They found that, unlike peers without ASD, the relationship between online communication and face- to-face communication and friendship quality did not apply to individuals with ASD and high levels of anxiety.

In addition to the above factors, the characteristics of online communication and social networking sites have changed significantly over the past decade. Email, texting, and older forms of online communication, such as discussion boards, blogs, forums, and chat rooms, allow for additional processing time and emphasizing verbal rather than nonverbal communication (Boyd & Ellison, 2008). In contrast, social networking sites allow for and encourage brief, frequent, and instant communication involving combinations of text, videos, photos, and emojis (Vaterlaus, Barnett, Roche, & Young, 2016). Furthermore, compared with older social media platforms such as Facebook and Twitter, hybrid communication and immediacy are more pronounced features of newer social networking platforms, including Snapchat and Instagram (Bayer, Ellison,

Schoenebeck, & Falk, 2016; Vaterlaus et al., 2016). Although Facebook remains the most commonly used social networking application in Canada and Twitter is widely used, Instagram and Snapchat are becoming increasingly popular, particularly among 18–34-year-olds (CIRA, 2018).5 Thus, trends in terms of which platforms adolescents and young adults use are consistent with eroding the advantages of social media for individuals with ASD because they replicate aspects of communication that are particularly challenging for them.

There are a number of notable gender differences in social media use related to the above trends. A slightly higher proportion of females than males use social media sites actively (Gruzd et al., 2018). However, differences in which platforms are used are more substantial. A higher proportion of males than females (85 percent versus 75 percent) use Facebook at least monthly and rates of Twitter use are similar (33 percent versus 31 percent). However, the proportion of females using Snapchat and Instagram regularly is substantially higher than the proportion of males using these platforms (25 percent versus 12 percent and 41 percent versus 24 percent respectively; Gruzd et al., 2018). The effects of these differences are unclear, but they likely influence which platforms individuals with ASD use, the nature of their online interactions and overall social engagement, and may contribute to relatively distinct social experiences that vary according to gender.

Online communication and text messaging may be preferred by and offer advantages to adolescents and young adults with ASD. However, these benefits may be limited by how they use the internet, higher levels of anxiety, having few friends and low levels of social engagement, as well as by the changing characteristics of social networking sites used by their peers. It is also possible that gender differences in terms of the types of social media platforms used by their peers influences the ways in which it influences and contributes to their social lives.

5 77 percent of Canadians use Facebook compared with 35 percent, 26 percent, and 19 percent for Instagram, Twitter, and Snapchat respectively (CIRA, 2018). However, whereas the percentage of adults aged 18-34 and 35-54 using Facebook and Twitter are approximately equal, the corresponding percentages for Instagram are 59 percent vs. 32 percent, and 46 percent vs. 11 percent for Snapchat (CIRA, 2018).

29 2.3 Postsecondary Environments

More than 60 percent of Canadian high school graduates attend postsecondary institutions (Statistics Canada, 2018). Consequently it is an important site for socialization and friendship development among adolescents and young adults. In North America, postsecondary education is evaluated according to economic-utilitarian criteria, including the extent to which it prepares citizens for future employment, and academic-humanistic goals, for example promoting intellectual, cultural, and moral development and civic engagement (Kirby, 2007). Although there is debate about the relative importance of these objectives, members of the public, governments, as well as college and university students, faculty, staff, and administrators view one of the roles of postsecondary institutions as contributing to students’ intellectual and personal development (Astin, 1991; Chickering & Reisser, 1993; Evans, Forney, Guido, Patton, & Renn, 2010; Kirby, 2007; Kuh, 1995).

Student development theorists have emphasized the importance of informal interactions with faculty, staff, and peers outside of the classroom for creating a sense of belonging and promoting positive outcomes in terms of academic performance, student satisfaction, and personal development (Astin, 1977, 1991; Kuh, 1995; McCluskey-Titus & Oliver, 2001; Moore, Lovell, McGann, and Wyrick, 1998). Students’ peer group and friends are viewed as the most significant influences on their personal development while attending college or university (Astin, 1991; Buote et al., 2007). Although students vary in terms of openness to making new friends in postsecondary institutions based on factors such as living in residence versus commuting and quality of pre-existing friendships, they generally expect and are expected to create and participate in social activities, make new friends who are interesting, possibly lifelong, and to do so independently (Buote et al., 2007; Chickering & Reisser, 1993; Koegel, Ashbaugh, Koegel, Detar, & Regester, 2013; McCluskey-Titus & Oliver, 2001).

Students face numerous stressors when they transition from high school to postsecondary education (Pancer, Hunsberger, Pratt, & Alisat, 2000). They are expected to manage greater responsibility academically and for their daily living in the context of vastly different social, administrative, and in many cases, living environments (Heiman, 2006; D. Howard, Schiraldi, Pineda, & Campanella, 2006; Mattanah et al., 2010; Ross, Niebling, & Heckert, 1999). Friends help to meet these challenges by providing companionship, modelling effective study habits, and

30 offering practical and emotional support (e.g., providing reassurance in response to unexpected academic challenges; Buote et al., 2007). In addition, friends help each other to integrate in and benefit from postsecondary environments by encouraging participation in extracurricular activities, using campus resources for academic and personal support, expanding each others’ social networks, and modelling how to behave within various social and academic settings (Buote et al., 2007).

2.3.1 Postsecondary Students with ASD postsecondary students with ASD are particularly vulnerable to social challenges and isolation as a result of their limited social experience and difficulties with social communication and transitions (Glennon, 2001; Manett & Stoddart, 2012). In addition, they are less likely to succeed in typical extracurricular activities that emphasize novelty, informality, and “going with the flow” (Glennon, 2001). Consistent with these challenges, postsecondary students with ASD engage less frequently with their peers, have fewer friends, describe difficulty integrating within the broader campus environment, and identify feeling excluded, isolated, and lonely more frequently and to a greater extent than their peers (Jackson et al., 2018; White et al., 2011). Connectedly, students with ASD report lower levels of satisfaction with their overall experience of postsecondary education regardless of academic ability and grades, low program completion rates, and substantially higher rates of anxiety, depression, suicidal ideation, and suicide attempts than their peers (Gelbar, Smith, & Reichow, 2014; Jackson et al., 2018; White et al., 2011).

Staff and administrators at colleges and universities are increasingly aware that students with ASD face challenges in terms of managing and benefiting fully from their postsecondary experiences and have made efforts to offer additional academic, medical and social supports (Alcorn MacKay, 2010; Gelbar et al., 2014; Manett & Stoddart, 2012, 2013; Smith, 2007). A number of institutions have implemented initiatives that address students’ social challenges including transition and peer mentorship programs, individual social skills instruction and counselling services, video modelling and online resources, as well as social skills, socialization, activity-based, and support groups that are geared specifically to students with ASD (Ames et al., 2012; Gelbar et al., 2014). However, the availability of both general and targeted supports remain limited and typically prioritize academic skills rather than personal or social issues (Alcorn MacKay, 2010; Gelbar et al., 2014).

31 2.4 The Social Model of Disability

The social model of disability is premised on the assumption that disablement is a function of the fit between individuals and their environments rather than solely individual factors (Oliver, 1990, 1996, 2013; Race, Boxall, & Carson, 2005). It emerged during the 1970s alongside efforts of individuals with physical mobility and sensory disabilities to remove physical, social, and economic barriers limiting their participation in society (Oliver, 1990; UPAIS, 1976). The model has since been applied to intellectual, cognitive, and psychological conditions (Goodley, 2001; Lenz, 2008; Mulvany, 2000).

The social model contrasts with an individual model that assumes that “problems” of disability are caused by individuals’ physical or cognitive limitations or impairments (Hiranandani, 2005; Oliver, 1990). The individuals model corresponds with a medical model that views disability as a “personal tragedy” and individuals with disabilities as patients who are sick, flawed, compromised, worthy of pity, dependent on others, and whose impairments necessarily reduce their quality of life (Chamak, 2008; Hiranandani, 2005; Kapp et al., 2013; Mackelprang & Salsgiver, 1996; Oliver 1990; Sim, Milner, Love, & Lishman 1998). According to proponents of the social model, this encourages positioning professionals, parents, and non-disabled people as suitable decision makers about care as opposed to prioritizing and responding to what individual with disabilities view as important in terms of their quality of life (Chamak, 2008; Kapp et al., 2013; Lenz, 2008). Connectedly, these assumptions lead to promoting medical interventions to cure or reduce symptoms of conditions in order to “fix” individuals so that they can function as “normally” as possible (Kapp et al., 2013; Oliver, 1990). These types of interventions direct resources away from addressing the barriers that individuals with disabilities identify as interfering with their quality of life (Kapp et al., 2013; Oliver, 1990). In contrast with the individual model, the social model emphasizes the role of environmental factors, asserts that individuals with disabilities are experts on their own lives who are capable of leading efforts to advocate for social change, and thereby promotes self-determination, fuller participation in society, and enhanced well-being (Lenz, 2008; Oliver, 1990).

The social model of disability has been credited with influencing how service providers understand disablement as well as identifying and removing social, physical, and legal barriers (Oliver, 2013; Owens, 2015). However, a number of writers have argued that the gains achieved

32 through political action occurred in contexts where targeting specific barriers and advocating based on a shared identity were effective strategies (Owens, 2015). This contributed to treating individuals with disabilities as a homogeneous group by attributing restrictions entirely to the societal factors and physical environment, which resulted in not acknowledging impairment, separating the body from disabled individuals’ identities, and therefore failing to account for varying subjective experiences (Hughes & Paterson, 1997; Owens, 2015; S. J. Williams, 1999).

While acknowledging the importance of the interplay between individuals and their environments, critics of the social model have also argued that some people experience impairment or restrictions, such as physical pain, irrespective of the environment (Shakespeare & Watson, 2010). In addition, they argue that disablement associated with some types of disabilities or conditions, such as intellectual disabilities and mental health conditions, will not necessarily be reduced by environmental change (Cooper, 2017; Mulvany 2000).

The model has also been criticized for assuming that disability status is central to identity and that all individuals with disabilities are oppressed. This has resulted in failing to sufficiently account for factors such as race, ethnicity, gender, sexuality, socioeconomic status, and differences between types of disabilities (Lenz, 2008; Shakespeare & Watson, 2001). This is problematic because these factors are associated with differences in terms of lifestyles, access to opportunity, exposure to discrimination, as well as influencing individuals’ experience of disability and its relative importance with regard to identity (Davis, 2000; Lenz, 2008; Shakespeare & Watson, 2001).

2.5 The Neurodiversity Movement

The term neurodiversity refers to the idea that atypical or divergent neurological development is a natural and valuable part of human variation (Armstrong, 2010; Broderick & Ne’eman, 2008). The neurodiversity movement emerged during the 1990s and was promulgated by various autistic self-advocacy groups6 (Mackenzie & Watts, 2011; Runswick-Cole, 2014; Sinclair, 1993;

6 Autistic self-advocates make a distinction between ‘autism advocacy,’ which they associate with ‘speaking for’ individuals with ASD as well as promoting cures for Autism and ‘normalizing’ treatments including Applied Behaviour Analysis. In contrast, ‘autistic self-advocacy’ reflects the importance of individuals with ASD playing a

Singer, 1999). One of the major catalysts for the movement being established was opposition to the “personal tragedy” view of disability (Sinclair, 1993; Singer, 1999). The following discussion is limited to autism, but the principles of neurodiversity have been applied to other cognitive and neurological disorders including learning disabilities, intellectual disabilities, attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), psychiatric conditions, and speech disorders (Baker, 2011; Jaarsma & Welin, 2012).

The perspectives associated with the neurodiversity movement are consistent with the social model of disability. Its goals include promoting the rights of people with autism, effecting political change, and improving their quality of life based on the assumptions that disablement is a function of the fit between individuals and their physical, social, economic, and political environments (Baker 2011; Kapp et al., 2013). In addition, its proponents argue that people with autism are best positioned to challenge negative views of autism and to advocate for improved accommodations and services (Runswick-Cole, 2014).

Like the social model, the neurodiversity movement explicitly rejects the medical model of disability. Its proponents view autism as a set of differences and as a central aspect of identity. Therefore, they reject metaphors that treat autism as a disease or health crisis, and oppose identifying its causes, taking measures to prevent it, or seeking to cure it (Broderick & Ne’eman, 2008; Kapp et al., 2013). Numerous individuals and organizations associated with the neurodiversity movement vigorously challenged the views and goals that have been advanced by Autism Speaks (2016). From 2005 to 2016, its mission statement included funding research into the causes, prevention, treatment, and cure of autism based on the position that the increased prevalence of autism constituted an “urgent global health crisis” warranting medical treatment (Autism Speaks, 2016). Proponents of the neurodiversity movement argue that promoting prevention is consistent with practising eugenics because it encourages the idea that it is better to not exist than to risk being disabled by having autism, and because prevention would involve

central role in advocacy efforts and is associated with prioritizing inclusion, quality of life, accommodation, and acceptance of neurodiversity (see AutisMag, 2014; see Autistic Self Advocacy Network, 2019; Ne’eman, 2010).

34 identifying specific gene interactions and mutations to allow for selective abortion (Ne’eman, 2013).

Advocates of neurodiversity also challenge the medical model’s emphasis on promoting normalization and symptom reduction, including interventions such as Applied Behavioural Analysis (ABA) that aim to eliminate unusual behaviour (Kapp et al., 2013). These interventions are viewed as problematic and insulting because they seek to change the personalities of people with autism and involve suppressing harmless behaviours, such as making limited eye contact or flapping, without accounting for how they function in terms of coping (Broderick & Ne’eman, 2008; Chamak, 2008). The neurodiversity movement frames social, communication, and sensory characteristics associated with autism not only as variations to be embraced, but as biological differences that confer advantages (Brownlow, 2010; Kapp et al., 2013; Runswick-Cole, 2014). Based on these perspectives, its proponents encourage creating support systems and environments that allow individuals with autism to be themselves rather than conforming to conventional expectations (Kapp et al., 2013; Runswick-Cole, 2014).

Like the social model of disability, the neurodiversity movement has been criticized for deemphasizing differences among individuals with ASD in terms of their opinions and experiences with regard to identity, marginalization, and impairment. They argue that it does not account for factors such as gender, sexuality, race, language, and socioeconomic status (Goodley, 2011; Jo et al., 2015; Runswick-Cole, 2014). This is problematic because these factors contribute to marginalization and different experiences of living with ASD such as the timing of diagnoses and access to and experiences of treatment and support (Goodley, 2011; Jo et al., 2015; Runswick-Cole, 2014).

Proponents of the neurodiversity movement view autism as inseparable from identity and individuals with autism as constituting a community that should be treated similarly to identity- based groups centred around categories such as ethnicity, race, culture, sexuality, and gender (Kapp et al., 2013; Ortega, 2009; Runswick-Cole, 2014). However, Jaarsma and Welin (2012) argue that whereas other forms of identity are not intrinsically disabling or associated with general impairment or functioning, autism is characterized by biological and physiological differences that directly impact functioning and are not exclusively caused by discrimination. This is consistent with qualitative studies that include participants with ASD who describe

35 suffering as a result of sensory issues, pragmatic and expressive communication challenges, and who view their autistic traits as interfering with their ability to manage social environments, make friends, be part of groups, and relate to others (Jaarsma & Welin, 2012; Jones, Zahl, & Huws, 2001). Critics argue that by defining autism as a set of differences reflecting normal human variation that constitutes a special culture as opposed to a disorder associated with disadvantages that warrants treatment, it ignores differences between individuals with ASD, complicates being able to claim exceptional status to access supports and benefits, and may prevent people who may need or want care from receiving it (Baker, 2006; Jaarsma & Welin, 2012; Overboe, 1999; Runswick-Cole, 2014). Connectedly, the movement has been criticized for rejecting and excluding individuals with autism who view it as interfering with their lives and who support efforts to prevent and cure it rather than viewing it as a set of differences to be celebrated (Ortega, 2009).

2.6 Summary

This chapter presented a review of the literature regarding friendship, ASD, the experiences of students with ASD in postsecondary environments, as well as discussing the social model of disability, neurodiversity movement, and criticisms of each. Friendship was described as a universal phenomenon characterized by positive interpersonal interactions, minimizing and managing conflict effectively, and high levels of support and intimacy. Variations in friendship based on gender and age were discussed, as well as its practical and emotional functions, including its importance in terms of social development and psychological well-being. Factors that contribute to the complexity of navigating social relationship and developing and maintaining friendships during adolescence and early adulthood were outlined. These include the heightened importance of intimacy, developmental changes associated with cognitive empathy, and communication via social media platforms.

ASD was described as a disorder characterized by social communication challenges, and restricted patterns of behaviours, interests, or activities. These challenges correspond with a tendency for older adolescents and adults with ASD to have limited levels of social engagement. ASD-NoID is characterized by uneven cognitive and adaptive skills profiles, which is associated with less overt symptom presentation, but limited access to support and poor adult outcomes. Individuals with ASD-NoID, particularly females, employ social camouflaging techniques to

36 navigate various social contexts successfully. However, doing so is associated with high levels of anxiety and limited enjoyment of social experiences.

Debates about the extent to which individuals with ASD are motivated to engage socially were outlined. Proponents of the social motivation theory of autism argue that limited motivation is an innate and defining feature of ASD. Contrasting views emphasize the influence of effortful or negative social experiences on motivation and that individuals with ASD describe a desire for social engagement and developing friendships. Specific obstacles to friendship associated with ASD were discussed in detail including inflexibility, conceptual issues related to reciprocity, and difficulty with nonverbal and pragmatic communication. postsecondary education is associated with promoting intellectual and personal development as well as an expectation that students will participate in social activities with their peers and develop meaningful friendships. In addition to promoting student development, social engagement and friendship are important for managing the challenges associated with postsecondary. However, students with ASD struggle to integrate within these environments and describe feeling lonely and isolated, which corresponds with negative outcomes in terms of student satisfaction, program completion, and mental health. Although efforts have been made to increase support for students with ASD, available supports that address social concerns remains limited.

The social model of disability and neurodiversity movement emphasize the fit between individuals and their environment as opposed to individual factors when considering disablement. Both frameworks view individuals with disabilities as experts on their own lives who are capable of making choices about supports based on their needs and priorities. Correspondingly, proponents of both perspectives believe that advocacy and research related to supports and interventions must include and prioritize the voices of individuals with disabilities. The social model of disability and the neurodiversity movement have been criticized for underemphasizing impairment that is not related to environmental factors, assuming the presence of shared identity on the basis of disability, not accounting for factors such as race, ethnicity, gender, and socioeconomic status, and excluding individuals with ASD who support interventions that are considered “normalizing.”

The above frameworks and criticisms of them are relevant to exploring the ways that postsecondary students with ASD understand friendship and enact their social lives. The milieus that social interactions take place within are multifaceted, complex, and interrelated, particularly for individuals with ASD. Socializing occurs in numerous private and public locations, including homes, classrooms, campuses, workplaces, and recreational and support settings. Each of these include social conventions and expectations that are reproduced or contested, communicated explicitly and indirectly, and that result in consequences for adhering to or violating them. Social settings and the conventions that they entail are shaped by organizations, groups, and institutions such as the media, advocacy groups, and governments, that reflect and influence public opinion and policy decisions, which affect resource allocation and the mandates of organizations and programs. The ways in which individuals with ASD navigate these environments shapes their social opportunities, experiences, and the relationships that they develop, as well as influencing how they and others evaluate success, and how satisfied they are with their social lives. The social model and the neurodiversity movement are relevant to exploring the social lives of postsecondary students with ASD because they direct attention to these contexts and the environmental factors that influence them.

Criticisms of the above frameworks are also relevant for examining social engagement and friendship development among postsecondary students with ASD. These criticisms have drawn attention to the ways in which individuals’ access to various social settings and their experiences of them are influenced by gender, age, geographical location, cultural beliefs, socioeconomic status, language, race, and ethnicity. By doing so, they have highlighted a set of tensions between celebrating difference and acknowledging impairment, prioritizing uniqueness and pursuing conventional goals, and establishing a shared identity and recognizing diversity within the ASD population. Accounting for these factors and their impacts on social experiences, understandings, goals, and concerns is consistent with ensuring that supports for postsecondary students with ASD reflect their varying preferences and priorities.

Thus, the social model of disability, neurodiversity movement, and criticisms of both are relevant for exploring how postsecondary students understand friendship and enact their social lives, the challenges that they face, and their experiences and views of supports. Accounting for environmental factors as well as life circumstances and various aspects of identity is consistent with understanding the range of perspectives that exist among postsecondary students with ASD

38 in terms of their goals, preferences, and priorities and the ways that various factors operate to compound or reduce social challenges. This knowledge can contribute to assessing and developing environments and programs that promote social engagement and lead to students with ASD succeeding and having more positive postsecondary experiences.

Chapter 3 Methodology 3.1 Rationale for Qualitative Research

The purpose of this study was to examine how postsecondary students with ASD understand friendship, including their definitions and which aspects they view as important, as well as the nature of their social priorities and activities, their perceived social weaknesses or concerns, and their perceptions of what forms of support would be helpful to them in terms of socializing. The study was informed by theory and research from the fields of autism and friendship, and is influenced by aspects of the social model of disability (Oliver, 1990) and neurodiversity paradigm (Broderick & Ne’eman, 2008; Sinclair, 1993; Singer, 1999).

A qualitative approach was employed in this study because it is suitable for understanding how individuals make meaning regarding their experiences, including the thoughts, feelings, and emotions associated with behaviour or phenomena (Patton, 2002; Strauss & Corbin, 1998). The use of qualitative methodology is premised on the idea that reality is socially constructed, subjective knowledge is valid, and individuals are capable of generating it (Denzin & Lincoln, 2005; Whitmore, 2004). Qualitative research is particularly well suited to understanding the perspectives of individuals with disabilities because it seeks to “give voice” to marginalized persons (Berger & Lorenz, 2015) and is consistent with a social model of disability that views individuals with disabilities as experts on their own lives who have developed a body of knowledge from different standpoints from those without disabilities (Hurlbutt & Chalmers, 2002; Shakespeare & Watson, 2001; Wendell, 1996). In the context of research, it is important to present the experiences of participants with disabilities from their perspective in order to make them more visible, accessible to mainstream groups, and to affect change that will benefit them (Barnes, 1992; Berger & Lorenz, 2015; Redmond, 2005).

The idea of individuals with disabilities having developed a body of knowledge from different standpoints than those without disabilities is especially applicable to studies involving participants with ASD. Along with communication and cognitive processing differences, challenges with understanding the perspectives of others is a defining feature of ASD (Attwood, 2007; Deruelle, Rondan, Gepner, & Fagot, 2006; Sachse et al., 2013). The corollary is that

39 40 individuals with ASD may have unconventional understandings, experiences, and perspectives in many areas, including with regard to friendship and social engagement. Consequently, it is important to examine their social lives and understandings from their perspective in order for the research to be valid (Roller & Lavrakas, 2015).

3.2 Rationale for a Modified Grounded Theory Approach

This study adheres to the principles and utilizes a majority of the methods of a modified grounded theory approach (Cutliffe, 2005). Grounded theory methodology is employed to conceptualize phenomena based on the understandings that participants have and the meanings that they assign to them without attempting to verify or disprove preconceived ideas (Birks & Mills, 2015; Charmaz, 2006; Corbin & Strauss, 2008; Glaser & Strauss, 1967; Mills, Bonner, & Francis, 2006; Morse, 2001). Although there has been considerable debate about approaches to the methodology, a number of essential grounded theory methods have been identified. These include initial coding and categorization of data, concurrent data collection and analysis, writing memos, theoretical sampling, constant comparison within and between categories, theoretical sensitivity, intermediate coding, identifying a core category, and advanced coding and theoretical integration (Birks & Mills, 2015).

This study does not meet the formal criteria of a traditional grounded theory study because coding is viewed as an essential component of concurrent data collection and analysis, and I did not engage in the process of coding until all of the interviews were completed (Birks & Mills, 2015; Cutliffe, 2005; Mills et al., 2006). This decision did not necessarily prevent the study from being considered a grounded theory study. I was open to and planned to conduct follow-up interviews until no new concepts arose. However, after coding the interviews and consulting with members of my committee, I determined that additional interviews were not necessary in terms of conceptualization, and not desirable for practical reasons, including challenges with recruiting participants and the time and expense associated with conducting them. After considerable reflection, I felt that my decision to complete the interviews before coding was consistent with staying true to the principles of authenticity and avoiding bias that I value, and ultimately more important than meeting the criteria of being a grounded theory study. However,

41 describing and evaluating this study in relation to grounded theory is appropriate because it was designed and has proceeded based on most of its principles and methods.

Adherents of grounded theory acknowledge that researchers begin the process of conducting studies with their own life experiences, knowledge of relevant literature, and exposure to theories. However, there are differing epistemological perspectives among proponents of grounded theory that relate to the role of the researcher, as well as practical considerations such as the topic being studied and academic and funding requirements (G. Allan, 2003; Birks & Mills, 2015; Charmaz, 2006; Cutliffe, 2005; Glaser & Strauss, 1967; Mills et al., 2006).

Traditional grounded theory is based on a critical realist orientation that views data as reflecting an objective reality and as independent of researchers and participants (Birks & Mills, 2005; Mills et al., 2006). In order to ensure that theories and questions are derived from the data as opposed to forcing pre-existing ideas and biases on it, researchers are required to approach studies with a neutral stance characterized by a sense of “abstract wonderment” about the topic or processes under consideration (Cutcliffe, 2005; Glaser & Holton, 2004; Mills et al., 2006). This includes beginning studies without establishing a defined research question or conducting a literature review (Braganza, Akesson, & Rothwell, 2017; Glaser, 1992).

In contrast with the traditional approach, modified grounded theory is based on a relativist stance that views reality as being enacted within specific contexts and understood from multiple perspectives that need to be taken into account when developing, identifying, and refining theories (Mills et al., 2006; Strauss & Corbin, 1994). While proponents of modified grounded theory emphasize the importance of maintaining objectivity in relation to participants and data, they assert that it is not possible to be entirely unbiased and that researchers necessarily play a central role by interpreting the perspectives they identify as part of the processes of theoretical integration and conceptualization (Mills et al., 2006; Strauss & Corbin, 1998). In addition, evolved grounded theorists view pre-existing knowledge and the use of existing literature as acceptable and useful resources for theorizing as opposed to representing a threat to researchers’ sensitivity to the nuances and complexities of participants’ statements (Mills et al., 2006; Strauss & Corbin, 1998).

Constructivist grounded theory is premised on the assumption that knowledge is subjective, context dependent, and that realities are socially constructed through interactive processes

(Charmaz, 2000; Mills et al., 2006). While proponents of constructivist grounded theory emphasize the importance of participants’ voices being central, researchers are viewed as co- constructors of experience and meaning by virtue of interacting with participants, interpreting their meanings, and shaping their descriptions into theoretical conceptualizations (Charmaz, 1995; Mills et al., 2006)

With the exception of concurrent data collection and analysis, this study meets the criteria of a constructivist, modified approach to grounded theory. A modified approach utilizes grounded theory methods but accounts for the fact that researchers generally possess knowledge and experience that inform the research process, and that they must meet the demands of thesis committees, ethics review boards, and funders, which often include developing specific research questions and conducting literature reviews (Cutciffe, 2005).

My personal beliefs, academic requirements, and professional experience made a neutral approach to this study neither possible nor desirable. First, I was required to have a specific research question and complete a literature review as part of my dissertation and ethics proposals. Second, consistent with constructivist perspectives, I do not believe that it is possible for one’s experiences, beliefs, thoughts, ideas, and feelings to not influence the questions that they ask and their interpretations. Connectedly, I believe that acknowledging biases, opinions, and influences allows for assessing whether findings are impacted by them, and is more consistent with authenticity than claiming to be objective and value free. Third, I possess considerable knowledge about the specific topic as a result of my academic and professional experience.

3.3 Reflections on My Background and Potential Biases

Based on the understanding that researchers play a central role in terms of interpreting and conceptualizing participants’ perspectives, engaging in reflexive processes is a key component of conducting qualitative research that adheres to the principles of constructivist grounded theory (Charmaz, 2006). As a result, researchers are responsible for becoming aware of their presuppositions and reflecting on how they affect their interpretations in order to prevent preconceived ideas from inappropriately shaping the research (Charmaz, 2006; Roller & Lavrakas, 2015; Strauss & Corbin, 1998).

Prior to conducting interviews, I engaged in a process of written reflection to capture my thoughts and opinions about ASD, friendship, social engagement, the social model of disability and the neurodiversity movement. This is consistent with McCracken’s (1988) description of a cultural review, which is completed to identify “familiar expectations” in order to make both consistent and contrasting perspectives more visible to the researcher. The themes that were identified by engaging in this process are discussed below.

When I proposed this study, I had been working with children, adolescents, and adults with ASD for 15 years in recreational, academic, and clinical settings. A substantial portion of my work involved identifying and addressing social issues and promoting social engagement, including exploring understandings and enactment of friendship. Based on my work experience and the reading that I did as part of my course work and the process of writing my thesis proposal, I entered the study with a clearly defined set of opinions and beliefs about ASD, social engagement, and social support. I expected that participants’ understandings of friendships and their social lives, goals, challenges, and preferences would vary based on factors including their postsecondary environments, gender, parental influence, previous social experiences, geographical location, types of interests, history of social interventions, and mental health considerations.

I also began the research with the opinion that individuals with ASD deserve to have friends and participate in enjoyable activities, understand and relate to each other better than those without ASD understand them, and that similarities in terms of the nature and intensity of interests, shared communication styles, and shared identity can provide a foundation for social connection and friendship. I felt that demonstrating unconventional social preferences and communicative practices could be viewed as reflecting difference as opposed to reduced competence, and that what people with ASD want and value in terms of friendship may be different from what professionals think is best. In addition, I believed that it is beneficial to create environments that explicitly accept some of the idiosyncratic behaviours associated with ASD because social difficulties often reflect a lack of fit to a greater extent than specific behaviours being intrinsically problematic. These views are consistent with my longstanding belief that by adulthood, limited social experience often represents a more significant obstacle to social engagement and friendship than social skills deficits.

My views about the social model of disability and the neurodiversity movement featured prominently in my reflective writing. I established that I support many of the principles of both, but also hold a number of critical views about them. I agree that impairment is often a function of the fit between individuals and their environments, that people with disabilities are experts on their own lives, and that their voices should be central in any discussions involving matters that affect them. Based on my direct experiences and what I had read, I also viewed many aspects of ASD as differences rather than deficits. However, I felt that some proponents of the social model of disability assume that disability is necessarily central to individuals’ identity and that the neurodiversity movement does not sufficiently acknowledge diversity within the ASD population. I had learned that there is considerable variation in how individuals with ASD view their diagnosis, how it affects them, how they view and relate to others with and without it, and their goals and perspectives related to societal expectations, social interactions, and relationships. Although I am critical of many approaches to social skills development and am opposed to approaches that uncritically prioritize conformity, I viewed seeking to integrate into conventional contexts and celebrating differences as equally valid. I felt that proponents of the neurodiversity perspective often did not acknowledge that many people with ASD want to de-emphasize their differences and participate in various contexts in conventional ways for reasons that are not limited to avoiding social sanctions.

One of the most useful outcomes of my reflective process was identifying that I felt a degree of defensiveness about providing professional support to individuals with ASD despite not having ASD myself. This work has been central to my identity and a source of pride. Some proponents of the social model of disability and the neurodiversity movement are understandably critical about the appropriateness and effectiveness of people without a particular disability supporting people with it. While acknowledging that individuals are experts on their own lives, I do not believe that having ASD necessarily makes an individual knowledgeable about appropriate supports for others. My opinion was that there is no obvious reason for individuals whose identity is not centred around ASD to be focused on ASD or many of the issues associated with it beyond its impacts on them unless it is a topic of interest personally or professionally. Consequently, I believed that while it is necessary to engage with and follow the lead of people with ASD in order to be knowledgeable and equipped to provide effective support, it is possible for people without ASD, including me, to do so.

I described approaching this study with a combination of confidence and humility as well as genuine, but not abstract, wonderment. I felt that I could relate to individuals with ASD more than most, but recognized that I did not have ASD and that my role as a researcher was to listen to and learn from the experiences and perspectives of participants. I felt confident that my skills and experience would allow me to ask appropriate questions, listen attentively to and make sense of participants’ responses, and to present their perspectives accurately and coherently. Although I recognized that I was entering the study with a set of defined opinions and some expectations about what participants might express, I expected the unexpected and imagined that some of my perspectives would change based on my interactions with participants. My confidence was reinforced by my belief that I did not have any preferences about what the findings of the study would be. I felt that the perspectives, goals, and challenges of students with ASD with regard to friendship and social engagement were not well understood and that this study could contribute to addressing this. Consequently, my hope was that the perspectives presented would help people in positions to create or direct students to social contexts, programs, and services to do so as effectively as possible in order to contribute to students’ subjective well-being.

I believe that the process of examining my beliefs and opinions prior to conducting the interviews contributed to me constantly questioning whether my interpretations were true to participants’ accounts as opposed to my starting assumptions. I was also fortunate to have had opportunities to discuss my thinking with members of my committee, work colleagues, and some of my clients and students with ASD prior to commencing interviews, in between interviews, and during the data analysis process. These practices have facilitated my efforts to explore the topics of the study with an open mind.

3.4 The Interview Protocol

As described earlier, qualitative approaches are highly appropriate for understanding individuals’ thoughts and feeling regarding phenomena. Conducting in-depth interviews can be valuable because they are guided by the research area, but promote participants sharing their perceptions, opinions, and experiences in their own words (Minichiello, Aroni, & Hays, 2008). Semi- structured interviews in particular allow for exploring themes or issues as they arise and in depth, and are conducive to participants focusing on issues that are meaningful to them (Barbour, 2000). This is particularly appropriate for accurately representing the views of individuals with

ASD because it allows interviewers to seek immediate clarification if they are concerned about possible misunderstandings related to expressive communication differences and to confirm that they understand participants’ meaning in the event that unconventional understandings or perspectives are expressed (Cridland, Jones, Caputi, & Magee, 2015).

The interview protocol was developed based on the background research that I had completed as well as my professional experience with postsecondary students and others with ASD (see Appendix B). Members of my thesis committee also provided input about the content and wording of questions. The protocol began with preliminary questions asking participants if they had friends and to describe them, how they met, the nature of the activities that they did together, what being friends with someone meant to them, and the type of person that they wanted as a friend. Preliminary questions also included asking if participants had a boyfriend or girlfriend and, if so, to describe them, how they met, and how much time they spent together.

I began the first interview by asking the participant if she had friends. When reviewing the recording and transcript, I realized that she responded by describing her current social life, including her friends from home and school, how often she saw them, how they met, and what they did together. I decided to begin the remaining interviews with an open-ended question asking participants to describe their current social lives. I felt that this would lead to gathering background information while increasing the likelihood that their responses would reflect what they viewed as most important while safeguarding against inadvertently structuring the interview in a way that reflected my interests, assumptions, or priorities. I also thought that I should take care to avoid assuming that participants had friends, which could lead to embarrassment or affect their answers based on their possible perceptions of what I was expecting. This was the only change to the structured questions that I made in advance of subsequent interviews.

The next section of the protocol included four key questions that focused on participants’ definitions of friendship, the characteristics of a friend that they viewed as important, concerns about their social lives, and what they viewed as helpful in terms of making friends (see Table 1). Probe questions were included to prompt clarification and elicit elaboration and detail. These were developed in advance, spontaneously during interviews, and after listening to the recordings and reviewing transcripts of prior interviews.

Table 1 Key Interview Questions

Key Question Preamble Question

1 Friendship can mean different things to different How do you define the term friendship? people. This can include how they define the term friendship. 2 People can have different ideas of what is In your opinion, what are the most important in a friend or in a friendship. important characteristics of friendship? 3 Some people with Asperger’s syndrome or autism What, if any, concerns do you have about have trouble in social situations and trouble your social life? making friends. Do you have any social concerns about friendship or social weaknesses or worries? 4 Some people with Asperger’s syndrome or autism What, if anything, do you think would want help meeting people or knowing how to act help you in terms of making friends? in social situations, or why people act the way they do in social situations.

The interview protocol served as both a guide to follow and a menu to choose from to effectively elicit participants’ experiences and perspectives. The order in which key questions were asked as well as the timing and specific probe questions selected varied between interviews. These variations, as well as attempting to devise open-ended questions, reflect my efforts to ensure that I did not lead participants or impose a framework on the interview that may have inadvertently impacted how they expressed themselves (see Charmaz, 2006).

The following example illustrates the types of questions included in the protocol. Both the preamble and initial question itself were designed to invite a subjective response:

“People can have different ideas of what is important in a friend or in a friendship. In your opinion, what are the most important characteristics of friendship?”

The following probes were sometimes used to elicit details about a participant’s perspectives and actions. They could also be used to confirm that their response applies to them if they provide a response that does not clearly refer to her- or himself:

“What are the most important characteristics of a friend to you?”

“What do you look for in a friend?”

“What is most important for you in a friendship?”

If a participant identified that they have a friend or friends, the following probes could also be used to elicit details about their perspectives and actions:

“What makes (name) a friend?”

“What do you like about them?”

“What kinds of things do you do together?”

“How much time do you spend with other?”

“How often do you see each other?”

“How much time do you spend communicating with each other (including in person, on the phone, by text, Facebook, online games, IM, email etc.)?”

“How often do you communicate with each other?”

“What do you try to do as a friend?”

The following probe could be used to explore a participant’s perspectives about others’ expectations regarding the enactment of friendship:

“What things do you think other people expect of you as a friend?”

The key questions and probes described above were designed to elicit rich, detailed responses that capture the complexity of participants’ understandings, perspectives, intentions, motivations, and experiences in their own words (Marx, 2008). The interview protocol was developed based on the principles of constructivist modified grounded theory. Consequently, it is important to acknowledge that the questions it contains reflect some of the my beliefs and expectations identified earlier, including factors that I anticipated could be important for understanding participants’ perspectives. However, the range and wording of questions reflect my attempts to balance the knowledge and opinions that I had about the topic with the goal of being as open minded and neutral as possible.

49 3.5 Participants

My original aim was to recruit 12 participants with the possibility of recruiting up to eight additional participants if emerging themes warranted further exploration (see Creswell, 2008). I recognized that recruiting participants could be challenging because the number of postsecondary students with ASD in Ontario is relatively small. However, my goal was to account for as much diversity as possible within the constraints of a small sample. I felt that it was important for participants to be divided as evenly as possible between college and university students and that students from smaller institutions (10,000 students or fewer) be included. I also attempted to account for the possibility that some individuals with ASD may select smaller institutions or choose an institution based on a desire to remain at home because of factors such as social challenges and sensory issues. My aim was to increase the likelihood of including these kinds of considerations and their influence on responses by ensuring that the sample was drawn from a variety of institutions. Although the male-to-female ratio in the ASD population is 4:1 (Lyall et al., 2017; Newschaffer et al., 2007), there are considerable differences between men and women with ASD in terms of their social preferences and functioning (Attwood, 2006b). In order to ensure that the understandings of females with ASD were represented, my aim was to include at least three females.

The recruitment process began in the fall of 2013, immediately after the study was approved by the University of Toronto Research Ethics Board. An email message was sent to the director of the office for students with disabilities at all 24 accredited public colleges and 19 of the 20 accredited public universities in Ontario (see Appendix C). I did not recruit participants from the University of Toronto because I was employed there as a disability counsellor at the time. This ensured that there was no possibility of a concurrent service delivery role with prospective participants, which may have created a potential conflict of interest with regard to power differential arising from my position. Recruiting through each institution’s office for students with disabilities ensured that respondents had a diagnosis of ASD from a relevant professional (e.g., Clinical Psychologist, Psychiatrist, Pediatrician) because registration is contingent on documentation from these sources according to the Ministry of Training, Colleges, Universities (MTCU). Each director was asked to distribute hard copies of the recruitment flyer (see Appendix D) and to send emails with identical information, directly or via disability counsellors, to students who were registered with their office and who had a diagnosis of ASD (including

“autism,” “autism spectrum disorder,” and “Asperger’s syndrome”). The recruitment flyer included the general purpose of the research, benefits of the study, information about where the interviews would take place, and my contact information. Each of the directors of the college offices for students with disabilities who responded to the recruitment message requested that an Ontario Multi-Site Research Ethics Board application be completed.

Eighteen students responded to express interest in participating, including ten females and eight males7 from three universities and four colleges in six cities. They were each sent an email with a form requesting background information, including the name of the institution that they were attending, confirmation that they were 18 years of age or older, their program, year of study, gender, and hometown. It also included a section asking if they were willing to be contacted for an interview, and if so, for their contact information (see Appendices E, F, and G for copies of the email text and information forms).

Ten participants (see Table 2) were selected for interviews based on the goal of obtaining a diverse sample and the order in which their responses were received. They were drawn from seven institutions and were evenly divided by gender and institution type. Although the number of schools represented was limited, there was considerable diversity in terms of participants’ age, area of study, school size and location, and the size of their hometown. The eight students who were not selected were thanked for their interest, informed that they were not selected because the limit to the number of participants had been reached, that there was a possibility of additional follow-up interviews, and asked if they were willing to be contacted if additional interviews were required (see Appendix H).

7 The gender section of the information forms included the options of “Female,” Male,” “Transgender,” and “Prefer not to respond.” All respondents selected either “Female” or “Male.” Although not possible to confirm because individuals’ gender identity may differ from the sex that they were assigned at birth, students’ responses are consistent with them being cisgendered (see Appendices F and G).

Table 2 Study Participants

Participant Gender Age School Type School Size* Area of Study Hometown Size**

Jodie F 18 College Large Art Small Sarah F 26 University Small Teacher Certification Medium Jake M 26 College Large Broadcasting and Film Large Mary F 20 College Large Law Clerk Large Ellen F 25 University Medium Music Medium Math Shawn M 19 University Medium Public Affairs and Medium Policy Management Alan M 19 University Medium Earth Sciences Rural Samuel M 34 College Small Network Technician Medium Gavin M 20 College Large Computer Systems Medium Technology Victoria F 18 University Large Business Technology Large Management

Note: *Small = fewer than 10,000 students; Medium = 10,000-30,000 students; Large = greater than 30,000 students. **Rural = fewer than 1,000 residents; Small Population Centre = 1,000–29,999 residents; Medium Population Centre = 30,000–99,999 residents; Large Population Centre = greater than 1,000,000 residents. Based on Statistics Canada (2011) census definitions.

In accordance with the principles of modified grounded theory, my role as a researcher is to analyze participants’ statements to identify underlying concepts, patterns, meanings, and relationships (Strauss & Corbin, 1998). Consequently, participants’ identities are subsumed into the sample as a whole and de-emphasized in relation to the statements that they made during our interviews. However, a description of each participant is included below in order to provide context for participants’ statements and the themes, concepts, categories, and theory derived from them. In addition, these profiles are intended to recognize the uniqueness of each person who generously shared personal, and often sensitive, aspects of their lives with me, and to gratefully acknowledge their indispensable roles in promoting understanding. The names of all participants have been changed in order to respect their privacy.

Jodie

Jodie was in her first-year of an art foundations college program and lived on campus at the time of our interview. She described having a wide range of interests including animation and

52 storytelling. She stated that she was nervous during the interview, but readily responded to questions, volunteered her opinions, and openly discussed areas of concern as well as difficult experiences. She was enthusiastic about her time at college because of the diversity of people who she met, the topics that she was able to discuss with them, and the supportiveness of faculty and staff. She contrasted this with “small-town” issues and earlier experiences of bullying, isolation, unsupportive teachers and principals, and ineffective supports with regard to social issues. Jodie was is in regular contact with friends from home and actively engaged with friends from her residence who she felt connected to intellectually and emotionally. Although she discussed being uncomfortable in many social situations, she took pride in her maturity, intelligence, and efforts to be a good friend.

Sarah

Sarah was enrolled in a one-year teacher certification program and was living independently in off-campus housing at the time of our interview. She had previously completed a child and youth worker diploma as well as graduating with a degree in French and sociology from another university. Sarah had a group of close friends from home who she met while teaching martial arts and was in regular contact with. She did not socialize with peers from her university outside of class because of the stress of managing sensory issues and social dynamics. Sarah presented as serious, mature, self-aware, and motivated to be successful academically, socially, and professionally. She expressed frustration about ineffective social skills supports and being in groups with people with ASD who she viewed as immature and unmotivated. Although she described having difficulty perceiving and understanding some aspects of social dynamics, she shared a number of sophisticated observations about group dynamics, gender differences in socialization, and diversity among people with ASD.

Jake

Jake was in his third year of a broadcasting and film diploma program and lived with his parents at the time of our interview. He had previously completed a media certificate program at another college. Jake was personable, engaged, and willing to answer questions. However, it appeared to be a challenging experience for him emotionally and because of speech dysfluency that made completing sentences effortful. He initially replied to a number of questions by saying “I don’t

53 know” and provided brief responses that lacked detail. Despite these challenges, with encouragement he was able to answer and elaborate when asked clarifying questions. Jake described having a best friend and two other friends who he had known since high school. He played tennis, video games, board games, and watched movies with them. He became visibly upset when discussing his best friend because they were experiencing mental health issues and had not been in contact with each other for a long period of time. He expressed concern about the future of their friendship and his social life in general. He explained that he rarely saw his other friends without his best friend, his involvement with peers from his college was limited, and that he felt uncomfortable in social situations because he did not know what to talk about. Jake recalled being in a community based program for children with ASD, but could not remember what type of program it was. He also participated in a social group for adults with ASD but felt uncomfortable, had difficulty speaking with the other members, and stopped attending. He had been meeting with a counsellor at his college, but was not receiving support that was specific to ASD.

Mary

Mary was in her second year of a law clerk diploma program at the time of our interview and lived at home with her mother. She identified her Christian faith as central to her life and explained that it informed her ideas about friendship and how to treat people. She had a best friend, a group of close friends, and a boyfriend, all of whom she met at a summer camp for children with ASD when she was 12 years old. Mary credited her mother’s efforts and her camp experience for helping her to manage being in public, socialize successfully, and prioritize her relationships. She described spending her time completing schoolwork, playing computer games, and seeing her best friend each weekend. She explained that she rarely saw her other friends or boyfriend because they lived in different cities, but was in regular contact with them online. She described being friendly with her classmates but did not socialize with them outside of class. Mary expressed interest in meeting more people and working on becoming more outgoing, but planned to wait until she was finished school to pursue these goals. She described being happy with her social life, grateful for her friends, and optimistic about her future.

54 Ellen

Ellen was in her seventh year of university and lived at home with her parents at the time of our interview. She was completing undergraduate degrees in music and math concurrently. Ellen presented as engaging, enthusiastic, confident, thoughtful, and aware of her strengths, areas of weakness, and what she needed in order to address them effectively. She received considerable support from her parents around socializing, communication, and maintaining friendships throughout her childhood and as an adult. In addition, she readily accepted help from counsellors, a professor, and a peer mentor at her university in order to pursue her social goals. Ellen was eager to discuss her social life and perspectives, and provided lengthy responses to questions that often included considerable background information. She took pride in her academic achievements, proficiency playing clarinet and knowledge of musical theory, as well as the progress that she was making in terms of her social skills. She had a best friend from childhood who she saw regularly, two friends who she met at university, and described maintaining a high level of social engagement on and off campus. She had also developed an interest in dating and was optimistic about developing a relationship with a student who she met at university.

Shawn

Shawn was in his second year of a public affairs and policy management degree program and was living at home with his parents at the time of our interview. He presented as polite, personable, and seemed comfortable during the interview. However, he seemed to have difficulty clarifying his meaning when responding to conceptual questions and providing details and examples when describing his experiences and opinions. Shawn’s social life was limited to spending time with other students in his department’s computer lab and participating in a campus group that was part of an international organization focused on youth leadership development. He was working on initiating conversations and was drawn to the group because its mandate included a focus on self-improvement. He explained that when he was not on campus he preferred to explore the city or relax at home on his own. The limited nature of his social life was consistent with the experiences and preferences that he had during his childhood and throughout high school. Shawn described receiving considerable support to address social and

55 communication challenges throughout his childhood and adolescence from his parents, school staff, and by participating in social skills groups in his community. He felt that he no longer required specialized help as a result of these experiences.

Alan

Alan was in his first year of a university paleontology program and living in residence at the time of our interview. He presented as soft spoken and provided thoughtful and detailed descriptions of his experiences, feelings, and opinions. Alan expressed feelings of frustration, loneliness, and longing for interaction and emotional connection with others. He discussed having two friends from childhood who he was no longer in contact with, not engaging with peers from his school, feeling uncomfortable in most social situations, and having difficulty relating to others. Alan was struggling to complete his work at university. During member checking, he explained that he had become severely depressed, failed most of his courses, withdrawn from the university, and had returned home to his small rural community to live with his parents. He also described making efforts to connect with others with ASD online, and hoped to develop social and advocacy groups in his area. He expressed strong opinions that were consistent with a neurodiversity perspective including viewing autism as a cultural difference, rejecting pressure to conform to “neurotypical extrovert” ways of meeting people, and seeking to create spaces that were not dominated by parents or experts.

Samuel

Samuel was in his first year of a network technician diploma program and lived at home with his parents at the time of our interview. Although he was 34 years old, his appearance, interests, and demeanour made him seem much younger. He explained that he had attempted and withdrawn from a number of college programs in the past and was attending because he was bored. His main interests included board games, card games, and video games, which he played with friends and at board game cafés. Samuel described making friends on campus that he saw regularly and having had numerous friends and acquaintances throughout his life that he was not in regular contact with. Although he presented as confident, easygoing, and socially engaged, he described being severely bullied as a child, frustrated about his limited achievements in comparison to younger people who he met, feelings of loneliness, and expressed that he wanted to meet more

56 people and participate in more social activities. He had participated in a social skills program at his college with the hope that it would help him to meet a girlfriend, but felt that it did not meet his needs. Samuel demonstrated dysfluent speech, had difficulty remembering details, and made a number of contradictory statements. Although communication issues were likely a contributing factor, these inconsistencies seemed to reflect tension between the positive outlook that he espoused and some of his underlying feelings about his experiences that emerged throughout the interview.

Gavin

Gavin was in his third year of a computer systems technology diploma program at the time of our interview. He was living at home with his parents when we met, but lived in residence during his first year. He was animated throughout the interview, enthusiastic about his social life and interests, and appreciative of his friends. He was in regular contact with friends from the high school that he had attended, saw them in person when possible, and communicated with them online when he was unable to see them. He also had a girlfriend, who he met during his first year of university, and spent time with each weekend. He described connecting with his friends and meeting new people because of his various musical interests, which included playing and listening to music, going to concerts, and technical aspects of instruments, effects, and sound systems. Gavin took pride in his qualities as a friend, his efforts to please his friends, and his social successes, including being able to meet new people at events. He explained that he was diagnosed with ASD when he was a young child, but his parents only told him about the diagnosis when he was 13 because he was experiencing sensory issues. He received support from staff at his university to address anxiety and academic issues and felt that he did not require help with regard to social issues or ASD specifically.

Victoria

Victoria was in her second year of a university business technology management program and lived at home with her mother at the time of our interview. She presented as defensive and initially provided short answers, appeared impatient, and spoke with an aggressive tone. However, she willingly answered each question and began to elaborate and volunteer her opinions with less probing as the interview progressed. Victoria described a challenging

57 childhood that included living in community housing with a foster family in a “ghetto area,” witnessing violence, and feeling isolated during her school years. She received academic support when she was younger, but was critical about not receiving help with social skills and about a teacher who disclosed her diagnosis to her classmates. Victoria demonstrated a combination of confidence, self-consciousness, and distrust that related to her early experiences. She did not speak with her peers at university, and with the exception of her friends, viewed others as untrustworthy and hypocritical. She had three close friends who she met at the beginning of high school and who she was in regular contact with. She emphasized being a “normal girl,” going to clubs and house parties, and spoke about her friends’ popularity and attractiveness. She also expressed pride about being at university, holding a job, her appearance, and being more successful than most of her peers from home. However, she described being scared of interacting with others, frustrated about not having a girlfriend, and concerned about privacy, how she would be viewed by others if they were aware of her diagnosis, and how her social challenges would affect her ability to succeed professionally.

In summary, the 10 postsecondary students in this study include five female and five male participants ranging in age from 18 to 34. The size of their hometowns ranged from a small rural area to large cities. They were attending seven institutions ranging in size from fewer than 10,000 to more than 30,000 students in six cities across Ontario. One participant lived independently, two lived in residence, and seven lived with their parents. The profiles above reflect considerable variation in terms of their school and social experiences, the supports that they received prior to and during postsecondary, as well as diverse areas of study, interests, preferences, goals, concerns, and levels of satisfaction.

3.6 Data Collection Procedures

As outlined in the recruitment flyer, participants were able to choose the location for their interview and were offered the option of completing them in person or by telephone. These options were provided to ensure that they were as comfortable as possible based on the understanding that many individuals with ASD have difficulty interpreting nonverbal aspects of communication and experience anxiety in new situations (Barnhill, 2007; Frith, 2004). The interviews were conducted between November 2013 and August 2014 and each student chose to meet in person. Seven of the interviews took place in private rooms and quiet areas on

58 participants’ campuses, including a library, cafeterias, a classroom, a student services building, and an office for students with disabilities. Two interviews took place in my private office in Toronto and one was conducted in the private office of one of my colleagues who was located in a different city.

Participants were sent a consent form by email that included a description of the study, risks and benefits, and information about confidentiality approximately one week prior to their interview (see Appendix I). The consent form was reviewed and participants were paid $30 immediately prior to each interview. Participants were asked to confirm that they understood each section and that they agreed to the interview being recorded. All ten students met with me at the scheduled time and agreed to participate. No participants asked to terminate the interview, exclude any of their responses, or for the recorder to be turned off. The interviews were an average of 80 minutes in length and ranged from 55 to 123 minutes. Each interview was digitally recorded and transcribed professionally shortly after it was completed.

I was aware that it was likely for some participants to have expressive communication challenges (Shriberg et al., 2001), feel uncomfortable because of the interaction itself, or experience intense emotions when discussing their social experiences. As a result, I took additional steps prior to and during interviews to increase their comfort level. When reviewing the consent form, I stressed that neither they nor their responses would be judged or evaluated and that it was acceptable for them to choose to not answer specific questions. I also emphasized that they might feel distress when discussing their experiences and that they were welcome to discuss any feelings that arose. I reiterated one or more of these points during the course of a majority of interviews.

I was careful to ensure that participants had a considerable amount of time to respond to questions, frequently asked them to confirm and clarify their answers, and avoided discussing any of my interpretations out loud. These considerations and practices were based on the anticipated challenges described above and my commitment to avoid attempting to confirm any expectations that I had developed based on my previous professional and academic experiences.

A specific expressive communication challenge that is important to consider when interviewing individuals with ASD is their tendency to struggle with open-ended questions (Harrington, Foster, Rodger, & Ashburner, 2014; Preece, 2002). Responding to these types of questions

59 involves competition between local- and global-level processing, which individuals with ASD often struggle with because of a processing bias favouring detail-focused information over global information or gist (Happé & Frith, 2006). I was careful to not assume that any individual participant would experience difficulty in this area and introduced topics with broad, open-ended questions. However, some participants indicated that they did not know how to answer or provided brief responses that lacked detail. When a participant appeared to be having difficulty responding, I reworded and repeated questions as well as asking numerous probe questions. I also related questions to specific friends, contexts, and time periods that they discussed when describing their social lives and histories. In one case, a participant was unable to respond when I asked him to identify his definition of friendship. Based on his inability to answer the questions, his visible unease, and his statement that he generally relied on dictionaries for defining words, I adjusted by finding a definition in an online dictionary and using it as a basis for discussing his understandings.

In contrast with students who had difficulty generating responses, I observed that some participants’ responses were lengthy, tangential, and included both conceptual components and numerous details. For example, asking participants to define the term friendship or to describe their social life led to responses that included aspects of their definitions, their experiences in elementary and secondary school, descriptions of their friends from childhood, their current social activities and relationships, and areas of frustration. My interpretation was that participants who provided extremely lengthy responses needed to think out loud in order to develop their answers because the process of responding to open-ended questions was effortful.

Although it was difficult to be attentive to participants’ responses while simultaneously keeping different types of questions in mind, I was mindful to avoid interrupting or redirecting them. This approach reduced the risk of inadvertently limiting participants’ statements if they contrasted with my pre-existing assumptions. In addition, despite the challenges in terms of coherence and subsequent challenges in terms of data analysis, participants’ tangential answers were typically either relevant to the initial research questions or contributed to exploring related themes or topics. As a result, I spent considerable amounts of time between each interview reviewing the protocol and identifying follow-up questions that I had generated spontaneously. This contributed to my ability to adapt flexibly and effectively in subsequent interviews.

Despite the challenges described above, participants willingly answered all of my questions and shared details about their childhood, current social lives, areas of difficulty, strengths, as well as ideas about what would help them and others with ASD. I believe that my professional experience, knowledge about ASD, and related expectations helped me to avoid interjecting when participants’ responses were lengthy and to anticipate and adapt quickly, calmly, and confidently when participants were having difficulty generating answers. This contributed to the richness of their accounts, and in turn, is consistent with enhancing the depth of my analysis.

3.7 Methods Used to Ensure Trustworthiness

According to Y. S. Lincoln and Guba (1985), the degree to which a qualitative study is worthy of attention is a function of trustworthiness, which includes four criteria. These include credibility, transferability, dependability, and confirmability. Each of these is discussed below.

3.7.1 Credibility

Credibility refers to accurately representing data drawn from participants and reasonably presenting the phenomena (Y. S. Lincoln & Guba, 1985; Shenton, 2004). Practices that contribute to credibility include adopting widely accepted research methods, subjecting the research project to scrutiny, developing an in-depth understanding of the phenomena through prolonged engagement, avoiding researcher bias in the selection of participants, ensuring that multiple perspectives are included, employing tactics to promote honesty in informants, ensuring that participants’ intended meanings are understood correctly, and providing enough detail to allow readers to evaluate the extent to which the researcher’s findings follow from the data (Creswell, 2003; Y. S. Lincoln & Guba, 1985; Shenton, 2004).

Interview designs are well established in qualitative research and by employing practices associated with a modified grounded theory approach to obtain and analyze the data, this study follows a recognized set of principles and methods. The methods employed include debriefing and self-reflection, which are geared toward scrutinizing the research. As described previously, I engaged in numerous reflexive practices and made interview transcripts, codes, and memos available to members of my committee. These materials provided a basis for debriefing with them on an ongoing basis. In addition, the data analysis section of the study includes thick

61 description, including verbatim quotes to illustrate thematic findings, which is consistent with allowing readers to scrutinize my understandings and analysis.

To ensure that my immediate understandings of participants’ statements were accurate, I incorporated summaries, paraphrasing, and requested clarification during the course of each interview. The study also included member checking, which consisted of sending each participant a written summary and copy of the interview transcript and inviting them to correct anything that they felt was misunderstood and to add to their responses if they chose to (see Appendix J).

I attempted to include diverse perspectives by recruiting participants from a range of large and small colleges and universities from across Ontario, as well as accounting for gender and the size of participants’ hometowns. These recruitment considerations are also consistent with the idea of triangulation, which involves examining information from different sources to build a coherent justification for themes (Creswell, 2003). By recruiting students through offices for students with disabilities, selection bias was limited because I did not know participants in advance. In addition, I encouraged participants to provide truthful answers by involving only willing participants, clarifying that there were no right or wrong answers to questions, clearly identifying the right to withdraw from participating at any time without negative consequences, and emphasizing my independent status as a researcher.

For practical reasons, including, time, distance, and expense, I did not acquaint myself with participants prior to the interviews or immerse myself in the institutions that they attended. However, I began the study with experience working privately with adults with ASD as an academic and life skills coach as well as a disability counsellor at a university, which included developing and facilitating a social group for students with ASD. As a result, I had been exposed to some students’ understandings, experiences and challenges regarding social interactions and friendships. Connectedly, I have included relevant information about my professional background in this chapter based on the idea that the credibility of a study is linked with the credibility of the researcher (Patton, 1990).

62 3.7.2 Transferability

Transferability involves providing enough detail and information for future researchers to evaluate whether or not the findings can be applied beyond the study itself (Y. S. Lincoln & Guba, 1985; Shenton, 2004). As is often the case with qualitative research, the sample of participants within my study is small. Consequently, my findings cannot be generalized to a wide population since there are many individual and contextual factors that can contribute to different perspectives and understandings. Nevertheless, the participants in my study can be considered members of a broader group of postsecondary students with ASD. Therefore, the findings may apply or relate to individuals or groups in other settings (see Stake, 1994) and may contribute to a broader understanding of how individuals with ASD understand friendship and enact their social lives by being one study among many spanning different methods, contexts and samples. By including information about participants, including the schools that they were attending, demographic features, as well as recruitment and data collection methods, readers can determine the extent to which the findings apply to various groups or contexts.

3.7.3 Dependability

Dependability refers to ensuring that future researchers can repeat the methods of a study if they determine that it is of high quality. This requires researchers to provide a clear account of the processes of data collection, analysis and theory generation that they employ (Y. S. Lincoln & Guba, 1985; Shenton, 2004). In accordance with these guidelines, I have described the recruitment, consent, interview, member checking, and data analysis processes undertaken, including my original plans, adjustments that I have made, and the associated rationale. I have also included copies of recruitment materials, the interview protocol, relevant forms, and the wording of messages as Appendices.

3.7.4 Confirmability

Confirmability refers to how well the findings of a study are supported by the data collected, which includes the findings emerging from the experiences and ideas of the informants as opposed to the researcher’s predispositions (Y. S. Lincoln & Guba, 1985; Shenton, 2004). Strategies to promote this include the researcher admitting their predispositions, identifying the ways in which these influence the approach taken, including detailed methodological description,

63 as well as discussing any weaknesses to the approach and possible benefits of alternative decisions (Shenton, 2004). I have discussed the role of my previous research and experiences on my opinions and expectations in this chapter and discuss disadvantages of my approach and advantages of alternative approaches in the discussion chapter. I have also maintained detailed notes regarding my decisions regarding the emergence of themes and thoughts during the data analysis process as a way of establishing how my findings were reached.

3.8 Data Analysis Procedures 3.8.1 Preliminary Observations

Prior to systematically analyzing the data, I had observed that participants described social lives that varied considerably from one another’s, placed different types of boundaries or restrictions around their social activity, had difficulty initiating interactions, experienced socializing as effortful, and identified a range of social goals. Participants were also conscious about their preferences in terms of group size, types of activities, and environments, and seemed notably attentive with regard to planning for social situations. I also observed that participants’ initial responses to questions about having friends and their social lives tended to be positive, but more direct questions about how satisfied they were revealed specific areas of concern or dissatisfaction. I was also struck by the sophistication of participants’ responses and areas of consistency between them with regard to their definitions and understanding of friendship. Although I was aware of some variations in terms of participants’ conceptualizations, I became more interested in their enactments of friendship than how they defined it. As a result of these initial impressions, I began analyzing the data with an eye to possible relationships between satisfaction, types of social lives, and the boundaries and limitations that they described in terms of engaging in social activity.

3.8.2 Data Analysis

I began the data analysis process by reading the transcript from each of the ten interviews thoroughly and beginning the process of open coding. This involved analyzing each transcript line by line, and based on the words used by participants, “naming” the experience or perspective that they represent (Charmaz, 1995; Creswell, 2008; Strauss & Corbin, 2008). Two participants responded to the interview summaries that were sent as part of the member checking process in

64 considerable detail. In one case, the participant’s responses were primarily clarifications about specific details. In the other case, the participant reflected about his answers, revised many of them, and discussed a number of topics that we had discussed during the interview itself in considerable depth. I coded these member checking responses using the same approach as with interview transcripts and generally disregarded previous responses if they conflicted.

Open coding was completed by hand writing codes directly on each printed transcript. After a number of unsuccessful attempts to identify concepts, I developed an approach that involved reading short passages of each transcript, then writing my thoughts in a “memo/journal” document, highlighting key words from the entry or writing a short list of highlighted words at the bottom it, and including the segment of the transcript (see Appendix K). These codes were then compared with these the handwritten codes on the transcripts to ensure that they were consistent.

After performing open coding on the first two interviews, the bolded codes were extracted from my memos and entered into a code list. In order to make sense of the codes, I organized them in terms of context by entering headings that corresponded with each key research question into a “Codes by Question” list. Because of the tangential nature of participants’ responses, there were numerous cases when the codes did not directly fit my original questions. As a result, new headings were created, which included sub lists of codes beneath them in order to help make sense of the codes (see Appendix L for two memos describing aspects of this process). This approach contributed to identifying conceptual categories and emerging themes later in the data analysis process.

After analyzing each interview, I compared codes from the most recently reviewed transcript with the existing “Codes by Question” document and transferred new codes to the list. The next stage of the process involved tentatively grouping codes with similar names. In cases when more than one participant produced the same code, I indicated which participants the code applied to. This was a transitional step that prevented overgeneralization by ensuring that the themes that were identified applied to participants broadly. I also wrote extensive “supplemental memos,” which included summaries and reflections that integrated multiple interviews as well as connections, tentative themes, and questions about the data. This process ensured that the

65 development of concepts and categories occurred gradually and systematically and that they remained as close to the statements of participants as possible.

The first complete attempt at open coding using line by line analysis and comprehensive reading of the transcripts led to the creation of 65 categories. I then wrote a series of narratives and created diagrams based on the categories in order to reflect on the analysis and provide a basis for consulting with one of the members of my committee. We determined that my initial analysis included promising elements, but involved too many categories and lacked coherence. As a result, I recoded the interview data. The 65 initial categories were sorted and recoded into 11 categories consisting of nine constituent and two interrelated composite categories (see Appendix M).

The dimensions of the categories revealed participants identifying a number of strengths and abilities consistent with social motivation and engagement, a range of social challenges associated with limitations, and a variety of strategic approaches related to managing these challenges and pursuing their social goals. The dimensions also reflected favourable and more ambivalent aspects of participants’ statements about themselves, which were based on evaluations of their social lives and comparisons with their peers with and without ASD. The two composite categories reflected a series of tensions in terms of evaluating themselves and tradeoffs impacting how satisfied they were with their social lives.

As I continued to compare categories with each other, I felt that the categories and dimensions were insufficient. They did not capture how effortful social interactions were for participants, how necessary the strategies that they employed were for managing the challenges that they faced and pursuing their goals, and how conscious they were in terms of developing and implementing them. When I reviewed participants’ statements with this in mind, I was struck by how often they provided multifaceted responses that included a combination of evaluative statements about themselves, a weighing of benefits and costs, and numerous layers of strategic thinking regardless of what type of question they were responding to. I felt that the shortcomings described above were reflected by my categories containing different types of dimensions that fit together awkwardly. For example, “Social Lives” included both descriptive elements, such as details related to location, size of peer group, type of activity, and quantity of interaction, as well as evaluative dimensions related to satisfaction.

I eventually determined that my categories were flawed because of bias. I was conscious that quantity of social activity, size of social group, and number of friends were not a good measure of social success or satisfaction. However, despite my best efforts, I had been applying conventional assumptions involving the expectation that engaging in a wider variety of activities in a range of contexts was intrinsically positive. As a result I had been conceptualizing some participants’ tendency to not maintain contact with peers from before postsecondary or to not initiate contact with peers from postsecondary as challenges. When I reviewed participants’ statements and scrutinized the categories that I had developed with these considerations in mind, I realized that these limitations were strategic adaptations to their challenges rather than challenges in and of themselves. While I had identified what I would eventually refer to as strategies for engagement, I had not been as effective at identifying strategies for self- preservation. Based on this insight, I was able to identify that many of the dimensions that I had included within the categories of “Social Lives” and “Social Goals/Orientations” and was thinking of as variations were also strategic limitations. These considerations led to identifying the category of “Strategic Limited Engagement” that incorporated strategies for engagement and self-preservation as well as who participants were engaging with and in which contexts. I also continued to ensure that my categories were coherent, related, and distinct, which led to collapsing and removing some categories (see Appendix N for a memo reflecting some of the above considerations). After sorting and recoding the 11 categories again, six categories consisting of five constituent and one composite category emerged (see Appendix O).

During an early attempt to write the Data Analysis chapter, I determined that the category “Satisfied but …” was not distinct. Participants’ descriptions of areas of satisfaction, dissatisfaction, and ambivalence with regard to their social lives was consistent with and reflected the tensions associated with how they positioned themselves in relation to others with and without ASD and their views about accessing support. As a result, I incorporated the data from the “Satisfied but …” category into the “Somewhere in the middle” category. After making this change and a number of minor modifications to increase coherence, five categories consisting of four constituent categories and one composite category remained. The categories and dimensions (Strauss & Corbin, 2008) are presented in Table 3.

Table 3 Data Analysis: Categories and Dimensions

Category Dimension

Conventional understanding Maintaining regular contact (spending time together, keeping in touch) of friendships Compatible interests (shared, complementary, different) Intimacy (positive regard, kindness, trust, comfort and self-disclosure, connection and understanding, acceptance, support) Gender variation (intimacy vs. activity emphasis; intimacy vs. practical emphasis; friendship requiring work) Social challenges Interaction level concerns (speaking, initiating and being outgoing) Social setting concerns (social setting, group size) Uncertain relationship status Motivating factors Motivation Areas of Confidence (attributes and achievements, traits and characteristics, social skills development, standing up for self) Strategies for social engagement Situation and context selection Limited number of friends Managing social situations (self-preservation, promoting engagement) Gradual approaches to social development Differences in engagement (context selection, limited engagement with friends and social media use, frequent engagement with friends and social media use) Composite category: Positioning self in relation to others with and without ASD (Favourable “somewhere in the middle” comparison, distancing---Less favourable, concern about how viewed by others, concern about how others’ understanding of ASD) Orientations to support (general view of supports, applicable/inapplicable to self, (un)suitable existing supports) Satisfaction with social life – Satisfied but … (areas of satisfaction/areas of dissatisfaction and/or ambivalence: confidence, comfort, and enjoyment; amount of social activity and number of friends, variations: degree of social engagement, level of satisfaction, and gender; Mediating factors: pursuing social goals and gradual approaches to social development)

Based on discussions with my committee, I decided to refer to the above categories as themes when presenting the findings because they emerged from responses to multiple questions in the interview protocol. Each of these themes will be outlined in the following two chapters using thick description drawn from participants’ statements during interviews.

Chapter 4 Findings

This chapter contains the findings derived from analyzing participants’ statements regarding their social experiences and understandings of friendship and consists of six sections (see Figure 1). Section 1 presents the theme “Conventional Understandings of Friendship.” This theme is primarily based on participants’ responses to the first two research questions, which addressed their conceptualizations of friendship, including how they defined it and the aspects that they identified as the most important to them.

Sections 2 to 6 present the themes that emerged from participants’ statements about how they enacted and evaluated their social lives and friendships. These include “Social Challenges,” “Motivating Factors,” “Strategies for Social Engagement,” as well as “Somewhere in the Middle,” the core theme that emerged from this study and which relates to participants’ views of themselves in relation their peers, their views about supports, and their level of satisfaction with their social lives. Sections 2 and 3 present the themes of “Social Challenges” and “Motivating Factors” respectively. Section 4 presents the first part of the core theme, “Somewhere in the Middle,” which addresses how participants positioned themselves in relation to others with and without ASD and their orientations to support. I argue that participants’ responses are function of the tension between their social challenges and areas of confidence and motivation. Section 5 presents the theme “Strategies for Social Engagement,” which outlines participant’s general and situation-specific approaches to socializing, including attempts to balance their desire for social interaction and friendship development with managing the impacts of the challenges that they experienced. Section 6 consists of the second part of the core theme, “Somewhere in the Middle,” which addresses participants’ level of satisfaction with their social lives. Their statements suggest that they held positive views about their friends, the activities that they engaged in, and their ability to succeed in social situations. However, to varying extents, they expressed dissatisfaction with how comfortable they felt in social situations, how often they saw their friends, and limitations with regard to their social lives.

68 69

Figure 1. Understandings of friendship, social engagement, and satisfaction among postsecondary students with autism spectrum disorders.

The data from this study suggest that participants’ qualified satisfaction with their social lives, perceptions of being “somewhere in the middle” of peers with and without ASD in terms of social functioning, and their ambivalent views about support emerged from the interplay between their conventional understandings of friendship, their social concerns and areas of motivation, and their corresponding selective approaches to social engagement.

Participants identified maintaining regular contact, having compatible interests, and aspects of intimacy as important features of friendship, which is consistent with conventional

70 understandings. Connectedly, their statements indicate that they evaluated themselves and their social lives, as well as their approaches to social engagement, in relation to conventional understandings and expectations.

Participants described being motivated to engage with others, as well as confident about their personalities, their ability to socialize and connect with others, and the progress they had made in terms of their social lives and social skills. However, they also described experiencing social challenges including speaking with others, initiating conversations, interacting in unstructured or unpredictable social settings, socializing in larger group situations, and ascertaining the status of their relationships with others.

The tension between the challenges and areas of confidence and motivation that participants discussed is reflected by their strategic approach to social engagement. Participants employed selective approaches with regard to the situations and contexts that they chose to engage in, as well as the size of their social circles and the number of friends that they had. Their approaches and strategies reflect attempts to maintain or expand their social lives while accounting for the need to address and mitigate the impact of their social challenges. Participants also established social goals, developed context-specific and longer-term strategies to achieve them, and described a gradual approach to their social development.

The core theme, Somewhere in the Middle, refers to how participants positioned themselves in relation to others with and without ASD, their orientations to support, and the extent to which they were satisfied with their social lives. Participants compared themselves favourably to others with ASD but less favourably with peers without ASD in terms of their social functioning. Connectedly, they expressed concerns about how they may be evaluated by others based on their diagnosis or behaviours associated with it. They also viewed various supports as appropriate for helping individuals with ASD and as potentially benefiting from help themselves, but viewed available supports as inapplicable to them.

The core theme, Somewhere in the Middle, also refers to participants’ statements about the extent to which they were satisfied with their social lives. Their responses revealed a combination of satisfaction with their social lives and dissatisfaction or ambivalence about how they experienced social situations in terms of comfort, confidence, enjoyment, as well as the amount of social activity and number of friends that they had. Although comfort within social

71 situations influenced participants’ satisfaction with their social lives, their responses suggest that the extent to which their friends were available to socialize with them was more important.

4.1 Section 1—Conventional Understandings of Friendship

All ten participants initially stated that they had friends and active social lives. Although some participants indicated that defining friendship was difficult or expressed uncertainty about their answers, all ten were able to define the term and explain their understandings thoroughly, distinguish between friends and non-friends, such as acquaintances and romantic partners, and identify different types of friends. Participants’ understandings are expressed through their descriptions of their own friendships, what they viewed as most important within them, by contrasting friendship with other types of relationships, and their definitions of the term. The names of all individuals identified by participants have been changed.

Participants emphasized the importance of maintaining contact, engaging in shared activities and experiences, and having compatible interests. They also identified a range of traits and behaviours associated with intimacy. In addition, a number of variations emerged that correspond with gender. These include female participants emphasizing aspects of intimacy to a greater extent than male participants when discussing activities and interactions with friends, helping and supporting friends, and the effort associated with friendship. Participants’ descriptions also suggest that females spent time and kept in touch with friends on a more regular basis than males. Each of these areas is discussed below.

4.1.1 Maintaining Regular Contact

Participants described the importance of being in contact regularly and frequently, including spending time with each other in person when possible, and keeping in touch by phone, email, or social media when seeing each other was not possible.

Spending time together Interviewer: How would you define the word friendship?

Jake: … when you hang out with someone, you talk to them regularly …

Participants specifically mentioned initiating getting together:

Interviewer: … what do you think other people expect of you as a friend?

Sarah: I think they expect me to initiate wanting to do things …

The centrality of spending time together to participants’ understandings of friendship is also highlighted by their statements about acquaintances:

Victoria: Acquaintances like honestly I don’t really care for them, I am just like I am bored, I don’t want to hang out …

Keeping in touch Interviewer: And, and how about your friends back home, how are you talking to them?

Jodie: … that’s through texting and social media. Of course I would rather see them face to face but obviously I can’t do that since what’s going on right now at home [parents preparing to sell their house].

Interviewer: Okay, and … are those shorter conversations that you are [having] on the phone or is it similar in length as when you’re face to face?

Jodie: Uh, sometimes it can be similar to face to face so let’s say if they are far away or I can’t get to them …

4.1.2 Compatible Interests

All ten participants identified the importance of similar interests as part of their definitions and descriptions of friendship. Examples of shared interests and activities included participating in a drumming ensemble, going to clubs and parties, studying music and psychology, karate, playing computer games, playing card games, attending the same campus group, and orientation week activities.

Participants also discussed how having different interests does not prevent becoming friends, and may contribute to friendship if they are complementary, or even “opposite”:

Gavin: Having similar interests that brings you guys together or opposite interests that makes you want to learn more about each other …

Although sharing similar interests is often emphasized as an important feature of friendships and social activity among individuals with ASD (Bauminger & Kasari, 2000), individuals with ASD also demonstrate an awareness of the importance of becoming interested in others’ interests (B. Howard et al., 2006). Participants’ statements are consistent with shared interests being important, but complementary interests not being a barrier to forming friendships and at times contributing to them. This is consistent with Shattuck, Seltzer, et. al.’s (2007) finding that the extent to which repetitive and stereotyped interests interfere with the everyday activities of individuals with ASD lessens during adolescence and adulthood.

4.1.3 Intimacy

The traits and qualities associated with intimacy include familiarity, affection, liking, closeness, trust, honesty, respect, loyalty, commitment, support, generosity, mutuality, understanding, and acceptance (Hartup & Stevens, 1997; Monsour, 1997; Newcomb & Bagwell, 1995). Participants identified many aspects of intimacy including positive regard, kindness, trust, comfort and self- disclosure, connection and understanding, acceptance, and support.

Positive regard

Alan: I’d say it’s something that’s about mutual liking and respect and, I guess people you get along with most of the time anyways . . .

Kindness

Interviewer: … what are the most important characteristics in a friend?

Jodie: In a friend? … I guess kindness is one …

Trust

Victoria: Friendship…, someone I can trust …

Comfort and self-disclosure

Sarah: … somebody that you can just be honest with or not necessarily honest like I am being dishonest with everybody else but, but you can share more things about yourself because you feel comfortable around them.

Connection and understanding

Shawn: I guess it would be the ability to have a connection with somebody … and … being able to [share] mutual understanding[s] …

Interviewer: Okay, and you mentioned connection. Can you tell me a bit more about that?

Shawn: I guess being able to share something emotionally and being able to understand the other person and being able to understand what they mean, or understand their personality or their feelings …

As part of the member checking process, Alan explained that he no longer considered a friend from high school to be his friend because he felt that they could no longer relate:

Alan: I did [say that I thought I would be happy if they contacted me] . I’m not so sure I feel that way anymore. Looking back, Don and I both changed quite a bit during high school, which was part of why we grew apart, and I don’t think we’d really be able to relate to each other very much anymore.

Acceptance

Samuel: just be yourself, … I don’t want a friend who won’t like me for the way I dress. Like for example if I was to always wear socks and sandals or like me I had the, the beard that’s messy, and that if they can’t get past that what’s the point, there’s no point in being friends, what’s the point of having a friend? That’s a friend.

Sarah explicitly identified the importance of friends accepting the emotional impact of her challenges:

Sarah: Yeah, well I think I will look for somebody that is okay with listening to me and … when I feel upset … they are okay that they don’t get freaked out by it and not want to be around me, that they understand that there’s moments of real pain but also that, that doesn’t define really … all of me.

Support

Ellen: … a true friend is one when you really struggle and things fall apart they don’t abandon you and you can talk.

Victoria and Sarah described receiving social advice and feedback from their friends:

Interviewer: …do they [your friends] know that you don’t always know what you’ve done wrong?

Victoria: Yes, for sure.

Interviewer: … let’s say you’re being judgmental about something, … will you not know until they actually start swearing at you and getting angry at you?

Victoria: They would just talk to me and say … you know?

Interviewer: So, what kinds of things do they say if they want to correct something you’re doing?

Victoria: Like what I said “you know, Victoria, you are being really rude and being a bitch and you’ve got to stop that before you lose all your friends.”

Interviewer: And … does that help you know, exactly what the problem is?

Victoria: Kind of, yeah.

Sarah described a situation when one of her friends explained why a mutual friend was upset about her being reluctant to go to her bridal shower:

Sarah: … she [mutual friend] would probably say that I am one of her best friends and there was some confusion around her wedding because she really wanted me to come to her bridal shower. But it was the weekend before I was moving away and … then my program was starting the next day … and I thought that it wouldn’t be wise for me to travel back and forth to [city] and then she was really hurt by it I guess and my other friend who is the high school teacher had to explain to me that she considers me as one of her best friends and I was shocked by that, I was like oh …

The statements above demonstrate that aspects of intimacy are central to participants’ conceptualizations of friendship. Their understandings are multifaceted and include valued traits, feelings, and behaviours. In addition, their comments about support included receiving it from and providing it to friends, which reflects mutuality and reciprocity.

4.1.4 Variation: Gender Differences in Emphasizing Intimacy

Although participants’ understandings of friendship include the importance of shared activities and intimacy, female participants emphasized aspects of intimacy to a greater degree than male participants. This is consistent with the general tendency for females to express the importance of loyalty, trustworthiness and emotional support when describing friendships to a greater degree than males, who emphasize shared activities throughout both adolescence and adulthood (Dickens & Perlman, 1981; Monsour, 1997; Pahl, 2000). These differences emerged when participants discussed friends helping, supporting, and giving things to each other. In addition, female participants identified the importance of putting effort into friendships to a greater extent than male participants.

Intimacy vs. activity emphasis

Some male participants used the term connection when discussing friendship. However, the ways that they used it emphasized shared activities and interests rather than emotional support and understanding:

When asked what he meant by connection, Gavin described having similar interests and wanting to spend time with friends:

Interviewer: You also mentioned something when you were talking earlier about feeling connected with people. Can you tell me more about what you mean by that?

Gavin: Having similar interests, pretty much wanting to hang out with them as opposed to someone that’s wanting to but you are not really in the mood to do that kind of stuff with.

In addition, when describing what he tried to do as a friend, he identified listening to them if they needed to talk or were having problems. However, when discussing his friends’ “best interests”

77 and “looking out for their interests,” he emphasized shared musical interests as opposed to emotional support. It is important to note that he linked showing them things that relate to their interests to pleasing them and maintaining the relationship. However, the emphasis on the shared interest or activity is also prominent:

Interviewer: … as a friend, what do you try to do?

Gavin: What do I try to do? Well, I try to be there for them. I try to listen to them when they need to vent or talk about something. I try and suggest solutions to their problems should they ever have any and, well, I tell them about stuff that’s in their best interest as well, like with Vito, so he is into electronic music I tell him about Grum … and he ends up liking it … Then we start talking about that stuff and I tell him about more stuff that he hasn’t heard of. I show him this device I got that’s an amp simulator that’s from the 1980s … he said he was looking for a specific distortion sound for his guitar … when we were hanging out … and he says hey, this is awesome. …

Interviewer: So, you kind of, you look out for their [things they are interested in]?

Gavin: I look out for their interests if it’s something worth looking out for. I like to please them and it’s what gets them coming back for more I think, it’s something that keeps this friendship knitted together. That’s … what I like to do when it comes to friends, I like to look out for their interests as well as suggest things that we could do together.

Samuel described playing certain games as his main social activity. He explicitly stated that when he arranged to meet people, who he referred to as friends, at a game café to play, he prioritized the activity rather than seeing them:

Interviewer: Okay, … you are actually going out and meeting them. Do you ever go to meet people because … they are there or do you mostly go because of the activities?

Samuel: Uh, more so with the activity.

Samuel’s emphasis on activity is also reflected by his use of the term connecting when contrasting his friends’ participation in a game with someone who he did not consider a friend during an ASD group meeting:

Samuel: But then when Thomas and Jennifer we connected in that and we’ve had another person join in afterwards … they would bring a game in, we’d be playing it, while they were playing they’d be on their ipad as well. Not really participating … so okay,[we] are supposed to be here type thing but they don’t really want to be here.

Interviewer: So, they are kind of doing the activity but ….

Samuel: Yeah, but they are doing the bare minimum of the activity.

Intimacy vs. practical emphasis

Female participants’ statements about supporting, helping, and giving things to friends also reflect a greater emphasis on intimacy than those of male participants.

In contrast with the examples of support provided in the previous section, some male participants described the importance of supporting or helping friends in purely practical terms:

Interviewer: … can you think of ways that you are kind [to your friends]? Is it just your way of being, is it things that you do?

Jake: Well, … there was one time where earlier this year when I had to help my friend Andrew … he was looking for help it was late at night, like it was around midnight or something and his dad [and him] had to go somewhere for something some place nearby, so I mean I can drive so my friend Andrew, they called [to see] if I could help them and so I did. I stay up late at night so I am not bothered by it so I drove them somewhere then I drove them back. That’s showing support.

Interviewer: … is there anything that you have tried to do to be a good friend?

Samuel: Well, if I can help out I will, like … a person I had class with … we became friends and … she had a problem with her place and she had called me so I had stopped what I was doing, I was just at home I got

downtown with her to help her with her problem.

Differences between male and female participants’ emphasis on intimacy are also reflected by their discussions about giving things to friends.

Mary discussed buying her friend a laptop so that she could play a game that she knew her friend used as an escape:

Interviewer: What other kinds of things do you try to do?

Mary: I will try and vent solutions like not only will I listen to a problem I will try to think of a solution to help them to actually make a difference so not just there to listen but I am also there to like, I can make a difference. For example, Christmas, I am going to buy her a laptop because hers is not going to play the SIMS so, I know that that’s what she escapes into in and so I am just going to, I can afford to, so I will, so that’s one of example of that.

Jodie discussed giving her friend a case of bottled water. She initially explained that it was because he did not like the tap water. However, later in the interview, she expressed that doing so was an example of showing friends that she understood them:

Jodie: A case of bottled water I mean … just listen to the little things that’s what I do and the little things actually are very important because that means that you get them.

Some male participants also identified giving things to each other as an important aspect of friendship. However, their emphasis on intimacy is less prominent because they do not include what giving each other things reflects in terms of relating or reinforcing the relationship:

Interviewer: … do you have anyone in your life who you would describe as a friend?

Samuel: Oh yes, like I have a friend of mine who is also autistic … I came back from Ottawa and I bought him [a] belt buckle.

Friendship requiring work

Female participants explicitly discussed the need to put forth effort as an important aspect of friendship:

Interviewer: … do you feel like you have an easy time getting along with people, or does it feel like work, both?

Jodie: Yeah, kind of both actually because you have to work at a friendship, again commitment and I think a lot of people feel that they, well not a lot of people feel but a lot of people nowadays don’t have that commitment. I mean back in my high school through my experiences, friends were not committed with each other, they would go against each other and, and the only thing that they had was, you know, some intimate conversations and that was it and then would have some, some stupid fun stuff with each other, so they would you know, get drunk, they would go to wild parties, things like that.

Ellen: … you invest energy in it, you put time into the friendship ….

Jodie’s and Ellen’s statements are particularly notable because they discuss the importance of effort in a general sense as opposed to discussing it in terms of their specific friendships.

In contrast with the other male participants, Gavin clearly expressed that friendships require work. He discussed limited endurance during the interview as well as putting forth effort to seek out topics of interest to his friends and ensuring that they enjoyed their time together. He also explicitly identified ensuring that he made time to see and communicate with them despite competing demands:

Gavin: … keeping a balance between work and hanging out with friends is one of the things I like to value … it’s worth it when you are being a friend to that person.

Shawn’s comment below contrasts significantly with the above statements. He stated that creating a connection is time consuming, but not difficult:

Interviewer: … Has it been easy or difficult to make friends as an adult?

Shawn: I guess it’s not particularly difficult but just time consuming to be able to create that connection between people . . .

He also stated that maintaining a connection with friends does not require working as hard:

Shawn: … it takes awhile to create that connection, but once I have that connection, then I am able to consider that … there’s a friendship there … and once that friendship is created then … you don’t really have to work as hard to connect with that person.

Managing conflict is a challenging aspect of maintaining friendships. As a result, putting effort into avoiding and resolving disagreements reflects intimacy because it demonstrates commitment (Bukowski et al., 2009; Hartup & Stevens, 1997). Three female participants discussed conflict as part of their understanding of friendship whereas no male participants did so.

Mary described her friendship as being secure despite arguments or disagreements occurring:

Mary: … I can be as peeved off with my best friend, but still love her at the same time, so you know, she’s still my friend, I still love her, we have our arguments … if we have a fight it doesn’t really matter, it’s not the end of the world.

Jodie also described actively trying to resolve a conflict with a friend who she felt was not treating her well:

Jodie: I was going to his place because I just wanted to talk to him about what was going on with our friendship.

4.1.5 Variation: Gender Differences in Maintaining Regular Contact

Although participants identified spending time together and keeping in touch as important aspects of friendship, females described doing so more than males.

Male participants described having friends from childhood and prior to postsecondary as well as being interested in engaging with peers from postsecondary. However, four of them stated that they had not had any contact with them for many months.

Jake described going on a trip with a group of classmates at the end of the previous school year and having a friend from college who he had spent time with at his college and who he once saw a movie with outside of school. However, he had not seen or communicated with the other students, including his friend, for a long period of time:

Interviewer: [Are there] any other people that you consider friends?

Jake: … there is somebody else I met from [college] who I had talk[ed] to and maybe hang out with … Yeah, his name is Wayne … I would talk to him and … we would go see a movie. I did hang around with my classmates from [college] … we would hang out in the school …[and] earlier this year I went on a trip with some of them to Niagara Falls.

Interviewer: And was that organized [by] the school or you did that separately?

Jake: No, we did that separately once our semester was over …

Interviewer: And are you still seeing some of them outside of school?

Jake: … no, well Wayne … I did see him a few months ago, we went and saw Pacific Rim.

Interviewer: And, and do you guys talk by phone or, or text or email?

Jake: … not really, I don’t talk to him right now, I can’t remember the last time I talked to him [it’s] been a few months I think . . .

Samuel described a friend who he had known for ten years, but who he only saw every five or six months and seemingly only by chance:

Interviewer: … do you have anyone in your life who you would describe as a friend?

Samuel: Oh yes, I have a friend of mine who is also autistic who [I] talk with …

Interviewer: Okay, how long have you known that person for?

Samuel: Over 10 years I think.

Interviewer: …how often would you see him?

Samuel: Not very often. We talk, we were closer but now it’s just … we meet when it happens, like he was in the hospital for a while and so I saw him once

there and then I found out because I went to where he was living and his roommates told me that and then I found he was in the hospital again and he had called me and told me now he had moved. But I haven’t actually contacted him yet.

Interviewer: So, how often are you in touch either in person or by phone … [or] email or Facebook …?

Samuel: With him I have his phone number.

Interviewer: Okay … how often do you see him; how often do you talk to him?

Samuel: Not that often anymore.

Interviewer: So, like once a year, once every six months?

Samuel: … maybe five, six [months] …

Females described meeting and talking with peers who they liked and identified as potential friends, but did not necessarily make efforts or take the initiative to expand the relationship or arrange for additional interactions:

Interviewer: … have you connected with anyone [at college] who you would call a friend or acquaintance?

Mary: More acquaintances, but I have potential friends like, this one person … she made conversation with me and we had a nice I think hour and a half chat before our class started, so she was friendly. I wouldn’t mind you know, maybe becoming friends with her.

Interviewer: … and do you have contact information for her or other people who you like?

Mary: I never got contact information unfortunately because I was so focused on studying, I was so stressed. It was just, I normally got contact information more when I am going for fun times.

The above statements indicate that participants had latent friendship and social opportunities with peers from before and at postsecondary, but despite identifying the importance of seeing each other regularly and maintaining contact, they do not necessarily do so. The key gender

84 differences that emerged are that female participants described maintaining regular contact with their existing friends and seeing them when it was possible, but not pursuing additional friendships. In contrast, male participants described not seeing or communicating with friends for months at a time but continuing to consider them to be their friends. This suggests that while their abstract conceptualizations of friendship are similar, females’ conceptualizations are applied in practice to a greater extent than males’. This is reflected by Sarah’s statement below. In response to being asked if she had met any people at college who she considered to be her friend, she stated:

Sarah: … I also have a lot of colleagues in my class, [but] I don’t think that really counts [as being friends] because we don’t hang out outside of school.

Social media and phone use

Gender differences with regard to maintaining regular contact with their friends corresponds with how participants used social media and their phones. Female participants’ descriptions indicate that they used these media for social communication in general and maintaining friendships specifically, whereas males, with one exception, used social media less than females in general, and not necessarily for social communicating or maintaining friendships.

With one exception, male participants described using social media minimally and as a source of information about events and to play games rather than for personal communication or for social reasons:

Jake did not discuss using social media at all and Shawn and Alan described using it as a source of information about events and to play games, but not necessarily for personal communication or for social reasons:

Interviewer: … do you have Facebook or anything like that?

Shawn: I don’t really communicate too much through social media or anything like that, although I do use it a fair bit, but just not as a method of communication.

Interviewer: … are you on things like Facebook or other social media?

Alan: I am now. I didn’t have Facebook until very recently. I actually just got

with that after I came here maybe a month or two ago because I noticed there were a lot of student groups and things that coordinated through that and a lot of the kind of extracurricular things, so I figured it would be more convenient that way . . .

Interviewer: So, do you use that more to get information about what’s going on or to communicate with people?

Alan: I don’t use it that much at all …

Gavin and female participants’ descriptions of their social media and phone use highlight how it can be used as a tool to facilitate social engagement and as a form of social engagement itself.

In contrast with the other male participants, Gavin described communicating with a number of friends by Facebook on a weekly basis. He specifically discussed maintaining contact with friends from high school who went to colleges and universities in different cities:

Interviewer: Are you still in touch with either of them [friends from high school]?

Gavin: I am whenever they are on Facebook because let’s see Chloe goes to Guelph and Adina goes … I forget what university but a university. So, they are pretty far off.

Interviewer: So how often would you connect with someone like Adina or Chloe by Facebook?

Gavin: Sometimes on a weekly basis if they are online or I feel bored while study I will say hey, how’s it going? They will usually be on late at night pulling an all-nighter or something and I can multitask so we will chat a little bit.

Mary also described using Facebook for contacting her friends from out of town on a weekly basis. Unlike other participants who described face-to-face contact as preferable in terms of maintaining connections, she described it as equivalent, which highlights the importance of it in terms of her social life:

Interviewer: How are they [your two friends from out of town] different as friends than your best friend?

Mary: Well, I don’t see them as often. I think that’s the only difference. Other

than that, I am just as comfortable around them.

Interviewer: [Do the things that you] talked about as important -- loyalty, love, trust -- are those similar with them?

Mary: Yeah, it’s the same.

Interviewer: And on Facebook, do you give each other advice and listen to each other in a way that feels similar?

Mary: Yeah.

Sarah and Ellen maintained contact with their friends by using their phone to speak or text with them when they were unable to get together:

Ellen: … I have been known to talk on the phone for an hour and a half with her [my best friend] on an evening. Normally it’s if she’s too tired to come over, she’s had a long day work and she’s tired, so we will just talk on the phone instead of getting together, or we’ll decide when to get together or, I am busy and we haven’t seen each other in three or four weeks …

Interviewer: How often do you talk to your friends … do you sort of talk to them every week or …?

Sarah: Well, I don’t call them every week, but … maybe once a week I text them a bit back and forth …

Participants’ conceptualizations of friendship include an emphasis on maintaining regular contact, but their responses indicate that female participants did so more than males. This tendency corresponds with gender differences in the extent to which participants used social media and their phones for social communication. In addition to reflecting differences in terms of maintaining contact, it is possible that making limited use of these communication tools may have reinforced this tendency, and in turn limited opportunities for social engagement and contributed to lower levels of satisfaction with their social lives.

4.1.6 Summary

Overall, participants were able to explain their views about friendship and connected their understandings to their social lives and relationships. They emphasized spending time together,

87 communicating with each other and discussed compatible interests as well as highlighting the importance of emotional connection, support and other aspects of intimacy. Although participants identified aspects of intimacy, spending time together and keeping in touch as important aspects of friendship, female participants emphasized intimacy to a greater than extent male participants. In addition, participants’ descriptions indicate that they spent time and kept in touch with their friends more frequently than male participants.

4.2 Section 2—Social Challenges

Participants described a number of social challenges including communicating with others, feeling comfortable in various social situations and environments, and identifying whether or not some of their relationships constituted friendships. These concerns emerged when discussing their current social lives, level of satisfaction, past and current friendships, which characteristics they sought in a friend, as well as social and academic aspects of their postsecondary experiences. Each of these areas is discussed below.

4.2.1 Interaction Level Concerns

Participants described experiencing a range of difficulties communicating and feeling comfortable within social situations and interactions including initiating conversations, knowing what to say or when to say it, and following conversations.

Speaking

Participants identified having difficulty speaking for a number of reasons including expressive communication issues exacerbated by stress, knowing what to talk about, and concerns about making social errors:

Jake: … when I talk to her over the phone, like there’s only so much that we talk about and then that’s it.

Interviewer: So, is that part hard, figuring out what to talk about?

Jake: I think that might be a problem yeah …

Alan: I still do have trouble sometimes with finding the words to express myself as accurately and thoroughly as I’d like, especially when I’m stressed or

emotionally distraught.

Jodie described wanting to be “less awkward in conversations and … more confident” as well as worrying about inadvertently sounding judgmental. The following example highlights the connection between not speaking and avoiding conflict:

Jodie: … I just sat on one of the girl’s beds and I was just looking, listening to other conversations, listening in and just sitting there and then they got into some conversations that I wasn’t so comfortable about. Of course I said nothing because obviously I don’t want to bring up conflict or anything …

Although not speaking in certain to situations to avoid conflict or causing offence is appropriate in many situations, her discomfort applied to most situations:

Jodie: …[in] most social situations I feel comfortable when I don’t have to do a lot of talking.

Participants also described struggling to follow and interject during conversations:

Interviewer: What are some of the difficult or tiring parts [of interacting with people]?

Sarah: Well, just following people when they are talking and what they are talking about. I find I am constantly, at least in my program, [thinking] what are you talking about now? And they change subjects quickly and there’s just a lot of dynamics going on that are hard to keep a track of …

Initiating and being outgoing

Participants described difficulty with initiating interactions and identified the importance of friends being more outgoing than them. Notably, this was the only complementary tendency that participants consistently identified as important.

Victoria: I don’t interact with people … unless I actually need something or they interact with me first.

Interviewer: And what do you look for in a friend?

Shawn: I guess someone who’s more outgoing and enthusiastic about life …

89 4.2.2 Social Setting Concerns

Participants also described having difficulty interacting in unstructured, unfamiliar, unpredictable or fluid social situations and settings:

Alan: … just meeting people around … or in just overtly social situations … socialization hardly ever works.

Ellen described having difficulty ending conversations or continuing to spend time with people when a third person was involved in the interaction and they planned to continue spending time together (with or without her) in a different location:

Ellen: … I felt awkward standing there, listening to the two of them I didn’t know how to say good-bye. I’d end up getting stuck there and being frozen, like I didn’t know how to talk and walk … I had a bit of a hard time with talking with someone on campus [when] a third person walks up…

When discussing what would help him socially, Samuel identified not knowing how to connect with people outside of situations based around shared interests:

Samuel: Yeah, like going into a place … not going somewhere where you are going to do something you are going to enjoy automatically [where] you will have something in common to keep you friends. How do you …[when] you have nothing in common at first … become friends?

Group size

Participants consistently expressed a preference for social situations involving one-on-one or small group interactions. Conversely, most participants described feeling overwhelmed, uncomfortable, and actively avoiding larger group situations and parties:

Interviewer: … do you have preferences about seeing people one on one, or do you prefer small groups, large groups, parties?

Shawn: … in larger groups I tend to be more reserved and maybe don’t talk as much whereas in smaller groups of maybe two or three people, I am

definitely more talkative and feel that it’s easier to make that connection with people.

The extent of the challenges and importance of the nature of social settings and situations is exemplified by Gavin’s comment:

Gavin: …I think I can get along in most social situations if everything is just right.

4.2.3 Uncertain Relationship Status

As discussed earlier, participants were able to define and explain friendship. However, some participants also described being uncertain about when they could consider someone who they knew to be their friend and when others considered them to be a friend.

Ellen: … I don’t understand when other people would consider me a friend or how many years it takes to gain a friend I don’t know, it took me like five years to acknowledge that I am a friend with Nancy …

Participants identified discrete indicators, including exchanging gifts and contact information, to distinguish when relationships could be conceptualized as friendships:

Sarah: I think acquaintances are people that you don’t know as well yet. They could become friends or they could continue to remain acquaintances, … I know them and I am friendly with them, but we haven’t exchanged phone numbers or plan to get together …

As the above statements demonstrate, participants experienced social challenges in the areas of communication, navigating various social settings and situations, and knowing if their relationships were considered friendships.

4.3 Section 3—Motivating Factors

Experiencing the types of challenges outlined in the previous section can lead to withdrawing from peers and social activities. However, participants demonstrated areas of motivation and confidence that are consistent with engaging socially. They expressed a clear desire to engage with their peers and existing friends, expand their social lives, and in some cases, challenge

91 themselves socially. In addition, participants’ statements about their skills, attributes, and unwillingness to accept mistreatment reflect confidence about their worthiness as individuals and friends. These areas of motivation and confidence are outlined below.

4.3.1 Motivation

Participants expressed liking, valuing, and enjoying time with their friends:

Sarah: I like being around my friends and I think to feel connected to people is important for any person … I do want to be around people and feel connected to them.

Jodie and Gavin expressed their motivation to meet new people and spend time with their friends with particular enthusiasm:

Jodie: … it was … res[idence] early move in week so we did a lot of special events with each other and things like that, I learned how they were as people and I mean I had such a fun time with them, I mean I could get along with them … I am just really happy being around with those people because they are nice, they are kind, they are considerate and they’re fun.

Gavin: One time I met this guy and his girlfriend and then they brought me into their social circle with other friends there as well and I had a great conversation, it was awesome because they wanted to know more about me and I wanted to know them as well and then one of their stepbrother[s] played drums for their [band] … and I got to meet them … and they are a great group of individuals it was awesome, and then …[the] lead singer of the [band] came over and started talking, … the thing is I made friends with them just at the door and then they went in and then I came in and then they said come sit with us Gavin and … I just think it’s kind of cool when that kind of thing happens. Then the other year I met them, the next time I went to see them I met this engineering student … and struck [up a] conversation with him and got to know more about what he does … and it was great and he introduced me to these older guys that were his friends … we talked about the bands, talked about the shows we had been to, our

favourite drinks, it was great.

Participants also expressed being open to, and in some cases, a clear desire, to meet more people and form friendships:

Mary: … as far as friendships yeah, the more people I have in my life to love the better.

In addition to speaking about friendships, some participants emphasized personal development and described being motivated to challenge themselves by pursuing goals related to their social lives.

Shawn: one of the main goals of the organization [campus group] is … the personal development of its members … I’ve really been trying to challenge my boundaries … I have noticed that when I have done those sort of things where I challenge myself and do things that are maybe not comfortable with … that there are definitely rewards to those kinds of actions …

Interviewer: Do you have an idea of what the rewards will be …?

Shawn: I don’t really have any concrete idea of what will come out of this but I guess just a greater sense of satisfaction with … the social aspect of my life …

Ellen described challenging herself by going to a conference with a student who she met at university:

Ellen: … we met off campus on another campus at a conference. It was a … we were off campus. It was so different, it was … like whoa this is the real world kind of, … I am off on my own, I am away for the day, I mean I take the bus downtown it’s not even as far as my high school, it’s you know?

Interviewer: But it felt different?

Ellen: It felt different, I am an adult, I am at a conference … I am not in a classroom with people my age. I am observing, I am interested, I am

thinking about a career. … this is like university but it’s not like university and … I am exploring my surroundings, I am trying to find the classrooms. I am from [city] so I knew vaguely where the buildings were but I didn’t know where the rooms were, I didn’t know where all of the buildings were, I was forcing myself to be social…

Shawn and Ellen’s statements are striking because they reflect that they view social interactions not only in terms of more immediate relationships, activities, and experiences, but in terms of personal progress and development. In addition, they demonstrate being goal-oriented, aware of the difficulty involved in challenging themselves, and by virtue of the planning and follow through that they describe, the extent to which they are motivated to engage socially.

4.3.2 Areas of Confidence

Confidence is associated with positive self-assessments of social skills, which are in turn consistent with being more likely to initiate and engage in interactions and avoid negative relationships (Baumeister, Campbell, Krueger, & Vohs, 2003; Buhrmester et al., 1988; Rusbult, Morrow, & Johnson, 1987). Participants demonstrated confidence in a number of areas, including general attributes and achievements, traits and characteristics that are consistent with friendship, and confidence about the social skills that they had developed.

Participants described the importance of being intelligent and their achievements to their confidence and identity:

Interviewer: So, … you take some pride in what you have achieved?

Victoria: Yes, .. look at what I have accomplished … before I went to [university] I was very insecure, but once I went to [university] and started working, and starting buying new clothes, and actually going out and looking good you know, that .. confidence grew out of me … just like taking hot pictures, like Instagram gives you some confidence too.

Interviewer: So, you get some feedback about how you look?

Victoria: Yeah, and attention and people know what I am doing with … accomplishments, I like to … show that off . . .

Participants also described possessing traits and characteristics that they felt were consistent with friendship as well as confidence about the social skills that they had developed:

Interviewer: … what do you think your friends like about you?

Samuel: The big thing with me is my sense of humour. Like I am very witty, I made people laugh I actually had a group of people one time actually almost rolling on the floor, laughing that much.

Shawn: … when I was a bit younger and didn’t really have the social skills that that I do now, I didn’t really understand the different components to an appropriate conversation whereas nowadays, I have picked up on those things …

Participants also described standing up for themselves and being unwilling to accept unfair treatment.

Sarah described ending a friendship because she felt that her friend was taking advantage of her by asking her to babysit her child repeatedly and not doing other things with her:

Sarah: … the one friend I was watching her kids she would pay me so I felt, so I thought it was more of a business transaction and … we sort of didn’t do anything friend wise. I mean I connected with her when I was around her kids but that’s not all I wanted to do. Just because I loved her kids so much doesn’t mean that that’s all that I wanted to have in that friendship. So, I think some people, some friends see … that I have a usefulness [to them]. But I don’t think they are really friends any longer when they do that because I think that’s sort of mean.

Interviewer: And the people who you are considering friends right now aren’t doing that?

Sarah: No … because I think it’s more mutual and it’s more equal and give and take …the relationship.

Jake described no longer spending time with a friend who had annoyed him:

Jake: … so I would hang out with him but, … he can be annoying … There was one time over the summer, we were playing tennis … he hit the ball at me when I wasn’t expecting it and that really bothered me, really annoyed me … After that I just didn’t feel like hanging out with him anymore. I don’t want to hang out with him because he can be annoying in other ways . . .

As the above statements show, participants were motivated to engage socially, confident about their general abilities and attributes relating to socializing and friendship, and unwilling to accept being treated poorly. Participants identified the value of interacting with their friends and peers in terms of their personal development, improving their communication skills, and enhancing their ability to cope in more settings and social situations. Although their responses reflect the challenging nature of acclimating to various environments and socializing, they also suggest that their efforts led to enjoyable, intrinsically rewarding experiences with friends and peers.

4.4 Section 4—“Somewhere in the Middle” Part 1

The core theme, “Somewhere in the Middle,” is presented in two parts. This section describes how participants positioned themselves in relation to peers with and without ASD, the tensions between how they evaluated and understood themselves and their ASD diagnoses on the one hand and concerns about how they may be viewed because of others’ understandings of ASD on the other, as well as their complex views about accessing support to address social challenges.

4.4.1 Positioning Self in Relation to Others With and Without ASD

Participants’ statements about others with ASD displayed that they compared themselves favourably to and distanced themselves from them in terms of their level of functioning. The ways that participants discussed themselves in relation to peers without ASD was more nuanced. They did not compare themselves negatively in a global sense, but acknowledged relative weaknesses socially and expressed concerns about how they may be viewed by others during interactions and based on others’ understandings of ASD.

Comparisons to others with ASD

Based on their observation and experiences, participants described themselves as higher functioning than others with ASD:

Interviewer: … have you actually met or spent time with other people with Asperger’s or autism?

Victoria: No, because most of them I knew were like not like me, … I am very high functioning they were on the other end …

Shawn: … I think that it might be a bit harder for me to connect with them [others with ASD] because I spent like my whole life learning how to interact with neurotypical people and really picking up on how to connect with those kinds of people instead of connecting with other people who might be on the spectrum. Because … they are all so different from myself and the experiences that I have had and … how comfortable they are with others and so I find that sometimes it’s maybe a bit more difficult to connect with them because I don’t know them too well and don’t know what they are going through as much as maybe some other people.

Although participants did not indicate feeling shame or resisting their diagnoses, the responses above reflect distancing themselves from others with ASD who they viewed as “lower functioning.”

Comparison to others without ASD

As previously described, participants expressed confidence about their social lives, achievements, and abilities in relation to others with and without ASD and in terms of their own progress. Although participants did not compare themselves to peers without ASD unfavourably in a general sense, they identified relative weaknesses in terms of social skills, and, in some cases, achievements. They also expressed concerns about how they were viewed by others during interactions, and how they would be viewed if others became aware of their diagnosis or that they received support related to it. This related to their interpretations of how ASD is understood at the societal level.

Sarah and Ellen explicitly acknowledged that social skills were an area of weakness for them that they wanted to improve.

Ellen discussed working with a mentor who was younger than her in order to get the help that she felt she needed:

Ellen: I am kind of like an over grown undergrad so … a mentor …, she helped me out. I realized I needed practice and … I want to improve. If I realize something I am not necessarily good at, I will want to improve it, so any weakness that comes with Asperger’s …I know I need to work at it …

Sarah expressed frustration about her experience participating in a social group that was geared toward “high-functioning” adults with ASD because she was placed with people who she felt were “lower functioning,” less motivated, and less socially skilled than her. She explicitly positioned herself as “somewhere in the middle” of people without ASD and “lower functioning” individuals with ASD in terms of social proficiency:

Sarah: … where are those other people that could maybe help the people with Asperger’s, like model a good conversation and not feel like there’s any pressure …? There has to be a situation that’s in between the two, in between a real social situation where there is a mixed group of people and [not] all people with Asperger’s … there has to be some middle ground. I think especially for people that are higher functioning because I can see that there is a big difference between that lower group and like the normal group you know, I sort of see myself somewhere in the middle and I don’t necessarily feel like talking to other people with Asperger’s is necessarily helpful.

Despite the areas of confidence that were described previously, participants compared themselves unfavourably to individuals without ASD socially:

Jodie: I do have an inferiority complex where I believe everyone is better than me socially and a lot of things.

Samuel also expressed feeling jealous of acquaintances when comparing his accomplishments with theirs:

Samuel: … I know of people, like the people I used to play Vampire with, most of them are actually younger than I am and they have done more with their life then I have. Jealousy. . .

Participants also expressed concern about how others thought of them:

Interviewer: … what do you think other people think of you?

Jodie: … judgment and they are like oh she made that mistake and oh, you know, she has something wrong with her you know?

Interviewer: What do you think people would notice as being wrong with you?

Jodie: … just sometimes lack of eye contact with people and my process of thinking [is not] clear sometimes.

Although Victoria and Alan did not position themselves as inferior to individuals without ASD at any time during their interview, they expressed intense discomfort about how others viewed them. Both made a clear distinction between how they viewed themselves and ASD and how they may be viewed because of misunderstandings about ASD:

Interviewer: Okay, so maybe this is a bit of a weird question, but for you, what’s sort of bad or negative about autism or having autism?

Victoria: … people don’t know [about] different types of autism out there so, their automatic thinking [is that] autism is something retarded or something you know?

Alan discussed being concerned about how he would be viewed for receiving help with some of the challenges associated with ASD. As part of member checking, he expanded on his reasons for feeling uncomfortable when he was offered an opportunity to be paired with a peer mentor through his university’s office for students with disabilities. Although he discussed academic accommodations, he connected his experiences with his views about receiving help and how others think of him more generally:

Alan: I suppose it’s because I’ve internalized this idea that asking for any kind of help that “normal people” don’t need is an admission of weakness or broken-ness and that people will think less of me (or think of me as lesser)

for it. I know that’s not completely true, but it has been almost instinctive in me for almost as long as I can remember. … Now that I know why Asperger’s/autism can make schoolwork difficult and require accommodations, that autism is not a bad or shameful thing and that there are many others like me, I can justify a need for accommodations or help to myself and feel okay about them, but the prospect of having to explain and defend them to any non-autistic acquaintances who find out is still very anxiety-inducing, and it is still hard to shake all those negative feelings off completely.

4.4.2 Orientations to Support

The statements above reflect that participants view themselves favourably in comparison to others with ASD, but less favourably in terms of their social skills and social lives than those without ASD. Participants also expressed concerns about how they are or may be viewed by others because of their diagnosis.

Participants’ orientations to support both reflect and highlight some of the factors that contributed to positioning themselves as “somewhere in the middle.” Their descriptions of support for social issues reveal a range of experiences with social interventions prior to and during their postsecondary education as well as variations in terms of how applicable support for social issues was to them in general. Regardless of these variations, participants viewed specific supports as inapplicable to them.

Participants demonstrated three main orientations to support. The first involves having a positive opinion about supports in general, but viewing them as inapplicable because they had already learned the relevant skills and no longer needed help. The second involves not considering supports because they are associated with “lower functioning” individuals. The third is characterized by viewing supports as applicable, but viewing actual supports as unsuitable for meeting their needs. Ellen’s orientation to support differs from each of these three orientations and is described separately.

100 Orientation 1

Jodie, Shawn, and Mary expressed positive views of supports in general, confidence about their social skills and social lives based on the previous supports and their own learning experiences. They therefore believed that they no longer needed help in these areas.

Interviewer: … some people with Asperger’s or autism … want help meeting people or knowing how to act in social situations or why other people act certain ways in social situations …

Jodie: Okay, I guess I have already dealt with that through my experiences though, so I am good.

Shawn: … it’s my personal opinion that … at the point that I am right now that just through experiences and observations and everything that I am better able to just take what I need … that I haven’t had as much need [for] the social skills classes or any of the support that I had when I was younger from maybe professionals or something.

When describing support that she received when she was younger, Mary expressed that she no longer needed help:

Mary: … that’s when I was really actually having issues socially, I am more high functioning now, so it’s not as much of an issue …

Jodie and Shawn discussed being interested in participating in a social skills group and mentorship program, but explained that they would join for the purpose of helping others, not for themselves:

Interviewer: … have you been involved through the office here in any groups or anything …?

Shawn: It’s mostly academic accommodations. I have helped out with some events for the centre and I have volunteered to be [a mentor for a student] with a disability, but I still haven’t been matched yet. I might be matched this term though.

Interviewer: … so it sounds like you are actually more interested in helping than

101

getting help at this point?

Shawn: Yeah.

Interviewer: … how much of the social [skills] component is there in the [ASD] group?

Jodie: … it’s really just basic stuff such as you know, getting along with friends, taking things the wrong way, stress . . .

Interviewer: So, is it [a] social skills … group?

Jodie: It’s kind of like a group full of social skills, but the thing is I know most of the social skills. In fact the reason I joined that group in the first place was because I wanted to help people with my disability …

Shawn and Jodie’s willingness to engage in support programs implies that they viewed them positively. However, positioning themselves in a helping role demonstrates distancing themselves from others with ASD and viewing existing supports as unsuitable based on their perceived level of functioning.

Mary did not indicate an interest in assuming a helping role, but her comments about what she felt would help students with ASD demonstrate that she did not feel that supports applied to her. She endorsed the idea of providing support to students with ASD, but discussed the potential benefits for “lower functioning” individuals and for society as whole as opposed to relating it to herself:

Interviewer: … there are some colleges and universities that have started social groups for students with Asperger’s syndrome and autism, what do you think of that?

Mary: Well, I think it’s good that they are trying to accommodate and learn more about people with [ASD] because it gives people a chance. Everyone has a different level of disability and I believe everyone should get a chance.

Interviewer: … so these are social groups … is that the kind of chance you are talking about?

Mary: Yeah, social groups, employment opportunities is another thing, there’s some people who are lower functioning than me they can’t work because

102

of it … It’s better for society as a whole that everyone contributes …

Orientation 2

Gavin, Victoria, and Jake did not discuss supports in general or comment directly about why they did not require them. Their responses to questions about what would help them or others with ASD suggest that receiving ASD-specific support relating to social issues is not something that they had considered seriously.

Interviewer: Either now or when you were younger, were you ever part of any groups or programs for or with other people with Asperger’s syndrome?

Gavin: I’ve never been, have never thought about it.

Interviewer: … would that kind of thing [a social group for students with ASD at his school] interest you if they had them?

Jake: It might, I don’t know … I could try it but I don’t really know.

Interviewer: Do you have any opinions about what would help make those kinds of groups more comfortable or successful …?

Jake: I don’t know . . .

Interviewer: … what would you actually want in a group if there was one that you were going to check out?

Jake: What would I want? I don’t know what I’d really want.

Victoria’s intense concerns about privacy and time appeared to make it difficult for her to consider accessing support.

Victoria: I should have gotten some help with my social skills [when I was younger] . . .

Interviewer: … if you could get that kind of help and it was private, so not necessarily even at your school, would you take it?

Victoria: Depends. I mean if it’s a private room, it’s not anywhere like if I come out it’s not like you know, at [university] you come out of the room and everyone knows, well like I don’t know how to explain it. It’s like in my

103

high school if people saw me come out of the autism room they will know I am autistic. I don’t want that.

Interviewer: Yeah, but if it’s a room that’s not necessarily for that and it’s just a group of people walking out of the room? Because I can tell the privacy part is very important to you … but at the same time, you also have concerns, so I am wondering [if you would be interested] if you could have the privacy and get the help?

Victoria: I want privacy like especially with this my autism. I don’t want no one knowing . . .

Interviewer: But you might want help with the social stuff …

Victoria: Um hmm

Interviewer: … if it could be private?

Victoria: Um hmm, but at the same time … I should have gotten it when I was younger but now since I am older I don’t think I will have the time for that.

Interviewer: … so you … should have gotten it when you were younger …?

Victoria: Yeah, someone should have helped me. But I feel like it’s kind of too late now, so I am not like right now I mean school is starting for me and I am wanting to work again so I don’t think I will have time on my plate for any type of outside programs.

Victoria expressed a degree of interest in receiving social skills help if privacy was assured. However, her concerns about privacy relate to distancing herself from being associated with “lower functioning” individuals, which is also consistent with being less likely to imagine receiving help.

Gavin’s statement below demonstrates that he associated ASD-specific support with individuals with “severe” ASD and had no interest in participating:

Interviewer: … do you know if your college has programs or other social groups for students with Asperger’s?

104

Gavin: I am not really sure but I haven’t ever really wanted to get together with anyone that was too severe.

Gavin’s, Victoria’s, and Jake’s views of support as not being applicable to them is consistent with their statements about having limited contact with others with ASD because they viewed themselves as higher functioning and unable to relate. In addition, unlike the participants described in the first orientation, most of the supports that these three participants received in the past were geared toward academic and psychological concerns rather than social issues. It is possible that they had difficulty imagining or being able to evaluate the suitability of supports because social issues were not necessarily emphasized and the experiences that they had to draw upon were limited.

Orientation 3

Samuel and Sarah were both motivated to address their social skills challenges and participated in ASD groups in order to do so. Alan did not discuss social skills specifically, but wanted to improve his social life by connecting with others. Thus, unlike the participants who reflected the orientations described above, they demonstrated that they viewed receiving supports related to social issues as applicable to them. However, like the other participants, they described readily available supports as unsuitable for meeting their needs.

Samuel explained that he wanted help with making friends, dating, and knowing how to act in various social situations and had participated in a campus group for students with ASD that included a social skills component. However, he described the content as not being useful:

Interviewer: … [have there been] any … group things that have happened around social skills or how to meet people or how to connect with people? …

Samuel: Well, we’ve had discussions and we trouble-shooted ideas of what to do and what not to do.

Interviewer: Okay, and was that useful?

Samuel: Not particularly because I think [that is] stuff that I already knew.

105

Sarah also demonstrated that she was motivated to improve her social skills when she discussed attending three social groups for people with ASD, including two as an adult. The first was at her previous university and the second was located in the same city as the university she was attending at the time of the interview, but was community based.

She expressed disappointment about her experience with the latter group, in part because she felt that the other participants were unmotivated:

Sarah: I was actually really hoping to meet some people that were like me and I was disappointed because everybody that I talked to had either done some university or some college, dropped out and a lot of them weren’t working … so I mean a lot of them weren’t sort of motivated academically or really wanting to be something or do something with their lives.

She also expressed frustration about the facilitators’ approach, activity choices, and limited emphasis on social skills:

Sarah: … we all have, like there’s all different skills but if our one skill deficit is the social aspect and then it’s a social group with people that have social deficits and the facilitators aren’t really proactive and leading …, they just sort of let it happen here’s an hour and then the people just talk about with whatever they want then that’s not really helpful. To me it was a giant waste of time I could have done school work that night but I took the bus there and I wanted to see the value in it, but there was absolutely zero value in it.

She described a more positive experience with the ASD group at her previous university because she could relate more with other participants. However, her comments about the social skills component demonstrate that the format did not meet her needs particularly well:

Interviewer: … did they teach anything in the social skills group about what happens if you meet someone who you like well enough and …?

Sarah: I honestly, I don’t even remember what the videos were about, it was a few years ago now. I find it doesn’t really stick because I think for each situation I think it’s so different … it’s a completely different puzzle …

106

even if I learn it in one area, it’s hard to apply in another. So, I feel like sometimes learning those things are good but then when it comes down to the real life situation … there’s more value in talking to somebody that could [provide] input to that specific experience than to just some video generically talking about you know, making friends or something.

Alan did not identify wanting help with social skills or express concerns about the functioning level of others. He described wanting to connect with other people and emphasized the importance of a suitable environment that would allow him to do so. During the interview, he stated that he was interested in attending the ASD group at his university because he had met other students with ASD before the start of classes and connected with them. However, during member checking, he expressed a viewpoint consistent with the neurodiversity approach and stated that he did not want to be part of a group that was facilitated by people without ASD. In contrast to most participants whose comments reflected distancing themselves from others with ASD, Alan distances himself from others without ASD based on issues of comfort and identity as opposed to functioning level:

Alan: They [groups for students with ASD] should be run by the autistic students themselves. There’s an important difference between a “space for autistics” and an “autistic space,” and the latter cannot exist if the group is set up and run by allistic (non-autistic)/ neurotypical facilitators. It’s like having an LGTBQ support/social group set up and run by straight people. Or a Deaf group run by hearing people, or a Black students’ group organized by white people. On a related point, when these groups are overseen by non-autistics, they tend to direct or influence (even unintentionally) the proceedings according to their non-autistic expectations of how socializing and activities should happen, which aren’t necessarily the same as what would be comfortable or ideal for the autistics.

This relates to his comments about not fitting into conventional social situations or being motivated to because doing so would involve needing to suppress his personality in order to “pass”:

107

Alan: Standard and popular North American neurotypical extrovert ways of meeting people and socializing do not often work for me. Anywhere I feel I have to pretend not to be autistic, or at least keep it hidden, in order to fit in (which is pretty much everywhere), I am unlikely to be socially successful. In most social situations, I do not feel I can be myself, which of course means that I’m not going to feel accepted even if I do “pass” well enough to fit in.

Although Alan did not discuss social skills, his statements demonstrate that he was motivated to participate in a group with others with ASD to meet his need for social connection. As a result, like Sarah and Samuel, he described existing supports not meeting his needs.

Ellen’s orientation to support

Ellen viewed supports to address social challenges positively in a general sense and as being applicable to her. She described receiving help from a number of sources at her university including two counsellors and a peer mentor. She eventually became a peer mentor herself and had been working with a first year student with ASD. Ellen was the only participant in the study who simultaneously helped others and received support. This reflects a unique combination of confidence about her social skills and the improvements that she had made while also identifying social issues as an area of weakness that she wanted help to address. Connectedly, Ellen is one of the few participants who did not appear to distance herself from others with ASD. This is demonstrated by her description of helping her mentee by explaining how students congregate at different places on campus and “pretend to study” as a way to meet and socialize with each other:

Ellen: That’s what other people [do], that’s why I said observe people pretending to study. He didn’t know, like that’s something we don’t know, that’s something I don’t know what university culture is like. I don’t know what other people do, we need to observe our peers, we need to observe our peers.

108

Ellen’s use of “he,” “we,” and “I” when discussing the challenges of understanding the culture of the university, how to navigate it, and the importance of observation indicates that she included herself as opposed to implying that these challenges no longer applied to her.

As described above, many of the other participants’ views of others with ASD were influenced by observing individuals with what they interpreted as more severe ASD when they were younger. Although Ellen described receiving considerable support prior to university, it was primarily to address mental health concerns as opposed to being ASD-specific or geared toward social challenges. As a result, her experiences involving individuals with intellectual disabilities or more overt symptom presentation may have been limited, which reduces the likelihood of differentiating herself from others with ASD.

Ellen was also the only participant who described available ASD-specific support related to social challenges as suitable for meeting her needs. This may be related to the type and timing of support that she received. Many of the other participants described participating in group settings that they viewed as unhelpful because of the other members and the content. In contrast, the supports that Ellen utilized during university were individual rather than group-based. As a result, not having participated in group settings may have reduced the likelihood of viewing supports as unsuitable or associating them with individuals with more visible symptom presentations. In addition, individualized support offers the potential advantage of being more responsive to specific concerns or priorities. Ellen provided two examples of how her mentor helped her that reflect this. The first involved acclimatizing to social settings on campus:

Ellen: … in high school I had never been to the cafeteria except for once … So, my mentor in fourth year, her role was to help me go into, like socialize on campus, … so we would meet in … socializing eating places, we would meet in the cafeteria … she helped me get acquainted …

Ellen: … I realized with my mentor … [because of the] background noise it was so weird, so hard to pay attention to a conversation because, it was so distracting there’s other stuff going on, people are talking, you are in a room with people talking and I didn’t do that. So, it was very distracting so getting used to being able to listen to the person in front of me … that was new so I had to learn how to do that …

109

Her mentor also helped her to become more comfortable with socializing with more than one person at a time:

Ellen: … [it was] hard for me to feel comfortable because I didn’t know them and I felt shy and awkward standing there, listening to the two of them. I didn’t know how to say good-bye. I’d end up getting stuck there and be being frozen … like I didn’t know how to talk and walk, so I had a bit of a hard time with talking with someone on campus [when] a third person walks up . . .

Interviewer: And did you get specific help for that? Either from your mentor or …

Ellen: My mentor, eventually we did a little bit of work on that too. So, by the end of fourth year with her, I could get the very basic … you know, two people you run into a third person, you are chatting in tunnels [or the] hallway that kind of thing. I could survive without disappearing. I could do that.

Both of the above examples are very specific and may not have been relevant to most people in a group or conducive to addressing in a group setting. It is possible that being able to target these specific challenges that she viewed as a priority contributed to her positive experience of support, which likely reinforced her view of support as being suitable and applicable to her.

Ellen’s experiences of and orientation to support are exceptional. Although the other participants demonstrated different orientations to support, they indicated that ASD-specific supports that relate to social challenges did not apply to them. Some participants felt that they had already received the help that they needed and it was no longer required. Others expressed that help regarding social challenges was applicable to them, but that available forms of supports did not meet their needs. For some participants, the idea of support was not even a consideration. The common thread running through these variations is that most participants distanced themselves from others with ASD in terms of functioning level.

The orientations to support described above reflect and are influenced by the other ways that participants expressed being “somewhere in middle.” They generally evaluated their social skills as being better than those of others with ASD, but below the level of others without ASD.

110

Participants were confident about themselves, their personalities, and level of functioning as well as self conscious about how they were viewed by others. They accepted their ASD diagnosis and did not necessarily view it as negative, but were concerned about others associating it with being “lower functioning,” how they would be viewed if others knew about it, or knew that they were receiving help to address the issues associated with it.

4.5 Section 5 – Strategies for Social Engagement

The fifth theme describes participants’ approaches to and strategies for managing their social lives. As previously outlined, they expressed being motivated to engage socially and make friends, and discussed areas of confidence as well as a variety of social challenges. The strategies, tendencies, and approaches that participants described reflect these tensions and are consistent with simultaneously striving to engage and placing limitations on aspects of their social lives in response to the challenges that they faced.

Participants described a combination of strategies within specific situations and general approaches to socializing that are characterized by selectivity and limitations geared toward pursuing social engagement while managing the challenges associated with ASD. These include being selective about the contexts and situations they chose to engage in, the size of their social circles, and the specific goals that they pursued. In some cases, the decisions that they made were part of a broader approach to social engagement that encompassed immediate and longer-term objectives. Each of these areas is described below.

4.5.1 Context Selection

Participants were selective with regard to the contexts that they chose to socialize in and were disinclined to engage in multiple contexts.

At the time of our interview, Ellen socialized with friends from before and from university. However, she described making a conscious decision while she was in high school to wait for two years before actively engaging with her peers:

Ellen: I didn’t put the effort [in] socially because I am like, they are just going to disappear in two years, so I was waiting until university to be social.

111

Although she was discussing an example from before postsecondary, the following statement is illustrative of participants’ reluctance to engage in more than one context:

Sarah: … I moved away from home when I was in [my last year of high school] and I made some friends up in the area [that I moved to] and so I just found it hard being a part of two different worlds, it’s hard right?

Connectedly, participants’ statements revealed a tendency to clearly demarcate school and home as either sites for social activity or not:

Interviewer: … have you connected with anyone [at college] who you would call a friend or acquaintance?

Interviewer: … and do you have contact information for her or other people who you like?

Mary: I never got contact information unfortunately because I was so focused on studying, I was so stressed. It was just, I normally got contact information more when I am going for fun times.

Shawn: … well I like to relax at home because I do my school work and my work with [the student group] most of that at school. So when I do have a bit of extra time I like [to] relax at home or I like to just explore new places around town [by myself].

The statements above suggest that participants’ tendency to socialize in only one context is a strategy to avoid becoming overwhelmed. They specifically refer to difficulty navigating multiple contexts, attempting to reduce stress, and being able to relax. Their statements also suggest that they consciously evaluated whether or not postsecondary was a suitable and sufficiently important source of social activity for them to attempt to engage with their peers. Consistent with these tendencies, their descriptions of their social lives, activities, and practices reveal considerable differences between them in terms of the extent to which they emphasized

112 socializing with friends and peers from postsecondary. Notably, with two exceptions, participants described socializing with friends and peers from either before or at postsecondary, but not both.

4.5.2 Variation: Gender Differences in Context Selection

The contexts that participants emphasized as sites for social engagement and the extent to which they actually socialized within them varied by gender to some extent. All five female participants emphasized and described seeing and maintaining contact with friends from before postsecondary on a regular basis, including Jodie and Ellen who were the only two participants to describe substantial social engagement with peers from postsecondary as well. There was more variation among males in terms of the contexts that they emphasized as sites for socialization and the extent to which they engaged within them. Two male participants emphasized friends from before postsecondary whereas three emphasized friends or peers from postsecondary. These differences in context selection influenced participants’ level of satisfaction with their social lives, which will be discussed in the sixth section.

4.5.3 Limited Number of Friends

In addition to selectivity with regard to the contexts that they engaged in, participants described having a limited number of friends, which is consistent with experiencing socializing as both worthwhile yet effortful. The statements below suggest that determining trustworthiness and conceptualizing multiple friendships may be stressors that reinforce participants’ selectivity:

Victoria: I have a really small circle … making friends is not my first priority … I don’t really care, but honestly, I don’t really trust people either, so, I just like to keep my circle small.

Ellen described limiting herself to a maximum of two friends in the past:

Ellen: … so the concept of having a few friends rather than many … Julie was growing apart, but we were still kind of friends, but I had two friends at most … no matter what.

113

Based on input from a counsellor at her university, she determined that “two could increase … a little bit …” However, her tendency to have a limited number of friends is illustrated by her comment about “replacing” a friend from childhood who she had grown apart from:

Ellen: … when I saw Julie was growing apart … in my mind, Nancy replaced Julie.

4.5.4 Managing Social Situations

Participants employed a variety of strategies before entering and during social situations. These include strategies for self-preservation, which were geared toward managing anxiety, discomfort, and limited endurance, as well as strategies for promoting engagement.

Self-preservation

Mary described staying close to friends in larger group settings:

Mary: Oh, I usually cower to the back of the room, and you know, do my own thing. I went to a night club a few times with my friends because I usually just hang around my best friend, the one who, who initially invited me and hang more around her than anyone else or just be alone you know, doing my own thing off somewhere.

Sarah described cancelling or limiting the amount of time that she spent socializing:

Sarah: Well, the thing is that I can sort of control [my anxiety]. If I commit to something and I don’t want to do it, sometimes I try to back out of it … or I cut the time short, or I leave.

She also described seeing friends at the end of the day in order to allow for recovery time:

Sarah: I think I get anxious before a social event but then when it’s happening I am usually okay. But then after I feel bad, but not really with these friends, mostly because when we get together it’s the last thing that I am doing for the night, so then I just go to bed anyways, so I don’t feel the after effects of having to socialize with them because we don’t really get together [at] any other [times of day] … we normally get together in the

114

evening.

Gavin described attempting to keep his girlfriend and group of friends separate so that he could spend time with one or the other:

Gavin: … when it comes to my relationship with Emily, I try and keep my relationships and my friendships distant because that way I can hang out with Emily if I really want to and if I don’t want to hang out with Emily I can hang out with my friends whereas if they are in a group it would kind of be an awkward situation to get out of.

Promoting engagement

Participants were strategic in terms of choosing locations and social situations that were conducive to socializing within, relatively comfortable for them, and likely to be enjoyable:

Samuel: … if I am not in class, I am usually here [at a student space on campus] during the day and so what has happened is after Thomas is done class, he will stop by to see if I am here and he will hang out for a bit.

Shawn: … we have our own lab for people in our program and it’s just as much a social gathering place as it is a place to do work … so by going there instead of staying home or doing all my work at home, I am still able to have that social connection with other people.

Participants also described being able to socialize with others by engaging in structured settings that involve a specific focus and that are centred around shared interests. Some participants explained that engaging in these types of settings was conducive to being approached by others, which addressed their challenges with initiating. Participants discussed joining organizations such as Girl Guides and Cadets and participating in organized activities such as soccer and karate prior to postsecondary. They also described joining groups and participating in activities on campus as well as planning to participate in structured activities in the future:

Ellen: … in second year, I forced myself to go into the music lounge … We had African drumming which helped me socialize. It allowed me to get to know my classmates in music really quickly [because] when you are

115

Mary: If I joined more groups, if I just joined places that I am interested in … I like cooking, so if I joined a cooking group, a knitting group, writing, a book club … [it] would be beneficial. So anything like that, if I just joined what I am interested in, then I will meet people.

In addition to selecting suitable settings, participants described employing and being aware of strategies to integrate themselves into social situations and conversations:

Gavin: . . .. when I went to see the show I went an hour before [they were] open. I went about five or ten minutes before, someone else was waiting there, so I ask so what band are you seeing tonight? And I will strike up a conversation with them. … I try and make it a purpose to arrive to shows early just to meet one person and then meet a whole bunch of other people once I have met them.

4.5.5 Gradual Approaches to Social Development

Participants demonstrated a gradual approach to their social development characterized by acknowledging their challenges, recognizing their progress, identifying various goals, assessing their readiness to pursue them, and accepting the need to wait if necessary.

Ellen described a uniquely comprehensive, conscious, and sequential approach to her social development that spanned a nine year period from the latter part of high school to the time of our interview (see Appendix P). Ellen’s statement about waiting until she was attending university before making efforts to socialize with her peers was included above. When she began university, she focused on acclimatizing to the other students within classroom settings:

Ellen: … finally it was like okay, the big opportunity opens up and it’s like I can do this, so I would work on the basic acquaintance stuff with my classmates only in class and before and after those classes.

116

Ellen: So, [that was] kind of my strategy in first year. So, I would work on, not friendships but, social skills, like social interactions with my peers …

After her first year of university, she continued to develop acquaintanceships and then friendships. She also made efforts to increase her range of social activities, acclimatize to various settings on campus, and be able to tolerate three-person interactions:

Ellen: … so between about second year and the end of that fourth year … that’s when I spent bridging the gap between acquaintances, classmates and maybe making some friends.

During her fifth year, she began to pursue dating:

Ellen: … the consequence of fourth year, fifth year and sixth year were really good because I had the social skills and so I applied them. Yes, finally starting to be interested in guys a little bit … I wasn’t ready when I was 19 to have peers, friends, acquaintances, whatever, people my age [had] you know, doing this couple relationship stuff. I am very simple, you can see how it takes me a long time to build up to acquaintances, friends, you know, boyfriends would be like you know, how am I supposed to do this before I hit 30 you know …?

Although less pronounced than in Ellen’s case, other participants’ statements reflect a gradual approach to their social development characterized by acknowledging their challenges, recognizing their progress, identifying various goals, assessing their readiness to pursue them, and accepting the need to wait if necessary.

Interviewer: … you’ve talked a lot about coping … are you doing anything to work on being able to approach people more easily or getting help from anyone in any way?

Mary: … I am pretty satisfied with my life but if I was ever really wanting to approach someone that I couldn’t, that I was too shy [to], then I would probably go and consult someone about it, but there’s no need to at the moment.

Interviewer: So, it’s sort of something you’d wish for in general, but not right now?

117

Mary: Yeah.

Interviewer: And do you feel like you’ve got the right lines to use [or] the things to say [to initiate more with others]?

Shawn: I like to think that I do … I still have a lot to learn about how to reach these goals and how to do these things but, yeah.

Gavin discussed being frustrated about not spending as much time with his friends compared to when he was younger. However, he also recognized the progress that he had made in terms of improving his skills and social life:

Gavin: … it was just easier back then but I wouldn’t trade for anything now because I am just happy I’ve come this far I guess.

Participants’ selectivity in terms of the situations and contexts that they engaged in, the limited size of their social circles, and their gradual approach to their social development reflects the challenges that they faced as well as their motivation to improve their skills and connect with others. Their statements suggest that the circumscribed nature of their immediate goals and short- term expectations functioned to allow them to pursue their longer-term social goals while managing anxiety, feeling confident, and being motivated to continue to challenge themselves.

4.6 Section 6 – “Somewhere in the Middle” Part 2: Satisfaction with Social Life (“Satisfied But …”)

This section presents the second part of the core theme, “Somewhere in the Middle,” which describes participants’ sense of satisfaction with their social lives. With one exception, participants expressed satisfaction with their social lives or aspects of it. However, their statements also reflect areas of dissatisfaction or ambivalence about how they experienced socializing in terms of comfort, confidence, and enjoyment, the amount of social activity that they participated in, and the number of peers and friends who they engaged with. In addition, differences between participants’ sense of satisfaction emerged that correspond with gender. Specifically, three males expressed more pronounced dissatisfaction than the other participants.

118 4.6.1 Areas of Satisfaction

Participants expressed satisfaction with their overall social life, their friendships, including friends and peers from postsecondary, and the number of friends that they had. In addition, they described enjoying the activities that they participated in, the amount of social interaction that they had, and feeling comfortable in social settings:

Overall social life

Mary: … I am pretty satisfied with my [social] life …

Friends, friendships, and peers

Sarah: I like being around my friends …

Interviewer: … what about your friendships? How satisfied are you with [them]?

Victoria: … good, eight out of 10.

Jodie: … I am just really happy being around with those people [friends from college residence] because they are nice, they are kind, they are considerate and they’re fun.

Number of friends

Interviewer: … you’ve also talked about having a small group of friends. [Is] there [a] group size you’d prefer …?

Victoria: Small group.

Interviewer: So, what’s … the perfect size?

Victoria: Just whatever I have right now.

Types of social activities

Gavin: We talk about … music, different bands, different songs, different albums. We introduce each other to new bands and albums, and stuff like that. And that’s always nice, he will play me some videos, he will play me some songs that he’s been learning and I will show him what I have learned so

119

far from my guitar teacher.

Amount of social interaction

Interviewer: Okay, and you’ve met people through that [who] you like to spend time with?

Shawn: … I have met people … [through the campus group] … we have a lot of social events with that group so I have found that I have had a good amount of social interaction with the group there.

Comfort in social situations

Ellen: … so I am kind of [on] my own socially doing this stuff, I feel comfortable, I have skills, … I am definitely comfortable around [the university]. I talk, even have acquaintances, friends, … classmates that I talk to, spend time with, can kind of do the have lunch thing …

Interviewer: … do you consider yourself comfortable in social situations?

Shawn: Definitely more comfortable than I have been in the past. … by going there [department computer lab] … I am still able to have that social connection with other people that I might not have been comfortable with when I was younger … I have been able to take that social component of my studies and been able to really become comfortable with the people there.

4.6.2 Areas of Dissatisfaction or Ambivalence

Participants expressed dissatisfaction or ambivalence about how they felt in social environments and when interacting with others, the amount of social activity that they engaged in, as well as the number of friends that they had and peers who they socialized with:

Confidence, comfort, and enjoyment

As discussed earlier, participants described having difficulty initiating interactions, concerns about their social skills and how others viewed them, and experienced socializing as effortful.

120

The statements below reflect these challenges and highlight the impact that they have had on participants’ enjoyment of their social experiences and satisfaction with their social lives:

Interviewer: … is this goal [of initiating interactions with others being pursued] because you aren’t completely satisfied or haven’t been?

Shawn: … well it’s not that I haven’t been satisfied … well with [the student group] one of the main goals … is the personal development of its members and so … I’ve really been trying to challenge my boundaries and I have noticed that when I have done those sort of things where I challenge myself and do things that [I am] maybe not comfortable with that there are definitely rewards to those kinds of actions. So it’s not that I haven’t been satisfied it’s because I’ve seen that I can be more satisfied with my life when I challenge myself and maybe initiate the social interactions.

Interviewer: … is there anything that you’d want to change [about your social life]?

Jodie: No, … well maybe be less awkward in conversations and be more confident. I do have an inferiority complex where I believe everyone is better than me socially and a lot of things …

Ellen described “forcing” herself to engage in various situations throughout university and wanting “… to do it just to be able to say I could do it.” The following exchange occurred when discussing her earlier efforts to acclimatize herself to a café on campus:

Interviewer: And [were you] still aiming to survive it [being in the café on campus]?

Ellen: Now I still do that, [I am] aiming to start to enjoy it.

Amount of social activity and number of friends

A number of participants expressed dissatisfaction or ambivalence about how many friends they had, the amount of contact they had with peers, and how often they saw their friends:

Mary and Sarah described being satisfied with their social life and number of friends respectively. However, their responses suggest that they accepted having a small social circle because of their challenges with initiating contact and the effortful nature of socializing as opposed to the size being optimal:

121

Interviewer: Would you say that you are satisfied with your social life?

Mary: Yes.

Interviewer: If you could change anything about your social life what would you change?

Mary: The only thing I would change is I would just be a little more outgoing because I could actually meet more people that way …

Interviewer: Are you happy with the number of friends that you have?

Sarah: Yeah, I think so because, it’s not like I wouldn’t be open to more. I just feel like it’s hard work to maintain the ones that I have.

In addition, Sarah expressed dissatisfaction about the amount of social activity that she was engaged in while at school:

Interviewer: … what does it mean for you to feel lonely …?

Sarah: … just feeling sad that I don’t have anything to do when I have time to do something, especially on weekends -- and living here it’s hard just because there’s one friend that I could phone that lives in [a nearby city] and then if she’s not available to do something or get together, then I feel like I am alone and I just can’t you know, go back to [my hometown] at the drop of a hat . . .

Similarly, Gavin expressed satisfaction about the number of friends that he had, but a degree of dissatisfaction about how often he saw them:

Interviewer: … and how about the number of friends that you have, are you happy with that?

Gavin: I am, but sometimes it feels like I don’t have a whole lot of friends because they are all abroad or something, but I can still stay in contact with them in some way if I feel like it.

Participants’ statements above indicate that they were generally satisfied with their existing friends, peers, and the activities that they engaged in. However, they expressed dissatisfaction

122 about the effortful nature of social interactions and the corresponding impact on their ability to enjoy them. In addition, participants expressed dissatisfaction or ambivalence about the number of friends and peers that they had, the amount of time that they spent socializing with them, and the extent to which they participated in social activities in general.

4.6.3 Gender Variation

Three male participants expressed considerably more dissatisfaction with their social lives than the other participants. In addition to identifying fewer aspects of their social lives that they were satisfied with, they described feelings of loneliness and depression that they attributed to not having friends who they were able to engage in social activities and speak with. Their statements are presented individually because of the differences between them in terms of the extent of their dissatisfaction and the nature of their social lives:

Jake

Jake described having “one very close friend” from childhood and two friends who he saw, but only when he was spending time with his close friend. At the time of our interview, he had not seen his best friend for a number of months because his friend was experiencing mental health issues. He expressed dissatisfaction with the amount of time that he spent with others, the limited number of friends that he had, and described feeling lonely as a result:

Jake: … it can be difficult for me. I really only have just a few real friends.

Interviewer: If you could change anything else about your social life what would you change?

Jake: My social life, I don’t know. I think I do get lonely … I would like to hang out with more with people.

Interviewer: If you had the choice would you have more [friends]?

Jake: Yeah, I don’t know how many more but, sure.

Interviewer: Is there anything different that you’d want in a friend or friends?

Jake: Well, I told you about how difficult it is sometimes to get a hold of people and to just arrange a get-together because they can’t do it on this day or

123

whatever . . .

Alan

Alan initially described having two friends from childhood. However, at the time of our interview, he had not been in contact with them for more than seven months. During member checking, he explained that he no longer considered them to be his friends:

Alan: …Don and I both changed quite a bit during high school, which was part of why we grew apart, and I don’t think we’d really be able to relate to each other very much anymore. With Marcus … By the time we lost touch with each other I didn’t feel like we were very good friends anymore and was starting to think that it was not a very healthy/fair sort of relationship anyway.

Despite wanting to be, Alan was not socially active at postsecondary:

Alan: I’d say I would like to know more people and be friendly with more people and don’t really connect or haven’t really connected or talked even to very many people for a while.

Alan was the only participant who did not describe any areas of satisfaction with regard to his social life. During member checking, he poignantly expressed the extent of the loneliness that he felt:

Alan: …The word “lonely” barely seems adequate anymore. Sometimes it’s to the point where it’s actually physically painful, in the same way (I suspect) that the pain of “heartbreak” can be an actual physical sensation and not just emotional/mental anguish. I think loneliness is probably the biggest single factor in my depression, and it is absolutely crushing, overwhelming and awful, to be honest.

The above statements indicate that Jake and Alan were not in contact with anyone who they considered to be a friend. This contrasts with the other participants in this study who expressed dissatisfaction because they wanted to expand their social circles and spend more time with the friends that they had. Samuel’s statements regarding dissatisfaction are unique because he

124 described spending a considerable amount of time with two of his friends. However, his responses demonstrate that he felt that his social life was minimal and that he did not necessarily have friends who he could contact to spend time with:

Samuel

Samuel described two students from his school as friends:

Interviewer: … so you described Jennifer and Thomas as friends … ?

Samuel: Oh yes.

Interviewer: … and how long have you known them for … ?

Samuel: … three or four years.

Interviewer: … how often do you see Jennifer?

Samuel: About once or twice a week.

Interviewer: Okay, and, and how about Thomas, how often do you see him?

Samuel: I actually see him more often than Jennifer.

During the course of our interview, Samuel described spending time with his two friends on and off campus, engaging in activities such as participating in a campus group for students with ASD, playing video games and board games, and going to movies, restaurants and cafés together. Despite knowing them for three or more years, seeing them regularly, and engaging in a range of activities with them, his statements indicate that he experienced his level of social engagement with friends as minimal:

Interviewer: Can you tell me a little bit about your social life?

Samuel: I don’t have that much of a social life … or I don’t really have people I will call to hang out with.

He explained that he felt lonely and depressed because of the limited amount of time that he spent with others and not having anyone to call to get together with:

125

Interviewer: Do you feel lonely at all now?

Samuel: Oh, at times.

Interviewer: And does that have to do with the amount of time you spend with people or feeling different than people or … how would you describe it?

Samuel: It’s the amount of time I actually spend with other people.

Interviewer: … are you happy with your social life, the friendships that you have?

Samuel: At times … I’ve been depressed when there’s no one I can call if I want to go to a movie or something.

Samuel’s responses above indicating that he saw his friends frequently and socialized regularly. However, his level of satisfaction is affected by his subjective experience of having a limited social life.

4.6.4 Summary

Overall, participants expressed a combination of satisfaction and dissatisfaction with regard to their social lives. They expressed positive views about their friends, social activities, and ability to succeed in social situations, as well as a desire to feel more comfortable, see friends more often, and expand their social lives. However, three male participants demonstrated greater dissatisfaction than the other participants. Their pronounced dissatisfaction compared with other participants indicates that experiences of not having friends who they were able to interact and engage in social activities with influences satisfaction to a greater extent than discomfort within social situations.

Chapter 5 Discussion

The purpose of this study was to examine the social experiences and understandings of friendship of postsecondary students with ASD. The questions that guided it were:

1. How do Postsecondary students with ASD understand and define friendship? 2. What factors (e.g., activities, talking, interests, personality traits) do Postsecondary students with ASD consider important in terms of friendship? 3. What social difficulties and/or concerns do Postsecondary students with ASD identify? 4. What social interventions, if any, do Postsecondary students with ASD identify as potentially helpful? 5. What are the sources of response variation within this population?

This chapter consists of eight sections. The first section addresses the study’s findings related to the first two research questions in relation to existing literature regarding understandings of friendships among individuals with ASD, particularly those without intellectual disabilities. The second section addresses the study’s findings related to the third research question in relation to existing literature about the social challenges that individuals with ASD without intellectual disability face. This includes a discussion of social camouflaging. The third section considers participants’ responses in relation to the debates about social motivation among individuals with ASD. The fourth section addresses the fourth question and discusses participants’ orientations to support and aspects of identity including how they position themselves in relation to others with and without ASD, as well as the extent to which they identify with ASD more generally. The themes of orientation to support and identity are discussed in relation to existing literature about ASD-NoID, as well as the social model of disability, the neurodiversity movement, and criticisms of both. The fifth and sixth sections address the fifth research question. The fifth section discusses participants’ enactment of and satisfaction with their social lives. Context selection, levels of social engagement, and participants’ approaches to social development are emphasized. The sixth section discusses gender differences in participants’ understandings of friendship and patterns of social activity and communication. The role of socialization processes, characteristics of ASD, and features of high school and postsecondary social environments in terms of social skills, understandings, and experiences are considered. The chapter concludes by

126 127 outlining limitations of this study and discussing implications in terms of research, advocacy, and practice.

The data from this study indicate that participants had conventional understandings of friendship that include compatible interests and aspects of intimacy such as positive regard, trust, comfort, connection, acceptance, and support as important components of friendship. Participants’ responses also demonstrated that they felt confident about their strengths, personalities, and social ability as well as being motivated to engage with peers and friends in social activities and to maintain and develop friendships. They also described social challenges including communicating with peers, engaging in various social environments, and determining whether or not their social relationships constituted friendships. Variations relating to participants’ understandings of friendship emerged that correspond with gender. Female participants emphasized intimacy and maintained contact with friends more than males.

Participants’ statements about how they evaluated themselves in relation to their peers, their views about support for individuals with ASD, and their approach to social engagement reflect the tension between the challenges and areas of motivation that they described. They positioned themselves as “somewhere in the middle” of peers with and without ASD in terms of social functioning, viewed supports as appropriate for others with ASD but not themselves, and employed strategic approaches to socializing in order to balance their desire for social connection with managing the impacts of the challenges that they experienced.

… I think especially for people that are higher functioning … there is a big difference between that lower [functioning] group and the normal group …, I sort of see myself somewhere in the middle . . .

Participants’ approaches were characterized by selectivity with regard to the contexts that they engaged in and the size of their social circles as well as pursuing their social goals in a gradual manner. Notably, with two exceptions, participants emphasized socializing with friends from before postsecondary or social engagement with peers from postsecondary, but not both. In addition, the contexts that participants prioritized varied by gender. Female participants emphasized socializing with friends from before postsecondary whereas the context that males prioritized varied between them.

128

Participants described feeling a combination of satisfaction and dissatisfaction or ambivalence with regard to their social lives. They expressed positive views about their friends, social activities, and ability to manage social situations successfully. However, the degree to which they were satisfied was compromised by feelings of discomfort as well as concerns about making social errors and being evaluated negatively by others. Participants also expressed dissatisfaction about how much time they spent with friends and how many friends they had.

5.1 Conventional Understandings of Friendship

Previous findings about the understandings of friendship among individuals with ASD are mixed. Some studies have found that children and adolescents with ASD have difficulty describing friendship, and emphasize activities, shared interests, proximity, recency, and the absence of conflict as opposed to psychological factors, intimacy, conflict resolution, and friendship as a relationship that develops over time (Attwood, 2007; Bauminger & Kasari, 2000; Bauminger, et al., 2004; Carrington et al., 2003; Church, Alisanski, & Ammanullah, 2000). However, some studies have found that adolescents and adults with ASD describe friendship in more concrete terms, but make clear distinctions between friends and non-friends (i.e., acquaintances, strangers, people they do not know, and people they do not like; Carrington et al., 2003), and identify the importance of aspects of intimacy including helping, reciprocity, caring, kindness, demonstrating interest, and resolving conflict through conversation (Carrington et. al., 2003; B. Howard et al., 2006; Locke et al., 2010).

The statements of participants in this study reflect conventional definitions and understandings of friendship that include emphasizing shared activities and aspects of intimacy. Their descriptions of their expectations of friends, what they value in terms of friendship, and what they feel was expected of them as friends included having compatible (but not necessarily the same) interests, as well as maintaining contact by spending time together and communicating regularly. In addition, participants identified exhibiting traits and behaviours associated with intimacy as important components of friendship, including positive regard, kindness, trust, comfort, self- disclosure, emotional connection, understanding, acceptance, and support.

The findings from this study are consistent with previous research indicating that individuals with ASD-NoID “systematize the social world” by social camouflaging, specifically developing and applying cognitive strategies to compensate for perceptual deficits in order to identify social

129 rules, understand others’ perspectives, and manage conventional social situations (Attwood, 2007; Lai, Lombardo, Auyeung, et al., 2015; Livingston et al., 2019; Livingston & Happé, 2017). This process relies heavily on applying conceptual knowledge (Frith, 2004; Hull et al., 2017) and is consistent with developing a strong conceptual understanding of friendship from which to base their behaviour.

Some participants described defining friendship as difficult or expressed uncertainty about their answers, which is similar to Carrington et. al.’s (2003) observations of the challenges that participants in their study demonstrated. However, in contrast with their suggestion that difficulties may reflect a conceptual deficit, all participants in this study provided definitions of the term, explained their understandings thoroughly, and provided conventional responses. These findings suggest that factors such as expressive language issues and confidence may contribute to the challenges that individuals with ASD-NoID have with describing friendship to a greater extent than limited conceptual understandings.

5.2 Social Challenges

Participants’ statements regarding their social challenges are consistent with the characteristics of ASD and the distinct challenges of individuals with ASD-NoID described in the literature. These include pragmatic communication challenges, such as generating, recognizing, and responding to paraverbal components of speech (e.g., tone, pitch, rate, and volume) and nonverbal behaviours (i.e., facial expression, gesture, body orientation) during social interactions (Barnhill, 2007; Frith, 2004; Ochs et al., 2004), as well as demonstrating cognitive inflexibility, which is associated with struggling to adapt to new environments and changes to plans and routines (Green et al., 2007).

Participants described experiencing difficulty following conversations, initiating interactions, knowing what to talk about, what to say, and when to say it, as well as ending conversations. They also described challenges interacting within unstructured, unfamiliar, and unpredictable social situations and settings, for example, engaging with peers outside of activities based on shared interests, multi-person interactions, peers joining conversations unexpectedly, large group situations, parties, and following conversations during seminar classes.

130

Participants’ descriptions of their social lives, strategic approaches, and areas of satisfaction are consistent with the positive outcomes and drawbacks of social camouflaging among individuals with ASD-NoID described in the literature (Hull et al., 2017; Kenny et al., 2016; Livingston et al., 2019). Many of the problematic social behaviours associated with cognitive inflexibility and pragmatic communication challenges are “acts of commission” based on not effectively anticipating others’ expectations and not perceiving their own or others’ misunderstandings. Examples include asking inappropriate questions, making impolite comments, introducing idiosyncratic interests and associations into conversations, not responding to attempts to change conversation topics, and providing insufficient, irrelevant, or redundant information (Barnhill, 2007; Ochs et al., 2004; Szatmari et al., 1989; Tager-Flusberg & Andersen, 1991; Tantam, 1991). However, participants’ descriptions of their social challenges indicate that they were aware of the risk of making overt social errors and employed social camouflaging techniques to integrate into social situations and to avoid attracting scrutiny, creating awkward situations, and being identified as having ASD. Participants also described putting forth considerable amounts of effort acclimatizing to physical environments, observing their peers in various settings, and closely monitoring conversations, social dynamics, and their own behaviours within social situations. They also identified exhibiting passive behaviours such as not speaking to avoid conflict, remaining on the periphery of social groups in order to be included without having to speak, limiting who they socialized with, how often, and in which contexts, and going to events with more outgoing friends in order to be included without needing to initiate interactions with others. Participants also described developing explicit strategies for integrating into social situations and interpreting social information. Examples include arriving at events early in order to meet new people, sitting near talkative classmates who include others in conversations, joining campus groups in order to meet people with similar interests while being able to integrate gradually, and identifying criteria to classify their relationships (e.g., establishing sharing contact information for reasons other than completing school work, spending time together outside of school, and exchanging Christmas gifts as indicators of friendship).

By using social camouflaging techniques, participants were able to achieve positive outcomes including integrating into classroom settings and campus groups, meeting acquaintances, and developing and maintaining friendships. They reported feeling increasingly comfortable in social situations, accepted by others, and pride about successfully managing and succeeding in these

131 contexts. However, participants also described feeling overwhelmed, anxious, and exhausted as a result of the time, effort, and stress involved in acclimating to various environments, and planning, preparing for, and participating in social interactions. These factors may contribute to the high incidence of internalizing problems among individuals with ASD-NoID described in previous studies (Kreiser & White, 2014; Livingston et al., 2019; Solomon et al., 2012).

5.3 Social Motivation

Although adolescents and adults with ASD make efforts to develop friendships and interact with others, they engage in less social activity, have fewer friends (Cage, Bird, & Pellicano, 2016; Gillespie-Lynch et al., 2017; Jaswal & Akhtar, 2018; Kanner et al., 1972; Marks et al., 2000; Szatmari et al., 1989), and express less interest in meeting new people, socializing with their peers, and pursuing friendships than individuals without ASD (Deckers et al., 2014; Sedgewick, Hill, Yates, et al., 2016; Whitehouse et al., 2009). There is considerable debate about the extent to which these patterns reflect an underlying disinterest in socializing resulting from impaired biological functioning versus the effects of social-cognitive deficits on their social experiences.

Proponents of the social motivation theory of autism assert that functional differences in areas of the brain associated with perceptual selectivity and reward mechanisms limit the capacity of individuals with ASD to attend to social information and experience social interactions as pleasurable, and that diminished social motivation is a primary feature of ASD that leads to social-cognitive deficits (Chevallier, Grèzes, Molesworth, Berthoz, & Happé, 2012; Chevallier, Kohls, et al., 2012; Grelotti, Gauthier, & Schultz, 2002; see Helt et al., 2008).

In contrast, numerous authors have argued that the social-cognitive deficits that characterize ASD are associated with social experiences being less enjoyable, which contributes to reduced motivation to interact with peers and pursue friendships. Perceptual challenges, theory of mind, and associated social communication issues are associated with interpersonal conflict and social rejection (Müller et al., 2008; Schroeder et al., 2014; Spain et al., 2018; Sterzing et al., 2012; Swain, Scarpa, White, & Laugeson, 2015). In addition, as described in the previous section, individuals with ASD are often able to have successful social interactions and develop peer relationships and friendships, but compensating for the challenges associated with ASD requires them to employ social camouflaging techniques (Carrington et al., 2003; Hull et al., 2017; Jaswal & Akhtar, 2018). Negative social experiences as well as the effort associated with compensating

132 for symptoms of ASD are both consistent with heightened social anxiety and lower levels of enjoyment, which in turn, correspond with reduced social motivation and avoidant behaviours (Spain et al., 2018; Swain et al., 2015).

The participants in this study were clearly motivated to interact, participate in social activities, and to develop and maintain friendships. They described having friends from before and during postsecondary who they liked, valued, and made conscious efforts to spend time and maintain contact with. Their responses also indicate that they wanted to meet new people, make new friends, and participate in more social activities. In addition, participants’ statements convey that they had and sought friendships characterized by intimacy, emotional connection, self- disclosure, and mutual support as opposed to their motives being limited to instrumental functions. These findings are consistent with previous studies indicating that individuals with ASD enjoy interacting with friends, prefer to do so compared with being alone, and socialize with them primarily because of intrinsic motivation as opposed to gaining social status, meeting others’ expectations, or engaging in specific activities (Chen et al., 2015).

Participants also expressed varying degrees of frustration about not seeing friends, socializing with other students, and participating in social activities as often as they wanted to. The participants who expressed the most dissatisfaction with their social lives described feelings of loneliness and depression, which they attributed to not having friends who they were able to speak and engage in social activities with at all or as frequently as they wanted, as well as unmet desires for connection, sharing personal matters, closeness, and companionship. These findings illustrate participants’ social motivation and are consistent with studies reporting that adolescents and adults with ASD experience feelings of loneliness and isolation when they fail to form friendships (Bauminger et al., 2008; Bauminger & Kasari, 2000; Frith, 2004; B. Howard et al., 2006; Locke et al., 2010; Mesibov & Handlan, 1997; Müller et al., 2008; Tantam, 1991).

The previous section outlined some of the strategies that participants used in order to engage successfully in social situations, the time and effort that they devoted to pursuing their social goals, and the stress, anxiety, exhaustion, and discomfort that they endured in order to engage with peers. Although they identified feeling frustrated about how difficult navigating social situations was, there was no indication that participants questioned whether or not pursuing their social goals was worthwhile. They were willing to challenge or “force” themselves to engage in

133 various situations with the short-term goal of coping or “surviving” as opposed to enjoyment. Their approaches were based on accepting their social difficulties and responding by engaging in long-term processes to develop the ability to manage social situations successfully and be able to experience them as enjoyable in the future. Participants’ statements are consistent with previous studies indicating that individuals with ASD have fewer friends, engage in less social activity, and derive less enjoyment from social interactions. However, their descriptions suggest that these tendencies are a function of how difficult socializing is and reflect the costs of operationalizing social motivation as opposed to indicating disinterest in social relationships.

A diminished capacity for social motivation is inconsistent with participants’ descriptions of what they value in terms of friendship, their social lives, areas of dissatisfaction, as well as the effort that they exert and the impacts they are willing to endure to pursue their social goals. Consequently, the findings of this study contrast with the social motivation theory of autism and align with perspectives that reject the idea of people with ASD being disinterested in social relationships (Jaswal & Akhtar, 2018; Jones & Meldal, 2001; Orsmond et al., 2004).

5.4 Orientations to Support and Identity

Considerations about support for addressing social challenges among individuals with ASD- NoID are complicated because of considerable variation in terms of their cognitive and adaptive skills profiles, corresponding strengths and weaknesses, the impact and visibility of symptoms within different contexts, and their social experiences and history of interventions. In addition, there are varying and often competing views and attitudes among the public, professionals, advocacy groups, and people with ASD regarding disability, ASD, identity, and appropriate support.

Participants’ responses to the question of what they felt would help them socially varied and included not knowing, not wanting or needing help, being observed during conversations in “natural settings” and receiving feedback from peers or facilitators without ASD, individual support, social groups with or without an emphasis on social skills, and in one case, being able to meet exclusively with others with ASD. However, the more notable aspects of their responses addressed their relationship with their diagnosis, their social goals, and their broader orientations to support.

134

The findings of this study revealed three main orientations to support. The first two involve participants viewing support as unnecessary for themselves because they were “high- functioning,” possessed the skills that interventions address, and associated the need for support with being “lower functioning” and demonstrating more visible or severe manifestations of ASD. The main distinction between these orientations is whether or not participants had received support to address social skills challenges in the past. The third orientation involved participants viewing ASD-specific support as applicable to them in general, but perceiving existing supports as unsuitable for reasons including an insufficient emphasis on social skills development and the content or topics within groups being simplistic, general, or unrelated to the situations that they wanted help managing. In addition, existing supports were viewed as unsuitable because other group members were perceived as being “lower functioning,” insufficiently engaged, less socially skilled, and less motivated to improve their skills. One participant did not emphasize social skills, but felt that existing groups and supports were inapplicable because they were led by “neurotypical” facilitators, which he felt was incompatible with creating a suitable environment for individuals with ASD.

The availability and characteristics of support or interventions, and individuals’ experiences and observations of them reflect institutional practices and policies that are shaped by and reinforce societal attitudes, beliefs, and understandings. Participants’ descriptions of available supports being insufficiently sophisticated or specific to meet their needs is consistent with the tendency for services and support being geared toward individuals with more visible physical and intellectual disabilities. In the case of ASD, support for adults is typically limited, particularly for individuals whose symptom presentation is subtle (Friedman, Warfield, & Parish, 2013; Lai, Lombardo, Auyeung, et al., 2015; Stoddart et al., 2013; Taylor & Seltzer, 2011). This service environment corresponds with public perceptions equating autism with mental illness, severe intellectual impairment, being nonverbal, and engaging in repetitive behaviours such as hand- flapping and spinning. Studies of individuals with ASD-NoID have found that that they are aware of these associations and attempt to differentiate themselves from others autism whose symptoms are more visible because of concerns about stigma and being treated as unintelligent or disabled (Jaarsma & Welin, 2012; Spillers et al., 2014; Vivanti et al., 2013).

The social model of disability and neurodiversity movement emphasize the fit between individuals and their environments rather than individual factors in terms of the extent to which a

135 condition is disabling (Armstrong, 2010; Baker, 2011; Broderick & Ne’eman, 2008; Kapp et al., 2013; Lenz, 2008; Oliver, 1990, 1996, 2013; Race, et al., 2005). Participants’ views of ASD- specific support as inapplicable to them, the association between support and “lower functioning” individuals with “more severe” ASD, and their attempts to differentiate themselves from others with ASD highlight the influence of environmental factors on experiences of disability emphasized by the social model and neurodiversity movement.

The neurodiversity movement regards the characteristics associated with autism as natural variations that may confer advantages and that should be embraced or celebrated, as a basis for constituting a community, and as inseparable from identity (Armstrong, 2010; Broderick & Ne’eman, 2008; Brownlow, 2010; Kapp et al., 2013; Ortega, 2009; Runswick-Cole, 2014). Based on these perspectives, its proponents are critical of interventions that prioritize reducing symptoms for the purpose of functioning “normally” and encourage creating support systems and environments that allow individuals with autism to “be themselves” rather than conforming to conventional expectations (Kapp et al., 2013; Runswick-Cole, 2014).

Participants did not indicate feeling shame about or resisting their diagnoses and generally viewed themselves favourably. In addition, some participants described having friends with ASD who they felt that they could relate to as a result of similar perspectives and experiences. However, participants were concerned about how others would view them if they were aware of their diagnoses based on their perception that ASD is misunderstood. In addition, with one exception, there was no indication that ASD was a central component of their self-concept. Their responses suggest that their identity was associated with other aspects of their lives including physical appearance, sexual orientation, values, religious beliefs, activities (e.g., “party girl”), academic achievement, employment status, as well as their interests and abilities (e.g., music, art, games). Their descriptions of their social goals and priorities also indicate that they were motivated to develop their social skills in order to succeed in conventional social situations.

Critics of the neurodiversity movement have argued that it underemphasizes impairment and does not account for individuals who view ASD as a disadvantage and want access to “normalizing” interventions because their symptoms interfere with their ability to participate in social situations and develop friendships (Baker, 2006; Jaarsma & Welin, 2012; Jones et al., 2001; Runswick-Cole, 2014). Participants’ statements indicate that they viewed the

136 characteristics of ASD as representing practical social challenges that they were motivated to address in order to achieve conventional social goals as opposed to neutral differences or advantages to celebrate. Connectedly, they employed social camouflaging techniques to de- emphasize ASD symptoms and navigate social situations. Although they identified drawbacks, participants conveyed a sense of pride about their social skills and the positive outcomes that they achieved by successfully implementing the strategies that they developed. These findings suggest that employing camouflaging techniques not only contributed to succeeding in social situations, but was also important in terms of their identity because it contributed to differentiating themselves from others with ASD. This is consistent with the tendency for some individuals with ASD-NoID to distinguish themselves from individuals with “full-on autism” who “clearly need help” based on their ability to control symptoms of ASD, mimic others’ social behaviour, and function successfully within conventional situations (Vivanti et al., 2013). Thus, in contrast with embracing or celebrating differences associated with ASD, participants’ statements suggest that their identity is based on being “high functioning.”

Participants’ orientations to support, views of others with ASD, descriptions of their social goals and priorities highlight the influence of societal factors (e.g., policy environment, conventional attitudes towards support, availability of services) on the experiences of individuals with ASD- NoID emphasized by the social model of disability and the neurodiversity movement. However, their statements are inconsistent with the assertion that the characteristics of ASD are inseparable from identity or a sufficient basis for constituting a community.

5.5 Factors Influencing Social Satisfaction: Context Selection, Level of Social Engagement, and Approach to Social Development

Participants in this study described areas of satisfaction, dissatisfaction or ambivalence with regard to their social lives. They discussed socializing in a limited range of contexts with small numbers of friends and peers in order to balance their desire to engage in social activities with managing the psychological challenges associated with ASD. With two exceptions, participants either emphasized socializing with friends from before or at postsecondary, but not both. Prioritizing engaging with friends from before postsecondary corresponds with higher levels of social engagement among participants and greater satisfaction with their social lives than

137 prioritizing postsecondary as a site for social engagement. The impact of context selection and level of social engagement on satisfaction is mediated by actively pursuing social goals and having a gradual approach to social development. The relationship between these factors is depicted in Figure 2 below:

Figure 2. The influence of context selection, level of social engagement, and approach to social development on postsecondary students’ satisfaction with their social lives.

138 5.5.1 Vulnerability to Social Isolation: Selectivity, Challenges Associated with ASD, and Characteristics of Postsecondary Institutions

Although the selectivity that participants demonstrated is adaptive, limiting the contexts that they engaged in, the amount of time that they spent socializing, and the size of their social circles is consistent with being vulnerable to isolation. However, the findings of this study suggest that the intersection of the specific social challenges associated with ASD and the characteristics of postsecondary environments correspond with the risk of limited social opportunities being more pronounced among students who emphasize socializing with peers from postsecondary.

Although there is a wide array of options for social engagement, the characteristics of postsecondary environments contribute to vulnerability to isolation among students with ASD- NoID. Transitioning to postsecondary involves acclimating to unfamiliar physical, social, academic, and administrative environments with less support than in high school settings (Heiman, 2006; D. Howard et al., 2006; Mattanah et al., 2010; Oswald & Clark, 2003; Pineda, & Campanella, 2006; Ross et al., 1999). Students are required to adapt to less consistent schedules, differing expectations in terms of classroom conduct, and larger classes with varying combinations of students in each. In addition, many of the social settings and activities that postsecondary students engage in are unstructured and include students who have not met in the past, which contributes to social groupings being relatively fluid and undefined.

Individuals with ASD-NoID are often able to manage social challenges successfully by employing compensatory strategies (Hull et al., 2017; Livingston et al., 2019; Livingston & Happé, 2017). However, applying them is more difficult when interacting with unfamiliar people or in novel social contexts because of the need to make more frequent adjustments during conversations in order to anticipate and interpret others’ expectations, thoughts, feelings, and reactions, and to respond effectively (Attwood, 2006a; Laurent & Rubin, 2004). These challenges are associated with exhibiting passive behaviours within social situations, interfere with making positive impressions, and may limit others’ interest in engaging with them. In addition, difficulty establishing connections with others and the effort involved when they do engage are associated with heightened social anxiety and limiting how enjoyable their social experiences are (Attwood, 2006a; Laurent & Rubin, 2004). These factors are consistent with

139 avoiding social situations or further restricting the extent of their social participation. As a result of the challenges that individuals with ASD face engaging with new people in unfamiliar settings, they may struggle to integrate into social groups, develop friendships, and maintain contact with other postsecondary students when they enter college or university.

5.5.2 Context Selection 5.5.2.1 Emphasis on engagement with peers from postsecondary

It is common for postsecondary students to either lose contact with friends from high school during their first year of university or for the amount of time spent engaging with them and the quality of friendships (i.e., supportiveness and commitment) to decline significantly (Buote et al., 2007; Feldman, Goel, Blakemore, & Zimbler, 2017; Oswald & Clark, 2003; Shaver, Furman, & Buhrmester, 1985). If students are focused on engaging with peers from postsecondary, struggling to meet and connect with them, and are also not in regular contact with friends from before postsecondary, they are vulnerable to having negligible levels of social interaction, and in turn, lower levels of satisfaction with their social lives. The risk of limited social contact and satisfaction may increase after students’ first year because colleges and universities generally make fewer efforts to help students integrate or provide social opportunities (Gump, 2007). In addition, students tend to spend less time socializing because of increased academic demands, and they place less emphasis on meeting new people as their social groups become more firmly established (Casper, Khoury, Lashbough, & Reush, 2011; Sterling, 2015).

5.5.2.2 Emphasis on engagement with peers from before postsecondary

Emphasizing socializing with established friends may limit the extent to which students with ASD interact with other students and become integrated within the institutions that they attend. However, this approach is consistent with higher levels of social engagement and greater satisfaction, particularly for postsecondary students, and may be more realistic in terms of sustaining social activity and avoiding isolation.

Students with ASD are capable of engaging with other students successfully. However, doing so in addition to coping with other responsibilities, such as managing challenges associated with increased independence and meeting academic expectations, may lead to becoming overwhelmed. Consequently, engaging with existing friends may be the most viable alternative

140 to social withdrawal for some students with ASD. Established friendships are likely to be characterized by clear expectations, predictable patterns of social activity and communication, as well as mutual understanding, acceptance, and support, which contribute to interactions being more comfortable and enjoyable. In addition, communicating and spending time with friends who are familiar provides continuity. These factors may offer a degree of relief from the challenges associated with navigating the multiple transitions and interactions with unfamiliar peers, faculty, and staff when students enter postsecondary. It may also provide consistency in contrast with the changes in living situation, classes, and peers who they come into contact after their first year.

5.5.2.3 Benefits of emphasizing both contexts

Only two participants emphasized socializing with friends from before postsecondary as well as peers from postsecondary. Based on the effortful nature of social interaction in general and the challenges associated with conversations with unfamiliar people, emphasizing multiple contexts as sites for social engagement could conceivably contribute to becoming overwhelmed. However, the statements of both participants indicated high levels of satisfaction with their social lives.

Although it may be stressful or effortful, students with ASD are motivated to interact with their peers and derive enjoyment and satisfaction from it. Consequently, engaging with peers from postsecondary reduces the risk of isolation and may contribute to offsetting the impact of reduced contact with friends from before postsecondary. This could be particularly important when students are attending school in different cities than their friends and are unable to see them in person.

Maintaining contact with friends from before postsecondary is also consistent with preventing isolation, contributing to social satisfaction, and may contribute to establishing new social connections. First, friends may be able to provide support or advice that contributes to social integration. Second, socializing with established friends provides relief from the stress associated with interacting with new people in unfamiliar situations and may serve a protective function if attempts to integrate with peers at postsecondary are unsuccessful or if the pace of the progress that they are making is slower than preferred. These factors may reinforce the types of gradual approaches to social development described by participants in this study by reducing the chances

141 of students accelerating their efforts to pursue their social goals to the extent of becoming overwhelmed.

5.5.3 Mediating Factors: Approaches to Social Development

Although the contexts that participants emphasized correspond with their level of social engagement and satisfaction, their statements suggest that the relationship between these factors is mediated by actively pursuing their social goals and their gradual approach to social development.

Participants expressed satisfaction with their social lives as well as acknowledging unmet desires and areas of dissatisfaction including concerns about their communication skills, ability to tolerate certain social and physical environments, having smaller social circles, fewer friends, and spending less time engaging in social activities than they would prefer, as well as experiencing discomfort, stress, and anxiety within social situations. Participants’ statements indicate that satisfaction with their social lives was reinforced and areas of dissatisfaction were tempered by pride about their social progress and having clear goals and specific plans for addressing areas of dissatisfaction. They acknowledged the effort, discomfort, and potential lack of enjoyment associated with pursuing their social goals and adopted gradual, incremental approaches to their social development in response. In addition, they expressed confidence about their ability to further enhance their skills and social lives in the future. Participants’ perspectives about their progress, gradual approach to their social lives, and the corresponding impact on their level of satisfaction relate to themes addressed by theories addressing motivational beliefs, values, and goals, including self-efficacy and self-determination theory.

5.5.3.1 Self-efficacy

Self-efficacy refers to the extent to which individuals feel capable of identifying and implementing the actions required to solve problems or accomplish tasks. According to self- efficacy theory, confidence about one’s ability to complete the steps that are consistent with a desired outcome is associated with persistence and developing specific, proximal, and challenging goals (Bandura, 1990, 1997, 2001; Schunk, 1990).

Consistent with the characteristics of the goals emphasized by self-efficacy theory, participants described using specific strategies to pursue circumscribed goals in a gradual, sequential manner

142 in order to address concerns about their social skills and difficulties tolerating various settings. For example, they discussed observing their peers’ behaviour and interactions on campus and online, joining campus groups, working with peer mentors, and arriving to classes and events early in order to adjust to the settings, enhance their social understandings, familiarize themselves with the social demands associated with them, and to practice communication skills (e.g., initiating interactions, engaging in conversations).

As discussed throughout this dissertation, taking the steps that they determined were necessary to achieve their social goals was effortful and involved enduring considerable amounts of stress, discomfort, and anxiety including “forcing themselves” to adapt to and engage within certain social situations and environments with the immediate goal of “surviving” rather than enjoyment. In addition to demonstrating self-efficacy, participants’ willingness to engage in effortful processes that were not necessarily enjoyable is consistent with aspects of self- determination theory.

5.5.3.2 Self-determination

According to self-determination theory, humans have a fundamental need for autonomy, to challenge themselves, and to feel a sense of mastery, competence, and effectiveness (Deci & Ryan, 1985, 2000; Ryan & Deci, 2000, 2008). Meeting these conditions contributes to two types of intrinsic motivation that apply to the findings of this study. These include integrated motivation, which involves individuals choosing a course of action because it is satisfying in and of itself, and identified regulation, which is associated with choosing actions because they contribute to desired goals (i.e., serve a utilitarian function; Chen et al., 2015; Eccles & Wigfield, 2002; Ryan & Deci, 2000).

Participants’ motives for interacting with their peers, joining groups, and attending events included developing friendships and immediate enjoyment. However, they often discussed comfort, enjoyment, expanding their social circles and range of activities, and developing additional friendships as actual or potential consequences of their processes for acclimating to various environments and developing their communication skills as opposed to a direct result of attending events or participating in groups.

143

5.5.3.3 Mastery goals

In addition to being consistent with identified regulation, participants’ willingness to pursue their social goals despite the effort, stress, and limited enjoyment that it involved also relates to the distinction between task-oriented or mastery goals versus ego-involved or performance goals (Ames, 1992). Whereas achieving performance goals is based on comparison with others, pursuing mastery goals involves prioritizing progress in relation to oneself (Ames, 1992). According to Ames (1992), mastery goals tend to be more challenging because individuals are more likely to choose easier tasks when they are primarily motivated by a desire to outperform others. Prioritizing progress in relation to oneself is also consistent with the concept of “person- referenced outcomes,” which is emphasized within the quality of life paradigm (Schalock, 2000). A central tenet of this perspective is that individuals’ subjective evaluation of their progress in areas that are personally important to them is a critical factor in terms of determining satisfaction and quality of life (Schalock, 2000).

Participants favourably compared their social skills, friendships, and social lives with their earlier experiences. In addition, their statements indicate that they viewed these improvements as accomplishments that they took pride in. Their gradual approach, willingness to challenge themselves and endure significant discomfort, and sense of pride about their accomplishments demonstrates that they evaluated their progress according to their own standards, which contributed to enhancing their level of satisfaction with their social lives and limiting the extent of their dissatisfaction despite having unmet desires.

5.5.4 Summary

The findings of this study indicate that participants who prioritized friends from before postsecondary had higher levels of social engagement than those who emphasized engaging with peers from postsecondary, and that participants who described higher levels of social engagement expressed greater satisfaction with their social lives. This suggests that despite the stress, anxiety, and exhaustion associated with social interaction, limited engagement may be more detrimental to social satisfaction than experiencing discomfort within interactions. In addition, the role of participants’ gradual approach to their social development highlights the importance of self-awareness, goal setting, self-efficacy, and achievement values in terms of satisfaction.

144 5.6 Gender Differences

A number of gender differences emerged from this study including the importance that participants assigned to intimacy when discussing friendship, the extent to which they maintained contact with friends and peers, as well as the contexts that they prioritized and their level of social engagement and satisfaction. These differences may reflect a broader pattern applying to postsecondary students with ASD whereby: (a) gendered processes of socialization and characteristics of ASD contribute to pronounced differences in social understandings, expectations, skills, and experiences including patterns of activity and communication within relationships and friendships; (b) the social experiences and skills of males and females diverge further throughout adolescence because of the characteristics of high school environments, which include increasingly complex social dynamics as well as advantages in terms of friendships development and maintenance associated with proximity; and (c) gender differences in social experiences expand further as a result of the disruption to established social networks that occurs during the transition from high school to postsecondary and the challenging characteristics of college and university social contexts.

5.6.1 Intimacy Emphasis and Maintaining Contact

Female participants’ descriptions of friendship included a greater emphasis on aspects of intimacy, including emotional support, conflict resolution, and the importance of investing effort than males’. These findings are consistent with established gender differences in understandings of friendship described in the literature (Altman & Taylor, 1987; Pahl, 2000; Voss, Markiewicz, & Doyle, 1999; Wright, 1988; Wright & Scanlon, 1991). In addition, females described maintaining contact with friends to a greater extent than males. All five female participants maintained contact with friends from before postsecondary, including both who also emphasized socializing with peers from before postsecondary. Male participants described having friends from before postsecondary, including from childhood. However, with one exception, they were either not in contact with them at all, or were in contact rarely (i.e., had not been in contact for five-to-six months) and only by chance (e.g., seeing each other on a bus, noticing them online).

Differences in maintaining regular contact with friends was reflected by pronounced gender differences in terms of social media and phone use. Female participants described using social networking sites and text-based communication extensively in order to maintain contact and

145 arrange to meet with their friends. Their use of social media and corresponding level of social engagement is consistent with studies indicating positive associations between the use of social networking sites and rates of in-person interactions and friendship quality (Coyne et al., 2013; Jacobsen & Forste, 2010; Padilla-Walker et al., 2010; Subrahmanyam et al., 2008; Wang et al., 2012; Zhao, et al., 2008). In contrast, male participants described using the internet and social networking sites for playing games and accessing information as opposed to social communication, which are not associated with positive social outcomes (Gillespie-Lynch et al., 2014; Mazurek & Wenstrup, 2013; Mazurek et al., 2012; Sundberg, 2018; van Schalkwyk, Marin, et al., 2017). Notably, the only male participant who used social media extensively for social communication was the only male who both emphasized socializing with friends from before postsecondary and maintained regular contact with them.

5.6.2 Online Communication

Internet, social media, and cell phone use are nearly ubiquitous among postsecondary students and are important in terms of initiating contact with peers, making plans with friends, and engaging in individual and group conversations (Boulianne, 2015; Coyne et al., 2013; Gruzd et al., 2018; Jacobsen & Forste, 2011; Sampasa-Kanyinga & Lewis, 2015; Yang, Brown, & Braun, 2014). Consequently, limited use of these forms of communication may impede students’ ability to successfully connect and interact with peers from postsecondary.

The tendency for males’ friendships to be based on shared activity as opposed to intimate communication is consistent with having limited incentives to use these platforms extensively or to view them as important in terms of social communication. In addition, even if they recognize the importance of online communication, the combination of challenges associated with ASD and the complex characteristics of these forms of communication could interfere with the ability to use them effectively.

Older forms of online communication8 such as email, discussion boards, blogs, forums, chat rooms, texting (prior to the widespread use of emojis), and previous versions of social

8 For definitions of words, phrases, and abbreviations related to online communication, see www.netlingo.com (Netlingo, n.d.) and www.webopedia.com (Webopedia, n.d.).

146 networking sites such as Facebook are characterized by asynchronous verbal communication that allows for considerable processing time (Boyd & Ellison, 2008; Kershaw, 2018). In contrast, newer types of online and phone-based communication are hybrid forms that incorporate written, spoken, and electronic properties, characteristics of formal and informal communication, context-specific variants of language, as well as nonverbal complements to language that indicate tone, emotion, and emphasis (Bayer, Ellison, Schoenebeck, & Falk, 2016; Boyd & Ellison, 2008; Crystal, 2006, 2011; Dresner & Herring, 2010; Kershaw, 2018; Tagliamonte & Denis, 2008; Vaterlaus et al., 2016).9 In addition, the characteristics of social networking sites and the pervasive use of cell phones have contributed to patterns of brief, frequent exchanges that have created expectations of immediate responses. As a result, successful online communication involves patterns of adjustment that parallel in-person communication, including having limited time to plan messages and interpret responses (Crystal, 2011; Kershaw, 2018).

Communicating effectively using social networking platforms, particularly newer forms such as Snapchat and Instagram, involves navigating complex systems of meaning and conventions. Each social media platform contains different features and can be considered to constitute a unique social context (Marwick & Boyd, 2011; Wilson, Gosling, & Graham, 2012). For example, Waterloo, Baumgartner, Peter, and Valkenburg (2018) have argued that there are different conventions between social networking sites in terms of the appropriateness of self- disclosure and emotional expression. In addition, the meanings of verbal and visual features of online communication are ambiguous and change rapidly.

Elements such as emoticons and abbreviations (e.g., lol, imo, omg) have relatively stable meanings but serve a range of possible functions and can therefore be challenging to interpret. For example, emoticons and emojis are used to indicate emotion. However, depending on the context, they may operate in ways that are similar to punctuation or function to communicate attitudes and intentions (e.g., as softening devices, to indicate sarcasm or teasing, or to signal that

9 Examples of internet language include internet slang, which includes abbreviations (e.g., BTW), acronyms (e.g., 2MORO), and combinations of both (e.g., CUL8R; see InternetSlang.com, n.d.; Netlingo, n.d.), expressive lengthening (e.g., “soooo sorry,” “awww,” “noooo,” “yessss”; Kershaw, 2018, see Bamman, Eisenstein, & Schnoebelen, 2014), and novel syntactic forms (e.g., “I can has cheezburger”; Fiorentini, 2013; Kershaw, 2018). Examples of nonverbal complements include emoticons, emojis, pictures, animations, and gifs. Some features include verbal and nonverbal components, such as memes and gifs with text overlaid.

147 a statement reflects a preference rather than a directive; Dresner & Herring, 2010). In contrast, features including memes, gifs, and variants of standard language are less stable. The meanings associated with them and the ways that they are used change rapidly and involve combinations of common associations as well as idiosyncratic meanings that are specific to subcultures or that emerge from frequent interactions within smaller social groups (Fiorentini, 2013; Herring, 2013; Kershaw, 2018).

As a result of the complex characteristics of online interactions, limitations in terms of social experience generally and with online communication in particular could be obstacles to using social networking platforms effectively, especially for individuals with ASD who struggle with pragmatic communication. If females with ASD use social networking sites and engage in online communication to a greater extent than males, this could amplify gender differences in social skills and experience and contribute to divergent trajectories during postsecondary. Even if males do choose to create social media accounts, which two participants who emphasized engagement with peers from postsecondary did, they may be less equipped to use them to engage and establish social connections with other students because of limited experience.

5.6.3 Context Selection, Socialization, and Social Skills

The social experiences of postsecondary students are influenced by the environments, activities, and relationships that they have experienced, which reflect socialization processes, and for students with ASD, the characteristics and impacts of the condition. The extent to which students prioritize friendships from before postsecondary is a function of the rewards and costs of the relationships as well as investments in and alternatives to them (Oswald & Clark, 2003; Rusbult, 1980). In addition, maintaining existing friendships and developing new ones each depend on students’ awareness and skills with regard to practices including engaging in in person, online, and phone-based conversations, and making social plans.

Participants’ descriptions of their social lives revealed gender differences in context selection. All five female participants emphasized socializing with friends from before postsecondary, including two who emphasized socializing with peers from postsecondary as well. In contrast, three males prioritized socializing with peers from postsecondary, two emphasized socializing with friends from before postsecondary, and none emphasized both contexts. As discussed in the previous section, participants who prioritized engaging with friends from before postsecondary

148 described higher levels of social engagement and satisfaction with their social lives than those who emphasized socializing with peers from postsecondary. Consequently, female participants were more satisfied with their social lives than male participants.

In Western heteronormative societies, conventional gender role expectations include females displaying interpersonal and emotional sensitivity, empathy, politeness, cooperativeness, sociability, and nurturing behaviour. In contrast, males are expected to be assertive, agentic, independent, productive, and task-oriented (Hentschel et al., 2019; Kreiser & White, 2014). These expectations are reflected and reinforced during interactions with family members and peers. Females use emotional references and supportive language more frequently than males. In addition, they have more opportunities to observe social behaviours and the responses that they elicit, and tend to receive more direct feedback about their behaviour and information regarding social expectations and others’ perspectives and emotional states (Attwood, 2006b, 2007; Dean et al., 2017; Gillberg, 2002; Hiller et al., 2014; Kopp & Gillberg, 1992; Kreiser & White, 2014; Lai, Lombardo, Pasco, et al., 2011; Tierney et al., 2016).

Heteronormative gender differences in social expectations and experience are consistent with a tendency for females with ASD to employ social camouflaging techniques more frequently than males, demonstrate more pragmatic language and conversation skills (Bargiela et al., 2016; Lai, Lombardo, Auyeung, et al., 2015), and have stronger friendships that are characterized by mutual understanding and emotional connection (Lai, Lombardo, Auyeung, et al., 2015; Sedgewick, Hill, Yates, et al., 2016; Sedgewick, Hill, & Pellicano, 2018; Vine Foggo & Webster, 2017). In addition to having more experience with interactions related to social dynamics and that involve emotional content, the more intimate nature of females’ friendships likely contributes to having experience and being aware of the importance of communicating with friends outside of school or other activities.

5.6.4 Characteristics of High School Social Environments

Adolescents generally develop friendships with peers in their schools and neighbourhoods (Crosnoe, 2000). High school settings are conducive to developing and maintaining friendships because shared proximity and joint academic and extracurricular activities promote frequent interaction with the same groups of people and create similarities that contribute to relating to one another (Crosnoe, 2000; Feld & Carter, 1998).

149

As discussed previously, male friendships are generally less intimate than females’ and individuals with ASD are selective in terms of socializing. As a result of the convenience associated with close proximity and similarities associated with the shared setting and activities, it may be possible for some male high school students with ASD to feel satisfied with their level of social engagement and social connections without having to make extensive efforts to arrange to spend time with friends, communicate outside of the context of shared activities, use social media for communication, or to engage in conversations involving social dynamics, self- disclosure, or emotional exchange. Although this may be advantageous during high school, limited experiences in these areas could contribute to being less skilled in terms of demonstrating behaviours associated with maintaining friendships. In addition to making maintaining friendships from before postsecondary less likely, sparse social networks and limited skills and experience may interfere with developing friendships with other postsecondary students.

5.6.5 Characteristics of Postsecondary Social Environments

Transitioning from high school to postsecondary disrupts students’ social networks (Oswald & Clark, 2003). They often live in different locations from friends from high school, and no longer share similarities associated with proximity and being in the same context. Seeing friends from high school on a regular basis may not be possible, or may require effort, planning, and initiative because of location and competing demands associated with attending school.

5.6.5.1 Maintaining existing friendships

The friendships that males have in high school are more likely to be based on shared interests, activities, and experiences as opposed to a foundation of self-disclosure and emotional support. Consequently, no longer being in close proximity and able see friends by going to school or engaging in the same activities may reduce or eliminate the rationale and motivation to make the effort to communicate and maintain contact with them. In contrast, females are more likely to have stronger friendships based on emotional connection that they are more likely to want to sustain even if they are not able to engage in shared activities or see each other in person on a regular basis. Connectedly, females often have to navigate complex conversations and social dynamics in order to manage and succeed in high school social contexts. Consequently, they are more likely to have experience and possess the conversational skills required to discuss themes

150 and topics that allow them to support and relate with their friends despite not being in the same location.

5.6.5.2 Developing new friendships

As discussed earlier, postsecondary social contexts are challenging because social situations are often less structured than in high school environments, and the composition of social groups can be fluid, undefined, and inconsistent. In addition, social dynamics and interactions become increasingly complex during adolescence and young adulthood and involve heightened demands in terms of demonstrating behaviours associated with intimacy (e.g., demonstrating interest and concern, engaging and responding to self-disclosure, and offering emotional support), managing social information, inferring others’ motives, and anticipating their reactions. These environments can be particularly challenging for students with ASD because interacting with unfamiliar people and navigating situations that relate to cognitive empathy are particularly effortful processes.

Having smaller social circles and friendships based on shared interests and convenience rather than personal and intimate connection likely contributes to challenges engaging with peers in college or university. Despite wanting to connect with their peers at postsecondary, male students with ASD may be less experienced and skilled in areas such as resolving conflicts, organizing get-togethers and activities, showing interest in others, knowing how frequently to contact friends, offering emotional support, and navigating various forms of communication (e.g., social media, speaking by phone, texting, and in-person conversations). Even with conceptual knowledge, genuine interest, and motivation, limited experience is likely to make these processes effortful, and may contribute to challenges with fluency and timing during interactions as well as identifying and capitalizing on social opportunities.

5.6.6 Summary

Participants’ descriptions of their social lives before and during postsecondary reflect the presence of two relatively distinct pathways in terms of context selection, social engagement, and satisfaction that correspond with gender. Females prioritized maintaining contact with friends from before postsecondary and described higher levels of social engagement and satisfaction than males. In contrast, males emphasized socializing with peers from

151 postsecondary, but described lower levels of social engagement and satisfaction. These findings are based on interviews with only ten participants and are therefore not automatically generalizable. However, they are consistent with established heteronormative gender differences in friendship and social engagement generally as well as among individuals with ASD specifically. As a result, this pattern may apply to other postsecondary students with ASD.

It is important to note that the gender differences identified above do not indicate that gender plays a deterministic role in terms of the social trajectories of postsecondary students with ASD. This is clearly illustrated by Gavin, whose responses and description of his social life are similar to female participants’. However, patterns of socialization and associated gendered socialization expectations make it more likely that the perspectives, experiences, skills, approaches, and outcomes of postsecondary students with ASD will correspond with the gendered trajectories described above.

5.7 Limitations

This study has a number of limitations related to recruitment, sample size, methodology, and data collection. Efforts were made to recruit a sample of postsecondary students with ASD that included as much diversity as possible in terms of gender, hometown, age, year and area of study, and the type, size, and location of institutions. Consequently, recruitment information was sent to all 24 accredited public colleges and 19 of the 20 accredited public universities in Ontario. However, only 18 students from seven institutions responded. As a result of the small pool of potential participants and time and resource constraints, this study is based on interviews with 10 participants. The sample is relatively balanced considering the small number of participants. However, only one participant was a visible minority, and socioeconomic status, cultural background, gender identity, and sexual orientation, which are potentially important sources of variation, were not emphasized during the recruitment phase or explored consistently or in an in-depth manner during interviews.

Participants were recruited exclusively from campus disability offices, which may have influenced the composition of the sample. Although some disability offices offer multiple services, they are mandated to authorize academic accommodations, which not all students with ASD require. It is possible that postsecondary students who are not registered with their campus

152 disability offices have different views about their diagnoses and the extent to which they identify with it, as well as different experiences socially and in terms of interventions and supports.

As Cridland et al. (2015) have noted, individuals with ASD may be unwilling to participate in interviews because of the stress and discomfort associated with their social communication challenges. In addition, responding to recruitment attempts and participating in research are not likely to be prioritized because of the demands of everyday life and additional challenges related to ASD. Agreeing to be interviewed as part of this study reflected a willingness to meet an unfamiliar person to discuss personal and potentially sensitive information. Participants may have been exceptional in terms of how comfortable they felt in social situations, how willing and effective they were in terms of coping with discomfort, and how well they were managing their academic responsibilities and other demands. The students who responded may have also been more interested in the topic of friendships in general or in relation to their personal experiences than other students with ASD. These possible differences could be associated with heightened self-awareness, which may have influenced their motivation and ability to develop specific goals and approaches to social engagement and friendship development, and to clearly describe their experiences, perspectives, and opinions. As a result of the above factors, the sample is not representative of postsecondary students with ASD and the extent to which the findings of this study apply to other groups of postsecondary students with ASD may be limited.

Another limitation of this study is that participants were only interviewed once. In addition to multiple interviews allowing for themes to be explored in greater depth, individuals with ASD- NoID in general and females in particular, are often able sustain initial conversations using the cognitive strategies and behavioural techniques associated with social camouflaging. Some individuals have reported doing so in situations when they do not necessarily need or want to because of the habits that they have developed as part of their ongoing impression management efforts (Hull et al., 2017; Kreiser & White, 2014). Although participants were offered opportunities to modify or supplement their answers during their interview and afterwards through the member checking process, it is possible that some of their responses were influenced by social acceptability bias.

Interviewing participants at only one point in time is also a limitation because there are substantial differences in social opportunities and academic demands as students progress in their

153 programs. Colleges and universities devote considerable resources to integrating new students. As a result, first-year students have more opportunities to live in residence, attend orientation events, and explore campus groups and clubs than upper year students. In addition, social groups tend to be relatively fluid in first year because students are often meeting each other for the first time. However, entering postsecondary education involves significant challenges associated with managing multiple simultaneous transitions. As a result of the stress associated with these changes and the nature of their symptoms, students with ASD may derive less benefit from initial social opportunities than their peers. This may limit their social opportunities in later years because social groups become more firmly established, increasing academic demands can limit the time available for socializing, and institutions place less emphasis on integrating and providing social opportunities to returning students (Gump, 2007). Despite these potential disadvantages, students with ASD may be better able to engage in social activities in later years when they are more likely to have acclimated to the academic, social, and physical environments at their schools. In light of these considerations, interviewing students multiple times throughout their postsecondary careers would have provided more insight into how their understandings, experiences, goals, and approaches evolved over time.

A further limitation of this study is that it did not include standardized measures of participants’ cognitive abilities, adaptive skills, and ASD and mental health symptoms. ASD-NoID is characterized by uneven cognitive and adaptive profiles, and there is considerable variation among individuals with ASD in terms of their developmental trajectories, symptom presentation, and concurrent psychological conditions or symptoms. More detailed information about these factors may have provided further insight into participants’ experiences and interpretations. In addition, variations in terms of participants’ satisfaction with their social lives emerged as an important focus within this study. However, identifying participants’ level of satisfaction as high or low was based exclusively on a subjective interpretation of their statements. Utilizing a formal quality of life measure would have been useful in terms of specificity and as a better basis for comparison between participants.

Another limitation of this study is that participants’ statements were not corroborated. Although there is no reason to doubt their honesty, it is possible that their interpretations of events, the status of their relationships, the impressions that they make in various social situations, and their evaluations of their social skills could be different from the perspectives of their friends, family

154 members, and others who know them well. However, the principles of qualitative research and the social model of disability include regarding participants as experts on their own lives and emphasizing their perspectives in order to understand phenomena. This is particularly appropriate in the context of this study because the purpose is to better understand participants’ subjective understandings, interpretations, and experiences.

Although this study has a number of limitations, the findings contribute to the existing literature about the ways in which individuals with ASD understand friendship, the importance that they assign to it, and how they balance pursuing their social goals with the challenges that they face. Participants’ descriptions of their social lives and strategic approaches to their own social development also provide insight about a range of variables that clinicians and postsecondary employees can consider when advising and supporting students, providing referrals, and developing programs. Implications for research, advocacy, and practice are discussed below.

5.8 Implications 5.8.1 Directions for Future Research

The findings of this study demonstrate the complex constellation of factors that influence how postsecondary students with ASD enact their social lives and the variation among individuals with ASD-NoID in terms of their experiences and perspectives. The heterogeneity of the population, and the limitations outlined in the previous section indicate the need for further research on their social experiences.

In addition to the considerable variation within the ASD population in terms of their cognitive and adaptive profiles, social experiences, and outcomes, individuals with ASD-NoID and less overt symptom presentation, especially adults and females, have been underrepresented in research (Lai, Lombardo, Auyeung, et al., 2015; Matilla et al., 2011). As a result, further studies that employ an exploratory approach emphasizing first-hand accounts are warranted in order to inform program development, approaches to support, and diagnostic practices.

A key limitation of this study is that it included a small number of participants and is not representative of postsecondary students with ASD. Future research should be based on samples that are as diverse as possible to capture sources of variation. This includes recruiting

155 participants from a wide range of cultural, socioeconomic, and geographical backgrounds drawn from as many colleges and universities, areas of study, and stages of their programs as possible. Attempts should also be made to compare the experiences and perspectives of students who enter postsecondary with and without peers who they already know, and with differing living arrangements (i.e., living with family, independently, in campus residences, with and without roommates).

There is a growing body of evidence indicating that gender nonconformity or gender variance, including diagnoses of Gender Dysphoria (GD) and identifying as “transgender” or “gender non- binary,” is more common among individuals with ASD than among the general population (de Vries, Noens, Cohen-Kettenis, van Berckelaer-Onnes, & Doreleijers, 2010; Dewinter, De Graaf, & Begeer, 2017; Glidden, Bouman, Jones, & Arcelus, 2016; Leibowitz & de Vries, 2016; Pasterski, Gilligan, & Curtis, 2014; van der Miesen, de Vries, Steensma, & Hartman, 2018). In addition, the proportion of adolescents and adults with ASD reporting non-heterosexual attraction is greater than among the general population (Dewinter et al., 2017; George & Stokes, 2018). The intersection of gender identity and sexual orientation with ASD contribute to complexity with regard to self-concept and social experiences (George & Stokes, 2018; Mendes & Maroney, 2019). Consequently, efforts should be made to ensure that samples include gender- diverse individuals and participants who identify as minorities in terms of sexual orientation.

There is a wide range of perspectives about whether ASD is a disability or set of differences, as well as variation in terms of the extent to which individuals with ASD identify with it. As a result, attempts should be made to include participants with a range of relationships with their diagnoses, views regarding the principles associated with the neurodiversity movement, and involvement with formal support (e.g., receiving academic accommodations, participating in structured social skills training, utilizing ASD-specific employment services). Developing a better understanding of the variables that are associated with differing viewpoints may positively influence approaches to support. For example, if there are pronounced differences that correspond with socioeconomic status, geographical location, or cultural factors (e.g., religion, ethnicity), it may provide insights that would allow practitioners to anticipate and respond to the priorities, concerns, and goals of individuals with ASD more effectively.

156

Future research should utilize longitudinal designs to allow for multiple interviews with the same participants in order to better understand how students’ subjective experiences, perspectives, challenges, motivations, and strategies change over time and relate to social, academic, mental health, and vocational outcomes. The findings of this study included satisfaction with social life being mediated by a gradual and strategic approach to social development. This included optimism about the future with regard to expanding social networks, levels of engagement, and interactions becoming less anxiety provoking and more enjoyable. A longitudinal design would be useful for exploring the extent to which the expectations of students with these perspectives are met.

The pattern of negative outcomes among individuals with ASD is well established. Future research should focus on the factors that contribute to positive outcomes. Understanding which practices and characteristics of interventions and supports contribute to positive social developments and satisfaction would be invaluable in terms of informing practice. In addition, the characteristics and dynamics of friendships that individuals with ASD perceive as high- quality and satisfying should be explored in detail and include friendships between individuals with ASD as well as between individuals with and without ASD. As one participants identified, social skills instruction that is based on an idealized view of how people think or act may have limited practical value. Understanding the behaviours that occur within actual friendships, particularly ones involving individuals who share similar characteristics, may contribute to individuals with ASD having a more precise understanding of what to do or say when interacting with friends and peers. This may be especially important for individuals with ASD because the differences associated with the condition likely contribute to their friendships including unconventional or idiosyncratic features.

Variations in terms of satisfaction with social life emerged as an important theme within this study. Participants’ satisfaction with their social lives was mediated by strategic, gradual approaches to social development, which is consistent with proximal goal setting and self- referenced comparison emphasized by literature focusing on subjective well-being (see Schalock, 2000). However, their level of social satisfaction was identified based on interpreting their comments as opposed to more formal measures. Given these findings and the importance of research contributing to approaches and interventions that improve social outcomes, qualitative data should be complemented with standardized measures of subjective quality of life that

157 include satisfaction with interpersonal relations, for example, the Quality of Life Scale (QOLS; Burckhardt & Anderson, 2003), and that incorporate items about the present, comparison with the past, and outlook regarding the future (see Schalock, 2000).

It may also be useful for future studies to incorporate standardized measure of cognitive and adaptive functioning, as well as anxiety, depression, executive functioning, and alexithymia. Including this information could be useful in terms of identifying relationships between individuals’ underlying characteristics and their concerns, goals, and satisfaction with their social lives.

Finally, this study identified the importance of online communication for maintaining contact with friends and peers, and in turn social engagement and satisfaction. The use of social networking sites and texting are prominent features of peer interactions that have changed considerably in recent years and directly relate to the social communication challenges associated with ASD. As a result, there is a need for additional research examining how individuals with ASD perceive and use these mediums (e.g., challenges and benefit of online communication, approaches to navigating interactions using social networking platforms, how they use and interpret various verbal and nonverbal features of online communication), the relationship between established social communication challenges and social media use, the various functions of different forms of online communication, and the connection between online and offline interactions and social networks.

5.8.2 Implications for Advocacy

The findings of this study have important implications in terms of advocacy. A central theme that emerged is that participants were “somewhere in the middle” with regard to satisfaction with their social lives and how they positioned themselves in relation to their peers with and without ASD. This was exemplified by viewing support as inapplicable to themselves despite the challenges that they described. This relates to debates between proponents and critics of the social model of disability and neurodiversity movement about ASD and identity, as well as the extent to which it constitutes a disability versus a set of differences.

The social model of disability and neurodiversity movement emphasize the importance of reducing barriers that interfere with quality of life, ensuring that interventions are consistent with

158 the priorities of individuals with disabilities, as well as critiquing “normalizing” interventions, which in the case of ASD include conforming to conventional expectations with regard to social behaviour (Broderick & Ne’eman, 2008; Chamak, 2008; Hiranandani, 2005; Kapp et al., 2012; Mackelprang & Salsgiver, 1996; Oliver 1990; Runswick-Cole, 2014; Sim et al., 1998). However, participants described distancing themselves from others with ASD who they viewed as “lower functioning,” accepted their diagnoses but viewed it as representing challenges that they were motivated to address, and took pride in their efforts to develop social skills and succeed in conventional contexts. Consequently, participants’ statements demonstrate that honouring the priorities of individuals with disabilities and reducing barriers that interfere with quality of life can be at odds with emphasizing similarities among individuals with ASD and differences between individuals with and without ASD. This suggests the importance of advocates recognizing that ASD can significantly influence individuals’ experiences without being central to their identity and that the characteristics of ASD can be viewed as obstacles to their quality of life without being viewed as a source of shame.

These considerations are consistent with efforts to reconcile some of the criticisms of the social model and neurodiversity movement with its principles. Although there are areas of disagreement, proponents and critics of these perspectives share the goal of improving quality of life among individuals with ASD and the perspective that individuals with ASD have the right to make choices regarding their identity and decisions about their lives based on their priorities (Baker, 2011; Broderick & Ne’eman, 2008; Kapp et al., 2013; Runswick-Cole, 2014).

Connectedly, it has been suggested that ASD can be viewed as a positive identity based on unique characteristics and abilities while also acknowledging that there are deficits that may warrant intervention (Kapp et al., 2013; Savarese et al., 2010). Consistent with this approach, Jaarsma and Welin (2012) have suggested that HFA should not be regarded as a disorder or disability, but as a condition that is associated with specific vulnerabilities. They argue that identifying vulnerability acknowledges differences between individuals with ASD as well as between individuals with and without ASD and reflects that support may or may not be required depending on environmental factors (Jaarsma & Welin, 2012). This approach accounts for the strengths of individuals with ASD-NoID and that they may be capable of managing their social lives without extensive support. It also acknowledges that the perceptual, sensory, and communication differences associated with ASD can lead to experiencing difficulties engaging

159 in certain social or sensory environments and therefore facing a higher risk of social rejection and isolation, and anxiety and exhaustion related to the effort required to successfully navigate interactions.

5.8.3 Implications for Practice

The findings of this study have implications for how clinicians and support staff approach discussions about social challenges with postsecondary students with ASD, as well as the focus and characteristics of potential interventions. Individuals with ASD-NoID are vulnerable to social challenges and isolation, but their experiences are shaped by environmental factors and vary considerably. Consequently, offering appropriate support requires understanding the perspectives, preferences, priorities, and goals of each student and tailoring recommendations and interventions accordingly. Although there is considerable variation, support providers can anticipate some of the strengths, challenges, tensions, and complexities that influence students’ experiences of and approaches to social engagement and support.

5.8.3.1 What practitioners and support staff should anticipate.

The findings of this study suggest that practitioners and support staff should anticipate that students with ASD are motivated to engage with their peers, have conventional understandings of friendship, and are capable of developing and maintaining friendships characterized by mutuality, reciprocity, and intimacy. It is also important to account for the tendency for individuals with ASD to mask or camouflage their symptoms and to experience social interactions as effortful. In addition, students may have a complex relationship with regard to their diagnosis and the extent to which they identify with it, as well as ambivalent views of support based on their past experiences and how they position themselves in relation to others with and without ASD.

5.8.3.1.1 The need to meet more than once.Individuals with ASD-NoID tend to employ social camouflaging strategies and exhibit subtle symptom presentation. In addition, as a result of their social challenges, students may be anxious or uncomfortable during initial encounters with clinicians or staff. Consequently, meeting students with ASD more than once may increase the likelihood that they will candidly discuss their challenges, goals, concerns, and consider accepting support.

160

5.8.3.1.2 Experiencing social interactions as effortful. College and university students generally expect and are expected to explore new activities and ideas, expand their social networks, and develop long-term friendships with other students (Astin, 1991; Buote et al., 2007; Chickering & Reisser, 1993; Koegel et al., 2013; McCluskey-Titus & Oliver, 2001). These expectations often lead to encouraging students to participate in a wide range of activities in order to engage with other students extensively. However, as a result of the effortful nature of socializing for students with ASD, associated selectivity, and connection between prioritizing existing friends and social satisfaction, it important for support providers and staff at colleges and university to be selective in terms of their recommendations and mindful of the potential need for these students with ASD to limit their level of social activity.

Students with ASD may describe specific goals that seem limited in general or in the context of their overall social goals and social lives that are circumscribed in comparison to other students. Anticipating and understanding the possible reasons for this type of approach is important for understanding that limitations in these areas do not necessarily reflect limited social motivation or determine satisfaction. Connectedly, as discussed earlier, quality of life and social satisfaction are influenced by the extent to which individuals feel capable of developing and executing strategies to address challenges and pursue their goals. Consequently, practitioners and support staff should be mindful of the value of actively pursuing clear, proximal goals in terms of sustaining social engagement and contributing to satisfaction, be open to unconventional criteria for success, and ensure that advice regarding social and support activities is consistent with students’ efforts to balance their goals with the need to recover from the stress of social interactions. This is a particularly important consideration when working with first-year students with ASD because of the extent of the challenges that they face when transitioning from high school to postsecondary.

5.8.3.1.3 Complex relationships with ASD diagnoses.The findings of this study highlight the importance of not making assumptions about the extent to which students with ASD identify with their diagnosis. Some students may view ASD as an important aspect of their identity, view the characteristics as contributing to their uniqueness or as strengths and may resent attempts to promote conformity or framing it as a disability. Others may accept their diagnosis, but view it as representing a set of challenges to overcome in order to integrate successfully in conventional contexts. In addition, some students may differentiate themselves from others with ASD, and

161 take pride in their ability to minimize their differences and to fit in, connect with others, and pursue conventional goals, activities, and social lives. Others may have more mixed views characterized by wanting to both fit in and be themselves. Identifying students’ views about their diagnosis is necessary for determining whether or not to recommend support as well as to ensure that the support offered is appropriate and consistent with their beliefs and goals.

5.8.3.1.4 Ambivalent views of support. Although students with ASD are likely to acknowledge the challenges that they face, they may have ambivalent or negative views regarding support because of associations between receiving help and being “lower functioning” or previous experiences that they view as ineffective. Pursuing support may represent an identity threat if camouflaging their symptoms and being “higher functioning” in general or in comparison to others with ASD is central to their identity. Some students may also feel that they do not deserve help because they perceive their challenges as less severe than those of others with ASD or in comparison to when they were younger.

As a result of these factors, practitioners and support providers may not only need to ensure that recommendations are applicable to the student, but that the reasons why they view it as suitable are explained effectively. In addition to learning about students’ challenges, goals, and priorities, this may require addressing previous experiences that were negative or ineffective in order to identify how recommended supports differ from them.

The importance of accounting for the possibility of ambivalent views of support when providing suggestions and referrals cannot be overstated, particularly if group-based social skills interventions are being considered. It is important to ensure that the types of skills being addressed (e.g., verbal communication, physical presentation of self, nonverbal communication, limiting versus expanding how much they speak) are consistent with potential participants’ priorities and that individuals are well-matched in terms of their intellectual ability, maturity, existing social skills, and motivation to focus on skill development. If the content covered within groups is too basic, not related to their priorities, or students are matched with peers who are less skilled than themselves, they may feel that they can get help, but do not need or deserve it because they already possess sufficient social skills. This may be accurate in some cases, but in others, it could contribute to having an inaccurate understanding of their social skills and how they are viewed by their peers. In addition, if students view interventions that they participate in

162 as below their ability level, they may feel that they do need help but cannot obtain suitable support and assume that attempts to do so will be futile. Each of these risks can interfere with seeking support and engaging in suitable interventions in the future.

Students may also need to be persuaded that they are deserving of support and that pursuing it does not necessarily indicate weakness or a lack of ability. One possible approach is to explicitly acknowledge that individuals with ASD-NoID are capable of succeeding within social situations, but that receiving assistance is warranted because socializing can be challenging, stressful, and anxiety provoking. Support can then be framed as a way of promoting further success and managing the impacts of the effort that they have to exert in order to be successful socially.

5.8.3.2 Considerations regarding the focuses and characteristics of support

Although there is considerable variation among individuals with ASD in terms of their experiences, perspectives, and priorities, the findings of this study as well as previous research suggest that there a number of issues regarding the focuses or characteristics of support that apply to postsecondary students with ASD more generally. These include the importance of focusing on enactment, or the practices and behaviours inherent in social engagement, emphasizing the importance of maintaining contact with friends and peers, promoting effective online communication, accounting for gender difference, and providing individualized support.

5.8.3.2.1 Emphasizing enactment.Participants’ conventional definitions and understandings of friendship, the challenges that they described, and their clear desire to engage with their peers, participate in social activities, and to have friends are consistent with promoting interventions that emphasize enactment rather than conceptual issues such as definitions and the functions or benefits of friendship. In addition, as a result of the behavioural strategies that they employ and selective approach to socializing, support providers should anticipate that postsecondary students with ASD are unlikely to require interventions that focus on correcting inappropriate behaviour or overt social errors. Students with ASD may benefit from help with defining their relationships by identifying the extent to which peers meet the criteria of friendship, identifying suitable settings for socializing and developing strategies to acclimate to them, and enhancing communication skills within in-person interactions (e.g., demonstrating and monitoring interest, initiating and interjecting in conversations effectively, establishing what to say in various

163 situations) and online communication. These types of interventions are consistent with students connecting their conceptual knowledge with their situations and experiences and thus enhancing their practical understandings of friendship.

5.8.3.2.2 Social media use. Successful social integration and friendship maintenance depend less on physical proximity than in the past and increasingly rely on online communication via social networking platforms and texting (Oswald & Clark, 2013). As a result of the importance and complexity of online interaction and the social communication challenges associated with ASD, online communication skills should be emphasized to a similar extent as in-person social skills. Service providers should assess postsecondary students’ awareness of the importance of online communication for developing and maintaining social networks and friendships, their patterns of use in terms of functions and frequency, and be prepared to offer or arrange support to assist students to use social networking platforms and texting effectively.

5.8.3.2.3 Maintaining contact with existing friends.The findings of this study indicate that postsecondary students with ASD who prioritize socializing with existing friends have higher levels of social engagement and satisfaction with their social lives compared with students who prioritize socializing with peers from postsecondary. In addition to the benefits of maintaining existing friendships, the complexity of social dynamics among adolescents and young adults, challenges associated with the transition to college or university, the effortful nature of interacting with unfamiliar people, and tendency toward selective engagement are obstacles to socializing extensively and developing friendships with peers from postsecondary. As a result, support providers should attempt to learn about students’ social networks, friendships, and patterns of social engagement. Depending on the characteristics of their existing friendships, the extent to which they want to maintain them, as well as their approach to social development in terms of selectivity, support providers should consider emphasizing maintaining existing friendships to a greater extent than developing new social connections. Postsecondary students with ASD may have relatively strong social skills, but limited experience with needing to make extensive efforts to maintain contact. As a result, practitioners should be prepared to provide direct and specific advice with regard to maintaining existing friendships (e.g., how frequently to contact friends, which methods to use, and what to say in certain situations).

164

5.8.3.2.4 Gender differences.As a result of factors including socialization processes, features of ASD, and the characteristics of high school environments, it is important for support providers to anticipate gender differences in terms of students’ perspectives, priorities, challenges and needs with regard to support. In comparison with males, female postsecondary students are more likely to employ social camouflaging techniques extensively and demonstrate fewer visible symptoms of ASD. They are also likely to have more social experience in general and with friendships based on intimacy specifically. Consequently, they may be more familiar with complex social dynamics, and have more developed communication skills that apply to in-person conversations and online exchanges. Connectedly, female students are more likely to have close friendships from before postsecondary and to prioritize maintaining them over developing new friendships with other students. As a result, female students may benefit from support that helps them to interpret the dynamics within the social contexts that they participate in, address challenges within their existing relationships, and manage stress associated with social engagement (e.g., addressing anxiety, defining their social relationships, and evaluating which contexts to engage in and relationships to maintain or develop). In contrast, males may need more encouragement to maintain existing friendships or more extensive support to connect with other students, including approaches that emphasize social skills that apply to in-person conversations and online communication.

5.8.3.2.5 The importance of individualized support.Variation in terms of the priorities, strengths, challenges, and experiences of postsecondary students with ASD necessitates an individualized approach for support to be effective. Depending on students’ goals, suitable forms of support may include one or a combination of individual interventions such as counselling, social skills coaching, or peer mentorship, and group interventions that emphasize social skills or recreational activity. Interventions could be administered or facilitated by professionals, follow mutual aid or self-help models, and may or may not include peers or facilitators without ASD. There are also many potentially appropriate possibilities and combinations in terms of group composition (e.g., size, gender, age, communication skills, interests).

Although individualization is important, limited time, funding and expertise within and outside of college and university contexts present significant obstacles to offering the range and number of options required to meet the varying needs of adults with ASD-NoID generally and postsecondary students specifically. In addition, the relatively small number of students with

165

ASD, their varying preferences, goals, and abilities, as well as logistical factors (e.g., incompatible schedules) contribute to challenges recruiting compatible staff, facilitators, and participants for interventions. However, it is important to not overstate the extent or permanence of these obstacles.

Many of the resource limitations described above are directly or indirectly related to conventional views that associate support with being severely or visibly physically or intellectually disabled. In addition to influencing funding decisions, restricted opportunities for individuals with ASD-NoID whose symptom presentation is subtle leads to a narrow range of abilities among individuals who are able to access support, and in the case of ASD, for interventions to be less sophisticated or general than many postsecondary students require. This is consistent with offering formal group interventions (e.g., social skills groups) that include standardized curricula, which can be expensive because of the need for certification or specific training. In contrast, an individualized approach to support that identifies specific needs, preferences, and goals may increase the likelihood of students being amenable to support, involve limited staff time, as well as being inexpensive and impactful.

Many of the strategies that participants have described and what they have indicated they want in terms of support may be inexpensive. Participants discussed the importance of observing peers in order to familiarize themselves with the behaviour of other students, the need to acclimate to certain settings, and a desire for feedback and advice about their social behaviours in conventional settings and situations. Although there may be a role for professional to play, support that addresses these areas could likely be provided by peer mentors with varying degrees of supervision or guidance. The shared experiences, goals, and cultural references associated with being from the same generation may make peers more effective than staff or professionals in terms of interpreting situations, statements, settings, and behaviours and providing relevant advice.

Support from peer mentors may be particularly appropriate for using social media effectively because of age-related differences in the use of social networking platforms, and the rapidly changing meanings and conventions associated with online communication. In addition, providing support that addresses online communication is particularly conducive to being effective and inexpensive because, in contrast with observing in-person interactions, there are

166 very few requirements in terms of the settings where help can be provided. As a result, the privacy of students who are receiving assistance can be maintained, feedback can be provided in a direct manner, and because of expectations of immediate responses, often in real-time.

Overall, although some interventions require considerable time, funding, and expertise, the cognitive strengths of individuals with ASD-NoID, their ability to apply their skills to manage social situations, as well as their gradual and selective approaches to pursuing their social goals is consistent with benefiting from informal, peer-administered, and circumscribed interventions to address specific challenges.

5.9 Conclusion

The postsecondary students who participated in this study positioned themselves as “somewhere in the middle” in terms of social satisfaction and in relation to peers with and without ASD in terms of social functioning, described complex relationships with their diagnosis, and viewed support as inapplicable to themselves. In addition to describing areas of confidence and satisfaction with their social lives, participants’ responses indicated that they had conventional understandings of friendship, were motivated to develop social relationships and engage with their peers, and experienced social successes. They also described areas of dissatisfaction or ambivalence with their social lives and adopted selective approaches to social engagement that reflected a need to balance their motivation to socialize with the impact of their challenges.

These findings demonstrate that possessing the intellectual ability, determination, and social skills to manage, “pass,” or succeed within conventional social contexts does not necessarily correspond with whether or not individuals with ASD require or can benefit from support. This is consistent with the idea that subjective well-being and quality of life are not necessarily a function of the severity or visibility of symptoms of specific conditions; they are enhanced by reducing discrepancies between individuals’ needs and their environments as well as their current states and their goals and aspirations (see Schalock, 2000). Consequently, it is important to challenge conventional views that equate the appropriateness of receiving support with overt behavioural differences, visible physical disability, severe impairment, and intellectual disability. In the case of individuals with ASD-NoID, including postsecondary students, providing support that reflects an individualized approach may be required for them to realize their social goals, reduce the costs of success, and enhance their quality of life.

167 References

Adams, R. G., & Allan, G. (Eds.) (1998). Introduction: Contextualising friendship. In Placing friendship in context: Structural analysis in the social sciences (pp. 1–17). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Adreon, D., & Durocher, J. (2007). Evaluating the college transition needs of individuals with high-functioning autism spectrum disorders. Intervention in School and Clinic, 42(5), 271–279. doi:10.1177/10534512070420050201 Alcorn Mackay, S. (2010). Identifying trends and supports for students with autism spectrum disorder transitioning into postsecondary. Toronto, ON: Higher Education Quality Council of Ontario (HEQCO). Retrieved from http://myaccess.library.utoronto.ca/login?url=http://books.scholarsportal.info/viewdoc.ht ml?id=/ebooks /ebooks0/gibson_cppc/2010-08-20/1/10398020 Allan, G. (2003). A critique of using grounded theory as a research method. Electronic Journal of Business Research Methods, 2(1), 11–20. Retrieved from http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.464.1384&rep=rep1&t ype=pdf Allan, G. A. (1989). Friendship: Developing a sociological perspective. Hemel Hempstead, UK: Harvester Wheatsheaf. Altman, I., & Taylor, D. (1987). Communication in interpersonal relationships: Social penetration theory. In M. E. Roloff & G. R. Miller (Eds.), Interpersonal processes: New directions in communication research (pp. 257–277). Newbury Park, CA: SAGE. Ameli, R., Courchesne, E., Lincoln, A., Kaufman, A., & Grillon, C. (1988). Visual memory processes in high-functioning individuals with autism. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 18(4), 601–615. doi:10.1007/BF02211878 American Psychiatric Association (APA). (1952). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders (1st ed.). Washington, DC: Author. American Psychiatric Association (APA). (1968). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders (2nd ed.). Washington, DC: Author. American Psychiatric Association (APA). (1980). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders (3rd ed.). Washington, DC: Author. American Psychiatric Association (APA). (1994). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders (4th ed.). Washington, DC: Author. American Psychiatric Association (APA). (2013). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders (5th ed.). Washington, DC: Author. Ames, C. (1992). Classrooms: Goals, structures, and student motivation. Journal of Educational Psychology, 84(3), 261–71. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.84.3.261 Ames, M. E., McMorris, C. A., Alli, L. N., & Bebko, J. M. (2016). Overview and evaluation of a mentorship program for university students with ASD. Focus on Autism and Other Developmental Disabilities, 31(1), 27–36. doi:10.1177 /1088357615583465

168

Anderson, D. K., Liang, J. W., & Lord, C. (2014). Predicting young adult outcome among more and less cognitively able individuals with autism spectrum disorders. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 55(5), 485–494. doi:10.1111 /jcpp.12178 Armstrong, T. (2010). Neurodiversity: Discovering the extraordinary gifts of autism, ADHD, dyslexia, and other brain differences. Cambridge, MA: Da Capo Lifelong. Astin, A. W. (1977). Four critical years: Effects of college on beliefs, attitudes and knowledge. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. Astin, A. W. (1991). Assessment for excellence: The philosophy and practice of assessment and evaluation in higher education. New York, NY: Macmillan. Archer, J., & Coyne, S. M. (2005). An integrated review of indirect, relational, and social aggression. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 9(3), 212–230. doi:10.1207/s15327957pspr0903_2 Attwood, T. (2000). Strategies for improving the social integration of children with Asperger syndrome. Autism, 4(1), 85–100. doi:10.1177/1362361300004001006 Attwood, T. (2006a). Asperger’s syndrome and problems related to stress. In M. G. Baron, J. Groden, G. Groden, & L. Lipsitt (Eds.), Stress and coping in autism (pp. 351–370). New York, NY: Oxford University Press. Attwood, T. (2006b). The pattern of abilities and development of girls with Asperger’s syndrome. In Asperger’s and girls (pp. 1–7). Arlington, TX: Future Horizons. Attwood, T. (2007). The complete guide to Asperger’s syndrome. Philadelphia, PA: Jessica Kingsley. AutisMag. (2014, December 16). Autism non-profit organizations. Retrieved from https://www.autismag.org/autism-non-profit-organizations Autism and Developmental Disabilities Monitoring Network Surveillance Year 2010 Principal Investigators. (2014). Prevalence of autism spectrum disorder among children aged 8 years—Autism and Developmental Disabilities Monitoring Network, 11 Sites, United States, 2010. Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report: Surveillance Summaries, 63(2), 1– 21. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org.myaccess.library.utoronto.ca/stable/24806108 Autistic Self Advocacy Network. (2019). Affiliate groups. Retrieved from https://autisticadvocacy.org/get-involved/affiliate-groups/ Autism Speaks. (2016). Mission. Retrieved from http://web.archive.org/web/2016073016 1338/https://www.autismspeaks.org/about-us/mission Bagatell, N. (2010). From cure to community: Transforming notions of autism. Ethos, 38(1), 33– 55. oi:10.1111/j.1548-1352.2009.01080.x Bagwell, C., Bender, S., Andreassi, C., Kinoshita, T., Montarello, S., & Muller, J. (2005). Friendship quality and perceived relationship changes predict psychosocial adjustment in early adulthood. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 22(2), 235–254. doi:10.1177/0265407505050945 Baker, D. L. (2011). The politics of neurodiversity: Why public policy matters. Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner.

169

Bal, V. H., Kim, S., Cheong, D., & Lord, C. (2015). Daily living skills in individuals with autism spectrum disorder from 2 to 21 years of age. Autism, 19(7), 774–784. doi:10.1177/1362361315575840 Bamman, D., Eisenstein, J., & Schnoebelen, T. (2014). Gender identity and lexical variation in social media. Journal of Sociolinguistics, 18(2), 135–160. doi:10.1111 /josl.12080doi:10.1111/josl.12080 Bandura, A. (1990). Perceived self-efficacy in the exercise of personal agency. Journal of Applied Sport Psychology, 2(2), 128–163. doi:10.1080/10413209008406426 Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. New York, NY: W. H. Freeman. Bandura, A. (2001). Social cognitive theory: An agentic perspective. Annual Review of Psychology, 52(1), 1–26. doi:10.1146/annurev.psych.52.1.1 Barahona-Corrêa, J. B., & Filipe, C. N. (2016). A concise history of Asperger syndrome: The short reign of a troublesome diagnosis. Frontiers in Psychology, 6(2024), 1–7. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2015.02024 Barbour, R. S. (2000). The role of qualitative research in broadening the “evidence base” for clinical practice. Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice, 6(2), 155–163. doi:10.1046/j.1365-2753.2000.00213.x Bargh, J. A., & McKenna, K. Y. A. (2004). The internet and social life. Annual Review of Psychology, 55, 573–590. doi:10.1146/annurev.psych.55.090902.141922 Bargiela, S., Steward, R., & Mandy, W. (2016). The experiences of late-diagnosed women with autism spectrum conditions: An investigation of the female autism phenotype. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 46(10), 3281–3294. doi:10.1007/s10803-016- 2872-8 Barkow, J. H. (1992). Beneath new culture is old psychology: Gossip and social stratification. In J. H. Barkow, L. Cosmides, & J. Tooby (Eds.), The adapted mind: Evolutionary psychology and the generation of culture (pp. 627–637). New York, NY: Oxford University Press. Barnes, C. (1992). Qualitative research: Valuable or irrelevant? Disability, Handicap & Society, 7(2), 115–124. doi:10.1080/02674649266780151 Baron-Cohen, S. (1995). Mindblindness: An essay on autism and theory of mind. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Barnhill, G. (2007). Outcomes in adults with Asperger syndrome. Focus on Autism and Other Developmental Disabilities, 22(2), 116–126. doi:10.1177 /10883576070220020301 Baumeister, R. F., Campbell, J. D., Krueger, J. I., & Vohs, K. D. (2003). Does high self-esteem cause better performance, interpersonal success, happiness, or healthier lifestyles? Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 4(1), 1–44. doi:10.1111 /1529-1006.01431 Baumeister, R. F., Zhang, L., Vohs, K. D. (2004). Gossip as cultural learning. Review of General Psychology, 8(2), 111–121. doi:10.1037/1089-2680.8.2.111 Bauminger, N., & Kasari, C. (2000). Loneliness and friendship in high‐functioning children with autism. Child Development, 71(2), 447–456. doi:10.1111/1467-8624.00156

170

Bauminger, N., & Kasari, C. (2001). The experience of loneliness and friendship in autism: Theoretical and practical issues. In E. Schopler, N. Yirmiya, C. Shulman, & L. Marcus (Eds.), The research basis for autism intervention (pp. 151–168). New York, NY: Kluwer Academic/Plenum. Bauminger, N., Shulman, C., & Agam, G. (2004). The link between perceptions of self and of social relationships in high-functioning children with autism. Journal of Developmental and Physical Disabilities, 16(2), 193–214. doi:/10.1023 /B:JODD.0000026616.24896.c8 Bauminger, N., Solomon, M., Aviezer, A., Heung, K., Gazit, L., Brown, J., & Rogers, S. J. (2008). Children with autism and their friends: A multidimensional study of friendship in high-functioning autism spectrum disorder. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 36(2), 135–150. doi:10.1007/s10802-007-9156-x Bayer, J. B., Ellison, N. B., Schoenebeck, S. Y., & Falk, E. B. (2016). Sharing the small moments: Ephemeral social interaction on snapchat. Information, Communication & Society, 19(7), 956–977. doi:10.1080/1369118X.2015.1084349 Beersma, B., & Van Kleef, G. A. (2012). Why people gossip: An empirical analysis of social motives, antecedents, and consequences. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 42(11), 2640–2670. doi:10.1111/j.1559-1816.2012.00956.x Bell, S., & Coleman, S. (1999). The anthropology of friendship: Enduring themes and future possibilities. In S. Bell & S. Coleman (Eds.), The anthropology of friendship (pp. 1–19). Oxford, UK: Berg. Benford, P., & Standen, P. (2009). The internet: A comfortable communication medium for people with Asperger syndrome (AS) and high functioning autism (HFA)? Journal of Assistive Technologies, 3(2), 44–53. doi:10.1108/17549450200900015 Berger, R. J., & Lorenz, L. S. (2015). Disability and qualitative research. In R. J. Berger & L. S. Lorenz (Eds.), Disability and qualitative inquiry: Methods for rethinking an ableist world (pp. 1–10). Farnham, UK: Ashgate. Berscheid, E., Snyder, M., & Omoto, A. M. (1989). The relationship closeness inventory: Assessing the closeness of interpersonal relationships. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 57(5), 792–807. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.57.5.792 Birks, M., & Mills, J. (2015). Grounded theory: A practical guide (2nd ed.). Los Angeles, CA: SAGE. Bishop-Fitzpatrick, L., Hong, J., Smith, L., Makuch, R., Greenberg, J., & Mailick, M. (2016). Characterizing objective quality of life and normative outcomes in adults with autism spectrum disorder: An exploratory latent class analysis. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 46(8), 2707–2719. doi:10.1007/s10803-016-2816-3 Bishop‐Fitzpatrick, L., Mazefsky, C. A., Minshew, N. J., & Eack, S. M. (2015). The relationship between stress and social functioning in adults with autism spectrum disorder and without intellectual disability. Autism Research, 8(2), 164–173. doi:10.1002/aur.1433 Björkqvist, K., Österman, K., & Kaukiainen, A. (1992). The development of direct and indirect aggressive strategies in males and females. In K. Björkqvist & P. Niemelä (Eds.), Of mice and women: Aspects of female aggression (pp. 51–64). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.

171

Boulianne, S. (2015). Social media use and participation: A meta-analysis of current research. Information, Communication & Society, 18(5), 524–538. doi:10.1080/1369118X.2015.1008542 Boyd, D. M., & Ellison, B. (2008). Social network sites: Definition, history and scholarship. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 13(1), 210–230. doi:10.1111/j.1083- 6101.2007.00393.x Braganza, M., Akesson, B., & Rothwell, D. (2017). An empirical appraisal of Canadian doctoral dissertations using grounded theory: Implications for social work research and teaching. Journal of Teaching in Social Work, 37(5), 528–548. doi:10.1080/08841233.2017.1386259 Broderick, A., & Ne’eman, A. (2008). Autism as metaphor: Narrative and counter‐narrative. International Journal of Inclusive Education, 12(5–6), 459–476. doi:10.1080/13603110802377490 Brown, B. (2004). Adolescents’ relationships with peers. In R. Lerner & L. Steinberg (Eds.), Handbook of adolescent psychology (pp. 363–394). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley. Brown, L. (2011). The significance of semantics: Person-first language: Why it matters. Retrieved from https://www.autistichoya.com/2011/08/significance-of-semantics-person- first.html. Brownlow, C. (2010). Presenting the self: Negotiating a label of autism. Journal of Intellectual and Developmental Disability, 35(1), 14–21. doi:10.3109/13668250903496336 Burckhardt, C. S., & Anderson, K. L. (2003). The Quality of Life Scale (QOLS): Reliability, validity, and utilization. Health and quality of life outcomes, 1(60). doi:10.1186/1477- 7525-1-60 Buhrmester, D., Furman, W., Wittenberg, M. T., Reis, H. T., Buhrmester, D., Furman, W., . . . Reis, H. T. (1988). Five domains of interpersonal competence in peer relationships. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 55(6), 991–1008. doi:10.1037/0022- 3514.55.6.991 Bukowski, W., Motzoi, C., & Meyer, F. (2009). Friendship as process, function, and outcome. In K. Rubin, W. Bukowski, & B. Laursen (Eds.), Handbook of peer interactions, relationships, and groups (pp. 217–231). New York, NY: The Guilford Press. Buote, V., Pancer, S., Pratt, M., Adams, G., Birnie-Lefcovitch, S., Polivy, J., & Wintre, M. (2007). The importance of friends: Friendship and adjustment among 1st-year university students. Journal of Adolescent Research, 22(6), 665–689. doi:10.1177/0743558407306344 Burke, M., Kraut, R., & Williams, D. (2010). Social use of computer-mediated communication by adults on the autism spectrum. In Proceedings of the 2010 ACM conference on computer supported cooperative work (pp. 425–434). New York, NY: ACM. doi:10.1145 /1718918.1718991 Bussey, K., & Bandura, A. (1984). Influence of gender constancy and social power on sex-linked modeling. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 47(6), 1292–1302. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.47.6.1292

172

Bussey, K., & Bandura, A. (1999). Social cognitive theory of gender development and differentiation. Psychological Review, 106(4), 676–713. doi:10.1037/0033- 295X.106.4.676 Cage, E., Bird, G., & Pellicano, L. (2016). “I am who I am”: Reputation concerns in adolescents on the autism spectrum. Research in Autism Spectrum Disorders, 25(2006), 12–23. doi.org/10.1016/j.rasd.2016.01.010 Carbery, J., & Buhrmester, D. (1998). Friendship and need fulfillment during three phases of young adulthood. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 15(3), 393–409. doi:10.1177/0265407598153005 Carrier, J. G. (1999). People who can be friends: Selves and social relationships. In S. Bell & S. Coleman (Eds.), The anthropology of friendship (pp. 21–38). Oxford, UK: Berg. Carrington, S., Templeton, E., & Papinczak, T. (2003b). Adolescents with Asperger syndrome and perceptions of friendship. Focus on Autism and Other Developmental Disabilities, 18(4), 211–218. doi:10.1177/10883576030180040201 Caronna, E. B., Milunsky, J. M., & Tager-Flusberg, H. (2008). Autism spectrum disorders: Clinical and research frontiers. Archives of Disease in Childhood, 93(6), 518–523. doi:10.1136/adc.2006.115337 Casper, J., Khoury, A., Lashbaugh, K., & Ruesch, A. (2011). The sophomore year experience final report to Dr. Laura Coffin Koch, Associate Vice Provost for Undergraduate Education. Minnesota, MN: University of Minnesota. Retrieved from http://www.secondyear.umn.edu/files /The percent20Sophomore percent20Year percent20Experience percent20Final percent20Report.PEL percent20.June percent202011.pdf Cederlund, M., Hagberg, B., Billstedt, E., Gillberg, I. C., & Gillberg, C. (2008). Asperger syndrome and autism: A comparative longitudinal follow-up study more than 5 Years after original diagnosis. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 38(1), 72–85. doi:10.1007/s10803-007-0364-6 Chamak, B. (2008), Autism and social movements: French parents’ associations and international autistic individuals’ organisations. Sociology of Health & Illness, 30(1), 76– 96. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9566.2007.01053.x Charmaz, K. (1995). Grounded theory. In J. Smith, R. Harré, & L. Langenhove (Eds.), Rethinking methods in psychology (pp. 27–49). London, UK: SAGE. Charmaz, K. (2000). Grounded theory methodology: Objectivist and constructivist qualitative methods. In N. K. Denzin & Y. E. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (2nd ed., pp. 509–535). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE. Charmaz, K. (2006). Constructing grounded theory: A practical guide through qualitative analysis. London, UK: SAGE Chen, Y. W., Bundy, A. C., Cordier, R., Chien, Y. L., & Einfeld, S. L. (2015). Motivation for everyday social participation in cognitively able individuals with autism spectrum disorder. Neuropsychiatric Disease and Treatment, 11(2015), 2699–2709. doi:10.2147/NDT.S87844

173

Chevallier, C., Grèzes, J., Molesworth, C., Berthoz, S., & Happé, F. (2012). Brief report: Selective social anhedonia in high functioning autism. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 42(7), 1504–1509. doi:10.1007/s10803-011-1364-0 Chevallier, C., Kohls, G., Troiani, V, Brodkin, E. S., & Schultz, R. T. (2012). The social motivation theory of autism. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 16(4), 231–239. doi:10.1016/j.tics.2012.02.007 Chickering, A. W., & Reisser, L. (1993). Education and identity. San Francisco, CA: Jossey- Bass. Church, C., Alisanski, S., & Amanullah, S. (2000). The social, behavioral, and academic experiences of children with Asperger syndrome. Focus on Autism and Other Developmental Disabilities, 15(1), 12–20. doi:10.1177/108835760001500102 Canadian Internet Registration Authority (CIRA). (2018). Canada internet factbook 2018: Canada’s source for current internet data. Retrieved from: https://cira.ca /factbook/canada percentE2 percent80 percent99s-internet-factbook-2018 Chakrabarti, S., & Fombonne, E. (2005). Pervasive developmental disorders in preschool children: Confirmation of high prevalence. American Journal of Psychiatry, 162(6), 1133–1141. doi:10.1176/appi.ajp.162.6.1133 Chiang, H., Tsai, L., Cheung, Y., Brown, A., & Li, H. (2014). A meta-analysis of differences in IQ profiles between individuals with Asperger’s disorder and high-functioning autism. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 44(7), 1577-1596. doi:10.1007/s10803- 013-2025-2 Cooper, R. (2017). Where’s the problem? Considering Laing and Esterson’s account of schizophrenia, social models of disability, and extended mental disorder. Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics, 38(4), 295–305. doi:10.1007/s11017-017-9413-0 Corbin, J., & Strauss, A. (2008). Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE. Coyne, S. M., Padilla-Walker, L. M., & Howard, E. (2013). Emerging in a digital world: A decade review of media use, effects, and gratifications in emerging adulthood. Emerging Adulthood,1(2), 125–137. doi:10.1177/2167696813479782 Creswell, J. W. (2008). Educational research: Planning, conducting, and evaluating quantitative and qualitative research (3rd ed.). Upper Saddle Creek, NJ: Pearson Education.: Cridland, E. K., Jones, S. C., Caputi, P., & Magee, C. A. (2015). Qualitative research with families living with autism spectrum disorder: Recommendations for conducting semistructured interviews. Journal of Intellectual and Developmental Disability, 40(1), 78–91. doi:10.3109/13668250.2014.964191 Crosnoe, R. (2000). Friendships in childhood and adolescence: The life course and new directions. Social Psychology Quarterly, 63(4), 377–391. doi:10.2307 /2695847 Crystal, D. (2006). Language and the internet. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. Crystal, D. (2011). Internet linguistics: A student guide. New York, NY: Routledge. Cummings, J. N., Butler, B., & Kraut, R. (2002). The quality of online social relationships. Communications of the ACM, 45(7), 103–108. doi:10.1145 /514236.514242

174

Cutcliffe, J. R. (2005). Adapt or adopt: Developing and transgressing the methodological boundaries of grounded theory. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 51(4), 421–428. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2648.2005.03514.x Davis, J. M. (2000). Disability studies as ethnographic research and text: Research strategies and roles for promoting social change? Disability & Society, 15(2), 191–206. doi:10.1080/09687590025621 Dean, M., Harwood, R., & Kasari, C. (2017). The art of camouflage: Gender differences in the social behaviors of girls and boys with autism spectrum disorder. Autism, 21(6), 678–689. doi:10.1177/1362361316671845 Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (1985). The general causality orientations scale: Self-determination in personality. Journal of Research in Personality, 19(2), 109–134. doi:10.1016/0092- 6566(85)90023-6 Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2000). The “what” and “why” of goal pursuits: Human needs and the self-determination of behavior. Psychological Inquiry, 11(4), 227–268. doi:10.1207/S15327965PLI1104_01 Deckers, A., Roelofs, J., Muris, P., & Rinck, M. (2014). Desire for social interaction in children with autism spectrum disorders. Research in Autism Spectrum Disorders, 8(4), 449–453. doi:10.1016/j.rasd.2013.12.019 de Giambattista, C., Ventura, P., Trerotoli, P., Margari, M., Palumbi, R., & Margari, L. (2019). Subtyping the autism spectrum disorder: Comparison of children with high functioning autism and Asperger syndrome. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 49(1), 138–150. doi: 10.1007/s10803-018-3689-4 Dekker, M. (1999). On our own terms: Emerging autistic culture, presented at Autism’99, Online, 1999. Retrieved from http://www.autscape.org/2015/programme/handouts /Autistic-Culture-07-Oct-1999.pdf DeMyer, M., Barton, S., DeMyer, W., Norton, J., Allen, J., & Steele, R. (1973). Prognosis in autism: A follow-up study. Journal of Autism and Childhood Schizophrenia, 3(3), 199– 246. doi:10.1007/BF01538281 DeMyer, M., Churchill, D., Pontius, W., & Gilkey, K. (1971). A comparison of five diagnostic systems for childhood schizophrenia and infantile autism. Journal of Autism and Childhood Schizophrenia, 1(2), 175–189. doi:10.1007/BF01537956 DeMyer, M. K., Hingtgen, J. N., & Jackson, R. K. (1981). Infantile autism reviewed: A decade of research. Schizophrenia Bulletin, 7(3), 388–451. doi:10.1093/schbul /7.3.388 Denzin, N. K., & Lincoln, Y. S. (2005). Introduction: The discipline and practice of qualitative research. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of qualitative research (2nd ed., pp. 1–32). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE. Deruelle, C., Rondan, C., Gepner, B., & Fagot, J. (2006). Processing of compound visual stimuli by children with autism and Asperger syndrome. International Journal of Psychology, 41(2), 97–106. doi:10.1080/00207590500184610 de Vries, A. L., Noens, I. L., Cohen-Kettenis, P. T., van Berckelaer-Onnes, I. A., & Doreleijers, T. A. (2010). Autism spectrum disorders in gender dysphoric children and adolescents.

175

Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 40(8), 930–936. doi:10.1007/s10803- 010-0935-9 Dewinter, J., De Graaf, H., & Begeer, S. (2017). Sexual orientation, gender identity, and romantic relationships in adolescents and adults with autism spectrum disorder. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 47(9), 2927–2934. doi:10.1007/s10803-017- 3199-9 Dickens, W. J., & Perlman, D. (1981). Friendship over the life cycle. In S. Duck & R. Gilmour (Eds.), Personal relationships (pp. 91–112). London, UK: Academic Press. Dissanayake, C., & Macintosh, K. (2004). Mind reading and social functioning in children with autistic disorder and Asperger’s disorder. In B. Repacholi & V. Slaughter (Eds.), Individual differences in theory of mind: Implications for typical and atypical development (pp. 223–249). Hove, UK: Psychology Press. Dresner, E., & Herring, S. C. (2010). Functions of the nonverbal in CMC: Emoticons and illocutionary force. Communication Theory, 20(3), 249–268. doi:10.1111/j.1468- 2885.2010.01362.x Du Bois, C. (1974). The gratuitous act: An introduction to the comparative study of friendship patterns. In E. Leyton (Ed.), The compact: Selected dimensions of friendship (pp. 15–32). St. John’s, NL: Institute of Social and Economic Research. Dziobek, I., Rogers, K., Fleck, S., Bahnemann, M., Heekeren, H. R., Wolf, O. T., & Convit, A. (2008). Dissociation of cognitive and emotional empathy in adults with Asperger syndrome using the multifaceted empathy test (MET). Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 38(3), 464–473. doi:10.1007/s10803-007-0486-x Eaves, L. C., & Ho, H. H. (2008). Young adult outcome of autism spectrum disorders. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 38(4), 739–747. doi:10.1007 /s10803-007-0441-x Eccles, J. S., & Wigfield, A. (2002). Motivational beliefs, values, and goals. Annual Review of Psychology, 53(1), 109–132. doi:10.1146/annurev.psych.53.100901.135153 Ellison, N. B., Steinfield, C., & Lampe, C. (2007). The benefits of Facebook “friends”: Social capital and college students’ use of online social network sites. Journal of Computer‐Mediated Communication, 12(4), 1143–1168. doi:10.1111/j.1083- \6101.2007.00367.x Eme, R. F. (1992). Selective females affliction in the developmental disorders of childhood: A literature review. Journal of Clinical Child Psychology, 21(4), 354-364, doi:10.1207/s15374424jccp2104_5 Engström, I., Ekström, L., & Emilsson, B. (2003). Psychosocial functioning in a group of Swedish adults with Asperger syndrome or high-functioning autism. Autism, 7(1), 99– 110. doi:10.1177/1362361303007001008 Estabillo, J. A., & Matson, J. L. (2018). Adaptive and developmental behavior scales. In J. L. Matson (Ed.), Handbook of childhood psychopathology and developmental disabilities assessment (pp. 71–81). Cham, Switzerland: Springer. Evans, N. J., Forney, D. S., Guido, F. M., Patton, L. D., & Renn, K. A. (2010). Student development in college: Theory, research, and practice (2nd ed.). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

176

Farley, M. A., McMahon, W. M., Fombonne, E., Jenson, W. R., Miller, J., Gardner, M., . . . Coon, H. (2009). Twenty‐year outcome for individuals with autism and average or near‐average cognitive abilities. Autism Research, 2(2), 109–118. https://doi- org.myaccess.library.utoronto.ca/10.1002/aur.69 Feld, S., & Carter, W. C. (1998). Foci of activity as changing contexts for friendship. In R. G. Adams & R. Allan (Eds.), Placing friendship in context: Structural analysis in the social sciences (pp. 136–152). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. Feldman, R., Goel, K., Blakemore, A., & Zimbler, M. (2017). Promoting mindset change and student success. In R. Feldman (Ed.), The first year of college: Research, theory, and practice on improving the student experience and increasing retention (pp. 277–308). Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press. Fiorentini, Ilaria. 2013. Zomg! Dis iz a new language: The case of lolspeak. Newcastle Working Papers in Linguistics, 19(1), 90–108. Retrieved from https://s3.amazonaws.com/academia.edu.documents/31135703/5.Fiorentini_NWPL.pdf?r esponse-content-disposition=inline percent3B percent20filename percent3DZOMG_Dis_iz_ a_new_language_The_case_of.pdf&X-Amz- Algorithm=AWS4-HMAC-SHA256&X-Amz- Credential=AKIAIWOWYYGZ2Y53UL3A percent2F20190707 percent2Fus-east-1 percent2Fs3 percent2Faws4_request&X-Amz-Date=20190707T033904Z&X-Amz- Expires=3600&X-Amz-SignedHeaders=host&X-Amz-Signature= 8125fd302ea505ff607cbff1d71585c3133bc852ce663a69db29eef064f39960 Fombonne, E. (2009). Epidemiology of pervasive developmental disorders. Pediatric Research, 65(6), 591–598. doi:10.1203/PDR.0b013e31819e7203 French, L. R., Bertone, A., Hyde, K. L., & Fombonne, E. (2013). Epidemiology of autism spectrum disorders. In J. D. Buxbaum & P. R. Hof (Eds.), The neuroscience of autism spectrum disorder (pp. 3–24). New York, NY: Academic Press. Friedman, N. D., Warfield, M. E., & Parish, S. L. (2013). Transition to adulthood for individuals with autism spectrum disorder: Current issues and future perspectives. Neuropsychiatry, 3(2), 181–192. doi:10.2217/NPY.13.13 Frith, U. (2004). Emanuel Miller lecture: Confusions and controversies about Asperger syndrome. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 45(4), 672–686. doi:10.1111/j.1469-7610.2004.00262.x Gelbar, N., Smith, I., & Reichow, B. (2014). Systematic review of articles describing experience and supports of individuals with autism enrolled in college and university programs. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 44(10), 2593–2601. doi:10.1007/s10803-014-2135-5 George, R., & Stokes, M. A. (2018). Sexual orientation in autism spectrum disorder. Autism Research, 11(1), 133–141. doi:10.1177/1362361317714587 Ghaziuddin, M. (2000). Autism in mental retardation. Current Opinion in Psychiatry, 13(5), 481–484. doi:10.1097/00001504-200009000-00003 Ghaziuddin, M. (2010). Brief report: Should the DSM V drop Asperger syndrome? Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 40(9), 1146–1148. doi:10.1007/s10803-010-0969- z

177

Ghaziuddin, M., & Mountain‐Kimchi, K. (2004). Defining the intellectual profile of Asperger syndrome: Comparison with high‐functioning autism. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 34(3), 279–284. doi:10.1023 /B:JADD.0000029550.19098.77 Glaser, B. G. (1992). Basics of grounded theory analysis: Emergence vs. forcing. Mill Valley, CA: Sociology Press. Glaser, B. G., & Holton, J. (2004). Remodeling grounded theory. The Grounded Theory Review: An International Journal, 4(1). doi:10.17169/fqs-5.2.607 Glaser, B. G., & Strauss, A. L. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory: Strategies for qualitative research. Chicago, IL: Aldine. Giarelli, E., & Fisher, K. (2013). Transition to community by adolescents with Asperger syndrome: Staying afloat in a sea change. Disability and Health Journal, 6(3), 227–235. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dhjo.2013.01.010 Gillberg, C. (2002). A guide to Asperger syndrome. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. Gillespie-Lynch, K., Kapp, S. K., Brooks, P. J., Pickens, J., & Schwartzman, B. (2017). Whose expertise is it? Evidence for autistic adults as critical autism experts. Frontiers in Psychology, 8(438), 1–14. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2017.00438 Glennon, T. (2001). The stress of the university experience for students with Asperger syndrome. Work, 17(3), 183–190. Retrieved from: http://web.a.ebscohost.com .myaccess.library.utoronto.ca/eli/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?vid=0&sid=8c36671b-0616-4b14- 8dc2-d23d51f3b75d percent40sdc-v-sessmgr03 Goodley, D. (2001). “Learning difficulties,” the social model of disability and impairment: Challenging epistemologies. Disability & Society, 16(2), 207–231. doi:10.1080 /09687590120035816 Goodley, D. (2011). Social psychoanalytic disability studies. Disability & Society, 26(6), 715– 728. doi:10.1080/09687599.2011.602863 Gordon, A. (2017). Advocacy group calls for better autism supports in schools. Toronto Star, April 4. Retrieved from: https://www.thestar.com/yourtoronto/education /2017/04/04/advocacy-group-calls-for-better-autism-supports-in-schools.html Green, V., Sigafoos, J., O’Reilly, M., Pituch, K., Didden, R., Lancioni, G., & Singh, N. (2007). Behavioral flexibility in individuals with autism: Theory, assessment, and intervention. In L. B. Zhao (Ed.), Autism research advances. Autism research advances (pp. 63–77). New York, NY: Nova Science . Grelotti, D. J., Gauthier, I., & Schultz, R. T. (2002). Social interest and the development of cortical face specialization: What autism teaches us about face processing. Developmental Psychobiology, 40(3), 213–225. doi:10.1002/dev.10028 Gruzd, A., Jacobson, J., Mai, P., & Dubois, E. (2018). The state of social media in Canada. Ryerson University Social Media Lab. doi:10.5683/SP/AL8Z6R Gump, S. E. (2007). Classroom research in a general education course: Exploring implications through an investigation of the sophomore slump. The Journal of General Education, 56(2), 105–125. doi:10.1353/jge.2007.0020

178

Gupta, V., & Korte, C. (1994). The effects of a confidant and a peer group on the well-being of single elders. The International Journal of Aging and Human Development, 39(4), 293– 302. doi:10.2190/4YYH-9XAU-WQF9-APVT Hacking, I. (2009). Autistic autobiography. Philosophical Transactions: Biological Sciences, 364(1522), 1467–1473. doi:10.1098/rstb.2008.0329 Hall, J. A. (2011). Sex differences in friendship expectations: A meta-analysis. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 28(6), 723–747. doi:10.1177/0265407510386192 Happé, F. (1993). Communicative competence and theory of mind in autism: A test of relevance theory. Cognition, 48(2), 101–119. doi:10.1016/0010-0277(93)90026-R Happé, F. (2011). Criteria, categories, and continua: Autism and related disorders in DSM-5. Journal of the American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry, 50(6), 540–542. doi:10.1016/j.jaac.2011.03.015 Happé, F., & Frith, U. (2006). The weak coherence account: Detail-focused cognitive style in autism spectrum disorders. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 36(1), 5–25. doi:10.1007/s10803-005-0039-0 Harrington, C., Foster, M., Rodger, S., & Ashburner, J. (2014). Engaging young people with autism spectrum disorder in research interviews. British Journal of Learning Disabilities, 42(2), 153–161. doi:10.1111/bld.12037 Hartup, W. W. (1989). Social relationships and their developmental significance. American Psychologist, 44(2), 120–126. doi:10.1037/0003-066X.44.2.120 Hartup, W., & Stevens, N. (1997). Friendships and adaptation in the life course. Psychological Bulletin, 121(3), 355–370. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.121.3.355 Hays, R. (1984). The development and maintenance of friendship. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 1(1), 75–98. doi:10.1177/0265407584011005 Heiman, T. (2006). Social support networks, stress, sense of coherence and academic success of university students with learning disabilities. Social Psychology of Education, 9(4), 461– 478. doi:10.1007/s11218-006-9007-6 Hentschel, T., Heilman, M. E., & Peus, C. V. (2019). The multiple dimensions of gender stereotypes: A current look at men’s and women’s characterizations of others and themselves. Frontiers in Psychology, 10(11), 1–19. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2019.00011 Herring, S. C. (2013). Grammar and electronic communication. In C. A. Chapelle (Ed.), The encyclopedia of applied linguistics [electronic resource]. Chichester, UK: Wiley- Blackwell. doi:10.1002/9781405198431 Hiller, R. M., Young, R. L., & Weber, N. (2014). Sex differences in autism spectrum disorder based on DSM-5 criteria: Evidence from clinician and teacher reporting. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 42(8), 1381–1393. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10802-014- 9881-x Hintzen, A., Delespaul, P., van Os, J., & Myin-Germeys, I. (2010). Social needs in daily life in adults with pervasive developmental disorders. Psychiatry Research, 179(1), 75–80. doi:10.1016/j.psychres.2010.06.014

179

Hiranandani, V. (2005). Towards a critical theory of disability in social work. Critical Social Work, 6(1), 1–15. Retrieved from http://www1.uwindsor.ca /criticalsocialwork/towards- a-critical-theory-of-disability-in-social-work Hobson, R. P. (1993). The emotional origins of social understanding. Philosophical Psychology, 6(3), 227–249. doi:10.1080/09515089308573090 Holliday Willey, L. (1999). Pretending to be normal: Living with Asperger’s syndrome. London, UK: Jessica Kingsley. Howard, B., Cohn, E., & Orsmond, G. (2006). Understanding and negotiating friendships: Perspectives from an adolescent with Asperger syndrome. Autism, 10(6), 619–627. doi:10.1177/1362361306068508 Howard, D., Schiraldi, G., Pineda, A., & Campanella, R. (2006). Stress and mental health among college students: Overview and promising prevention interventions. In M. V. Landow (Ed.), Stress and mental health of college students, (pp. 91–123). New York, NY: Nova Science. Howlin, P. (2000). Outcome in adult life for more able individuals with autism or Asperger syndrome. Autism, 4(1), 63–83. doi:10.1177/1362361300004001005 Howlin, P. (2003). Outcome in high-functioning adults with autism with and without early language delays: Implications for the differentiation between autism and Asperger syndrome. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 33(1), 3–13. doi:10.1023/A:1022270118899 Howlin, P. (2013). Social disadvantage and exclusion: Adults with autism lag far behind in employment prospects. Journal of the American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry, 52(9), 897–899. doi:10.1016/j.jaac.2013.06.010 Howlin, P., Goode, S., Hutton, J., & Rutter, M. (2004). Adult outcome for children with autism. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 45(2), 212–229. doi:10.1111 /j.1469- 7610.2004.00215.x Howlin, P., & Moss, P. (2012). Adults with autism spectrum disorders. The Canadian Journal of Psychiatry, 57(5), 275–283. doi:10.1177/070674371205700502 Hughes, B., & Paterson, K. (1997). The social model of disability and the disappearing body: Towards a sociology of impairment. Disability & Society, 12(3), 325–340. doi:10.1080/09687599727209 Hull, L., Petrides, K., Allison, C., Smith, P., Baron-Cohen, S., Lai, M.-C., & Mandy, W. (2017). “Putting on my best normal”: Social camouflaging in adults with autism spectrum conditions. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 47(8), 2519–2534. doi:10.1007/s10803-017-3166-5 Hurlbutt, K., & Chalmers, L. (2004). Employment and adults with Asperger syndrome. Focus on Autism and Other Developmental Disabilities, 19(4), 215–222. doi:10.1177/10883576040190040301 Hyde, J. S. (2005). The gender similarities hypothesis. American Psychologist, 60(6), 581–592. doi:10.1037/0003-066X.60.6.581

180

Hyde, J. S., Bigler, R. S., Joel, D., Tate, C. C., & van Anders, S. M. (2019). The future of sex and gender in psychology: Five challenges to the gender binary. American Psychologist, 74(2), 171–193. doi:10.1037/amp0000307 Idring, S., Lundberg, M., Sturm, H., Dalman, C., Gumpert, C., Rai, D., . . . Magnusson, C. (2015). Changes in prevalence of autism spectrum disorders in 2001–2011: Findings from the Stockholm youth cohort. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 45(6), 1766–1773. doi:10.1007/s10803-014-2336-y InternetSlang.com. (n.d). Internet Slang—Internet Dictionary. Retrieved from https://www.internetslang.com Jaarsma, P., & Welin, S. (2012). Autism as a natural human variation: Reflections on the claims of the neurodiversity movement. Health Care Analysis, 20(1), 20–30. doi:10.1007/s10728-011-0169-9 Jackson, S., Hart, L., Brown, J., & Volkmar, F. R. (2018). Brief report: Self-reported academic, social, and mental health experiences of Postsecondary students with autism spectrum disorder. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 48(3), 643–650. doi:10.1007/s10803-017-3315-x Jacobsen, W. C., & Forste, R. (2011). The wired generation: Academic and social outcomes of electronic media use among university students. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking, 14(5), 275–280. doi:10.1089/cyber.2010.0135 James, A., & Taylor, E. (1990). Sex differences in the hyperkinetic syndrome of childhood. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 31(3), 437–446. doi:10.1111/j.1469- 7610.1990.tb01580.x Jaswal, V., & Akhtar, N. (2018). Being vs. appearing socially uninterested: Challenging assumptions about social motivation in autism. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 1–84. doi:10.1017/S0140525X18001826 Jennes-Coussens, M., Magill-Evans, J., & Koning, C. (2006). The quality of life of young men with Asperger’s syndrome: A brief report. Autism, 10(4), 403–414. doi:10.1177/1362361306064432 Jo, H., Schieve, L. A., Rice, C. E., Yeargin-Allsopp, M., Tian, L. H., Blumberg, S. J., . . . Boyle, C. A. (2015). Age at autism spectrum disorder (ASD) diagnosis by race, ethnicity, and primary household language among children with special health care needs, United States, 2009–2010. Maternal and Child Health Journal, 19(8), 1687–1697. doi:10.1007/s10995-015-1683-4 Jobe, L. E., & White, S. (2007). Loneliness, social relationships, and a broader autism phenotype in college students. Personality and Individual Differences, 42(8), 1479–1489. doi:10.1016/j.paid.2006.10.021 Jones, R. S. P., & Meldal, T. (2001). Social relationships and Asperger’s syndrome: A qualitative analysis of first-hand accounts. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 5(1), 35–41. doi:10.1177/146900470100500104 Jones, R. S. P., Zahl, A., & Huws, J. C. (2001). First-hand accounts of emotional experiences in autism: A qualitative analysis. Disability & Society, 16(3), 393–401. doi:10.1080/09687590120045950

181

Kaiser, T., Del Giudice, M., & Booth, T. (2019). Global sex differences in personality: Replication with an open online dataset. Journal of Personality, 1–15. doi:10.1111/jopy.12500 Kalafarski, E. G. (2010). Gender identity development in individuals with autism: A project based upon an independent investigation (Unpublished master’s thesis). Smith College, Northhampton, MA. Retrieved from: https://scholarworks.smith.edu/theses/485 Kaland, N. (2011). Brief report: Should Asperger syndrome be excluded from the forthcoming DSM -V? Research in Autism Spectrum Disorders, 5(3), 984–989. doi:10.1016/j.rasd.2011.01.011 Kanne, S., Gerber, A., Quirmbach, L., Sparrow, S., Cicchetti, D., & Saulnier, C. (2011). The role of adaptive behavior in autism spectrum disorders: Implications for functional outcome. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 41(8), 1007–1018. doi:10.1007/s10803- 010-1126-4 Kanner, L. (1943). Autistic disturbances of affective contact. Nervous Child, 2(3), 217–250. Retrieved from http://mail.neurodiversity.com/library_kanner_1943.pdf Kanner, L., Rodriguez, A., & Ashenden, B. (1972). How far can autistic children go in matters of social adaptation? Journal of Autism and Childhood Schizophrenia, 2(1), 9–33. doi:10.1007/BF01537624 Kapp, S. K., Gillespie-Lynch, K., Sherman, L. E., & Hutman, T. (2013). Deficit, difference, or both? Autism and neurodiversity. Developmental Psychology, 49(1), 59–71. doi:10.1037/a0028353 Kenny, L., Hattersley, C., Molins, B., Buckley, C., Povey, C., & Pellicano, E. (2016). Which terms should be used to describe autism? Perspectives from the UK autism community. Autism, 20(4), 442–462. doi:10.1177/1362361315588200 Kershaw, D. (2018). Language change and evolution in online social networks (Unpublished doctoral dissertatioin). Lancaster University, Lancaster, UK. doi:10.17635/lancaster/thesis/442 Keyes, K. M., Susser, E., Cheslack-Postava, K., Fountain, C., Liu, K., & Bearman, P. S. (2012). Cohort effects explain the increase in autism diagnosis among children born from 1992 to 2003 in California. International Journal of Epidemiology, 41(2), 495–503. doi:10.1093/ije/dyr193 Kim, C. (2014). Nerdy, shy, and socially inappropriate: A user guide to an Asperger life. London UK: Jessica Kingsley. Kirby, D. (2007). Reviewing Canadian postsecondary education: Postsecondary education policy in post-industrial Canada. Canadian Journal of Educational Administration and Policy, 65, 1–24. Retrieved from https://files.eric.ed.gov /fulltext/EJ806980.pdf Klin, A., Saulnier, C. A., Sparrow, S. S., Cicchetti, D. V., Volkmar, F. R., & Lord, C. (2007). Social and communication abilities and disabilities in higher functioning individuals with autism spectrum disorders: The vineland and the ADOS. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 37(4), 748–759. doi:10.1007/s10803-006-0229-4

182

Klin, A., & Volkmar, F. R. (2003). Asperger syndrome: Diagnosis and external validity. Child and Adolescent Psychiatric Clinics of North America, 12(1), 1–13. doi:10.1016/S1056- 4993(02)00052-4 Koegel, L. K., Ashbaugh, K., Koegel, R. L., Detar, W. J., & Regester, A. (2013). Increasing socialization in adults with Asperger’s syndrome. Psychology in the Schools, 50(9), 899– 909. doi:10.1002/pits.21715 Koegel, L. K., Koegel, R. L., Miller, A. R., & Detar, W. J. (2014). Issues and interventions for autism spectrum disorders during adolescence and beyond. In F. R. Volkmar, S. J. Rogers, R. Paul, & K. A. Pelphrey (Eds.), Handbook of autism and pervasive developmental disorders (4th Eed.). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley. Kopp, S., & Gillberg, C. (1992). Girls with social deficits and learning problems: Autism, atypical Asperger syndrome or a variant of these conditions. European Child & Adolescent Psychiatry, 1(2), 89–99. doi:10.1007/BF02091791 Kraper, C. K., Kenworthy, L., Popal, H., Martin, A., & Wallace, G. L. (2017). The gap between adaptive behavior and intelligence in autism persists into young adulthood and is linked to psychiatric co-morbidities. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 47(10), 3007–3017. doi:10.1007/s10803-017-3213-2 Krasny, L., Williams, B., Provencal, S., & Ozonoff, S. (2003). Social skills interventions for the autism spectrum: Essential ingredients and a model curriculum. Child and Adolescent Psychiatric Clinics of North America, 12(1), 107–122. doi:10.1016 /S1056- 4993(02)00051-2 Kraut, R., Patterson, M., Lundmark, V., Kiesler, S., Mukopadhyay, T., & Scherlis, W. (1998). Internet paradox: A social technology that reduces social involvement and psychological well-being? American Psychologist, 53(9), 1017–1031. doi:10.1037 /0003- 066X.53.9.1017 Kreiser, N., & White, S. (2014). ASD in females: Are we overstating the gender difference in diagnosis? Clinical Child and Family Psychology Review, 17(1), 67–84. doi:10.1007/s10567-013-0148-9 Kuh, G. (1995). The other curriculum: Out-of-class experiences associated with student learning and personal development. The Journal of Higher Education, 66(2), 123–155. doi:10.2307/2943909 Kujath, C. L. (2011). Facebook and MySpace: Complement or substitute for face-to-face interaction? Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking, 14(1–2), 75–78. doi:10.1089/cyber.2009.0311 LaGaipa, J. (1977). Interpersonal attraction and social exchange. In S. Duck (Ed.), Theory and practice in interpersonal attraction (pp. 129–164). New York, NY: Academic Press. Lai, M. C., Lombardo, M. V., Auyeung, B., Chakrabarti, B., & Baron-Cohen, S. (2015). Sex/gender differences and autism: Setting the scene for future research. Journal of the American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry, 54(1), 11–24. doi:10.1016/j.jaac.2014.10.003 Lai, M. C., Lombardo, M. V., Pasco, G., Ruigrok, A. N., Wheelwright, S. J., Sadek, S. A., . . . MRC AIMS Consortium. (2011). A behavioral comparison of male and female adults

183

with high functioning autism spectrum conditions. PloS One, 6(6), e20835. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0020835 Lai, M. C., Lombardo, M. V., Ruigrok, A. N., Chakrabarti, B., Wheelwright, S. J., Auyeung, B., . . . MRC AIMS Consortium. (2012). Cognition in males and females with autism: Similarities and differences. PLoS One, 7(10), e47198. doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0047198 Landa, R. (2000). Social language use in Asperger syndrome and high-functioning autism. In A. Klin, F. R. Volkmar, & S. Sparrow (Eds.), Asperger syndrome (pp.125–155). New York, NY: The Guilford Press. Laugeson, E. A., & Ellingsen, R. (2014). Social skills training for adolescents and adults with autism spectrum disorder. In F. R. Volkmar, B. Reichow, & J. C. McPartland (Eds.), Adolescents and adults with autism spectrum disorders (pp. 61–85). New York, NY: Springer. Laurent, A., & Rubin, E. (2004). Challenges in emotional regulation in Asperger syndrome and high-functioning autism. Topics in Language Disorders, 24(4), 286–297. doi:10.1097/00011363-200410000-00006 Leibowitz, S., & de Vries, A. L. (2016). Gender dysphoria in adolescence. International Review of Psychiatry, 28(1), 21–35. doi:10.3109/09540261.2015.1124844 Lenz, G. (2008). Impairment and disability. In W. Kirch (Ed.), Encyclopedia of public health (pp.717–720). New York, NY: Springer. Lincoln, A., Courchesne, E., Kilman, B., Elmasian, R., & Allen, M. (1988). A study of intellectual abilities in high-functioning people with autism. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 18(4), 505–524. doi:10.1007/BF02211870 Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Beverly Hills, CA: SAGE. Livingston, L. A., Colvert, E., Bolton, P., & Happé, F. (2019). Good social skills despite poor theory of mind: Exploring compensation in autism spectrum disorder. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 60(1), 102–110. doi:10.1111/jcpp.12886 Livingston, L. A., & Happé, F. (2017). Conceptualising compensation in neurodevelopmental disorders: Reflections from autism spectrum disorder. Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews, 80(2017), 729–742. doi:10.1016 /j.neubiorev.2017.06.005 Locke, J., Ishijima, E., Kasari, C., & London, N. (2010). Loneliness, friendship quality and the social networks of adolescents with high-functioning autism in an inclusive school setting. Journal of Research in Special Educational Needs, 10(2), 74–81. doi:10.1111/j.1471-3802.2010.01148.x Loomes, R., Hull, L., & Mandy, W. P. L. (2017). What is the male-to-female ratio in autism spectrum disorder? A systematic review and meta-analysis. Journal of the American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry, 56(6), 466–474. doi:10.1016/j.jaac.2017.03.013 Lord, C., Petkova, E., Hus, V., Gan, W., Lu, M., Martin, D. M., . . . Risi, S. (2012). A multisite study of the clinical diagnosis of different autism spectrum disorders. Archives of General Psychiatry, 69(3), 306–313. doi:10.1001 /archgenpsychiatry.2011.148

184

Lord, C., & Schopler, E. (1987). Neurobiological implications of sex differences in autism. In E. Schopler & G. Mesibov (Eds.), Neurobiological issues in autism (pp. 191–212). New York, NY: Plenum Press. Lounds Taylor, J., Adams, R. E., & Bishop, S. L. (2017). Social participation and its relation to internalizing symptoms among youth with autism spectrum disorder as they transition from high school. Autism Research, 10(4), 663–672. doi:10.1002 /aur.1709 Lyall, K., Croen, L., Daniels, J., Fallin, M., Ladd-Acosta, C., Lee, B. K., . . . Newschaffer, C. (2017). The changing epidemiology of autism spectrum disorders. Annual Review of Public Health, 38, 81–102. doi:10.1146 /annurev-publhealth-031816-044318 Maccoby, E. E., & Jacklin, C. N. (1974). The psychology of sex differences. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press. Mackelprang, R., & Salsgiver, R. (1996). People with disabilities and social work: Historical and contemporary issues. Social Work, 41(1), 7–14. doi:10.1093/sw/41.1.7 Mackenzie, R., & Watts, J. (2011). Including emotionality in tests of competence: How does neurodiversity affect measures of free will and agency in medical decision making? AJOB Neuroscience, 2(3), 27–36. doi:10.1080/21507740.2011.580491 Manett, J. & Stoddart, K. (2012). Facing the challenges of postsecondary education: Strategies for individuals with autism spectrum disorders (ASD). Autism Matters, 46, 1–3. Retrieved from http://www.autismontario.com/client/aso/ao.nsf/docs/149395542949b52a85257bc10060d bc6/$file/facing+the+challenges+of+post+secondary+education.pdf Manett, J. & Stoddart, K. (2013, January). Thinking of postsecondary education? Considerations for individuals with autism spectrum disorder and their families. Autism Advisor, 58. Retrieved from http://autismontario.novosolutions.net/default.asp?id=148 Marks, S. U., Schrader, C., & Longaker, T. (2000). Portraits of three adolescent students with Asperger’s syndrome: Personal stories and how they can inform practice. Journal of the Association for Persons with Severe Handicaps, 25(1), 3–17. doi:10.2511/rpsd.25.1.3 Marmaros, D., & Sacerdote, B. (2002). Peer and social networks in job search. European Economic Review, 46(4–5), 870–879. doi:10.1016/S0014-2921(01)00221-5 Marwick, A., & Boyd, D. (2011). I tweet honestly, I tweet passionately: Twitter users, context collapse, and the imagined audience. New Media & Society, 13(1), 114–133. doi:10.1177/1461444810365313 Mattanah, J. F., Ayers, J. F., Brand, B. L., Brooks, L. J., Quimby, J. L., McNary, S. W. (2010). A social support intervention to ease the college transition: Exploring main effects and moderators. Journal of College Student Development, 51(1), 93–108. doi:10.1353/csd.0.0116 Matthews, N., Smith, C., Pollard, E., Ober-Reynolds, S., Kirwan, J., & Malligo, A. (2015). Adaptive functioning in autism spectrum disorder during the transition to adulthood. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 45(8), 2349–2360. doi:10.1007/s10803- 015-2400-2 Mattila, M., Kielinen, M., Linna, S., Jussila, K., Ebeling, H., Bloigu, R., . . . Moilanen, I. (2011). Autism spectrum disorders according to DSM -IV-TR and comparison with DSM-5 draft

185

criteria: An epidemiological study. Journal of the American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry, 50(6), 583–592. doi:10.1016 /j.jaac.2011.04.001 Mazurek, M. O., Shattuck, P. T., Wagner, M., & Cooper, B. P. (2012). Prevalence and correlates of screen-based media use among youths with autism spectrum disorders. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 42(8), 1757–1767. doi:10.1007/s10803-011-1413- 8 Mazurek, M. O., & Wenstrup, C. (2013). Television, video game and social media use among children with ASD and typically developing siblings. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 43(6), 1258–1271. doi:10.1007/s10803-012-1659-9 McAndrew, F. (2017). How “the gossip” became a woman and how “gossip” became her weapon of choice. In M. L. Fisher (Ed.), The Oxford handbook of women and competition (pp. 191–206). New York, NY: Oxford University Press. Retrieved from http://myaccess.library.utoronto.ca/login?url=https://www.oxfordhandbooks.com/ view/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199376377.001.0001/oxfordhb-9780199376377 McAndrew, F., Bell, E., & Garcia, C. (2007). Who do we tell and whom do we tell on? Gossip as a strategy for status enhancement. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 37(7), 1562– 1577. doi:10.1111/j.1559-1816.2007.00227.x McCabe, J. (2016). Connecting in college: How friendship networks matter for academic and social success. Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press. Retrieved from http://myaccess.library.utoronto.ca /login?url=http://books.scholarsportal.info/viewdoc.html?id=/ebooks/ebooks3/ucp books/2017-03-07/1/9780226409665 McCluskey-Titus, P., & Oliver, R. (2001). The relationship between community development and academic achievement of undergraduate students in residence halls. College Student Affairs Journal, 20(2), 12. Retrieved from http://search.ebscohost.com.myaccess.library.utoronto.ca/login.aspx?direct=true& db=eue&AN=507769481&site=ehost-live McCracken, G. D. (1988). The long interview. Newbury Park, CA: SAGE. Mendes, E. A., & Maroney, M. R. (2019). Gender identity, sexuality and autism: Voices from across the spectrum. Philadelphia, PA: Jessica Kingsley. Mesibov, G. B., & Handlan, S. (1997). Adolescents and adults with autism. In D. J. Cohen & F. R. Volkmar (Eds.), Handbook of autism and pervasive developmental disorders (pp. 309–322). New York, NY: Wiley. Mills, J., Bonner, A., & Francis, K. (2006). The development of constructivist grounded theory. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 5(1), 25–35. doi:0.1177 /160940690600500103 Minichiello, V., Aroni, R., & Hays, T. (2008). In-depth interviewing: Principles, techniques, analysis (3rd ed.). Frenchs Forest, Australia: Pearson Australia Group. Mirenda, P., Donnellan, A., & Yoder, D. (1983). Gaze behavior: A new look at an old problem. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 13(4), 397–409. doi:10.1007/BF01531588

186

Monsour, M. (1997). Communication and cross-sex friendships across the life cycle: A review of the literature. Annals of the International Communication Association, 20(1), 375–414. doi:10.1080/23808985.1997.11678946 Montgomery, C., Allison, C., Lai, M., Cassidy, S., Langdon, P., & Baron-Cohen, S. (2016). Do adults with high functioning autism or Asperger syndrome differ in empathy and emotion recognition? Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 46(6), 1931–1940. doi:10.1007/s10803-016-2698-4 Moore, J., Lovell, C. D., McGann, T., & Wyrick, J. (1998). Why involvement matters: A review of research on student involvement in the collegiate setting. College Student Affairs Journal, 17(2), 4–17. Retrieved from http://search.ebscohost.com.myaccess.library.utoronto.ca/login.aspx?direct=true& db=eue&AN=507640041&site=ehost-live Morse, J. M. (2001). Situating grounded theory within qualitative inquiry. In R. S. Schreiber & P. N. Stern (Eds.), Using grounded theory in nursing (pp. 1–15). New York, NY: Springer. Retrieved from https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/b414/6d581ed2c2ef88bc44bad5ad42b73a6aaa49. pdf Müller, E., Schuler, A., & Yates, G. (2008). Social challenges and supports from the perspective of individuals with Asperger syndrome and other autism spectrum disabilities. Autism, 12(2), 173–190. doi:10.1177/1362361307086664 Mullins-Sweatt, S. N., & Widiger, T. A. (2009). Clinical utility and DSM -V. Psychological Assessment, 21(3), 302–312. doi:10.1037/a0016607 Mulvany, J. (2000), Disability, impairment or illness? The relevance of the social model of disability to the study of mental disorder. Sociology of Health & Illness, 22(5), 582–601. doi:10.1111/1467-9566.00221 Ne’eman, A. (2010). The future (and the past) of autism advocacy, or why the ASA’s magazine, The Advocate, wouldn’t publish this piece. Disability Studies Quarterly, 30(1). doi:10.18061/dsq.v30i1.1059 Ne’eman, A. (2013, October 29). Autism and the disability community: The politics of neurodiversity, causation and cure. Retrieved from http://autisticadvocacy.org/201 7/02/autism-and-the-disability-community-the-politics-of-neurodiversity-causatio n-and- cure/ Netlingo.com. (n.d.). [Website]. Retrieved from https://www.netlingo.com/index.php Newcomb, A., & Bagwell, C. (1995). Children’s friendship relations: A meta-analytic review. Psychological Bulletin, 117(2), 306–347. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.117.2.306 Newschaffer, C. J., Croen, L. A., Daniels, J., Giarelli, E., Grether, J. K., Levy, S. E., . . . Reynolds, A. M. (2007). The epidemiology of autism spectrum disorders. Annual Review of Public Health, 28, 235–258. doi:10.1146/annurev.publhealth.28.021406.144007 Nie, N. H. (2001). Sociability, interpersonal relations, and the internet: Reconciling conflicting findings. American Behavioral Scientist, 45(3), 420–435. doi:10.1177/00027640121957277

187

Ochs, E., Kremer-Sadlik, T., Sirota, K., & Solomon, O. (2004). Autism and the social world: An anthropological perspective. Discourse Studies, 6(2), 147–183. doi:10.1177/1461445604041766 Oliver, M. (1990). The individual and social models of disability. Paper presented at Joint Workshop of the Living Options Group and the Research Unit of the Royal College of Physicians on People with Established Locomotor Disabilities in Hospitals, London, 23 July. Retrieved from http://disability-studies .leeds.ac.uk/files/library/Oliver-in-soc- dis.pdf Oliver, M. (1996). Understanding disability: From theory to practice. Basingstoke, UK: Macmillan. Oliver, M. (2013). The social model of disability: Thirty years on. Disability & Society, 28(7), 1024–1026. doi:10.1080/09687599.2013.818773 Orsmond, G., Krauss, M., & Seltzer, M. (2004). Peer relationships and social and recreational activities among adolescents and adults with autism. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 34(3), 245–256. doi:10.1023/B :JADD.0000029547.96610.df Ortega, F. (2009). The cerebral subject and the challenge of neurodiversity. BioSocieties, 4(4), 425–445. doi:10.1017/S1745855209990287 Orth, U., Robins, R. W., & Roberts, B. W. (2008). Low self-esteem prospectively predicts depression in adolescence and young adulthood. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 95(3), 695–708. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.95.3.695 Oswald, D. L., & Clark, E. M. (2003). Best friends forever? High school best friendships and the transition to college. Personal Relationships, 10(2), 187–196. doi:10.1111/1475- 6811.00045 Overboe, J. (1999). “Difference in itself”: Validating disabled people’s lived experience. Body & Society, 5(4), 17–29. doi:10.1177/1357034X99005004002 Owens, J. (2015). Exploring the critiques of the social model of disability: The transformative possibility of Arendt’s notion of power. Sociology of Health & Illness, 37(3), 385–403. doi:10.1111/1467-9566.12199 Ozonoff, S., Pennington, B. F., & Rogers, S. J. (1991). Executive function deficits in high‐functioning autistic individuals: Relationship to theory of mind. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 32(7), 1081–1105. doi:10.1111/j.1469-7610.1991.tb00351.x Ozonoff, S., South, M., & Miller, J. N. (2000). DSM -IV-defined Asperger syndrome: Cognitive, behavioral and early history differentiation from high-functioning autism. Autism, 4(1), 29–46. doi:10.1177/1362361300041003 Padilla-Walker, L., Nelson, L., Carroll, J., & Jensen, A. (2010). More than a just a game: Video game and internet use during emerging adulthood. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 39(2), 103–113. doi:10.1007/s10964-008-9390-8 Pahl, R. E. (2000). On friendship. Malden, MA: Polity Press. Pancer, S., Hunsberger, B., Pratt, M., & Alisat, S. (2000). Cognitive complexity of expectations and adjustment to university in the first year. Journal of Adolescent Research, 15(1), 38– 57. doi:10.1177/0743558400151003

188

Parker, J. G., & Gottman, J. M. (1989). Social and emotional development in a relational context: Friendship interaction from early childhood to adolescence. In T. J. Berndt & G. W. Ladd (Eds.), Peer relationships in child development (pp. 95–131). New York, N.Y: Wiley. Parks, M., & Roberts, L. (1998). “Making moosic”: The development of personal relationships on line and a comparison to their off-line counterparts. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 15(4), 517–537. doi:10.1177 /0265407598154005 Pasterski, V., Gilligan, L., & Curtis, R. (2014). Traits of autism spectrum disorders in adults with gender dysphoria. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 43(2), 387–393. doi:10.1007/s10508- 013-0154-5 Patton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative research and evaluation methods (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE. Paul, R., Augustyn, A., Klin, A., & Volkmar, F. R. (2005). Perception and production of prosody by speakers with autism spectrum disorders. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 35(2), 205–220. doi:10.1007/s10803-004-1999-1 Paynter, J., & Peterson, C. (2010). Language and ToM development in autism versus Asperger syndrome: Contrasting influences of syntactic versus lexical/semantic maturity. Research in Autism Spectrum Disorders, 4(3), 377–385. doi:10.1016 /j.rasd.2009.10.005 Piaget, J. (1968). The moral judgment of the child. London, UK: Routledge & Kegan Paul. Pina-Camacho, L., Villero, S., Fraguas, D., Boada, L., Janssen, J., Navas-Sánchez, F., . . . Parellada, M. (2012). Autism spectrum disorder: Does neuroimaging support the DSM-5 proposal for a symptom dyad? A systematic review of functional magnetic resonance imaging and diffusion tensor imaging studies. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 42(7), 1326–1341. doi:10.1007/s10803-011-1360-4 Planche, P., & Lemonnier, E. (2012). Children with high-functioning autism and Asperger’s syndrome: Can we differentiate their cognitive profiles? Research in Autism Spectrum Disorders, 6(2), 939–948. doi:10.1016/j.rasd.2011.12.009 Preece, D. (2002). Consultation with children with autistic spectrum disorders about their experience of short-term residential care. British Journal of Learning Disabilities, 30(3), 97–104. doi:10.1046/j.1468-3156.2002.00179.x Pugliese, C., Anthony, L., Strang, J., Dudley, K., Wallace, G., & Kenworthy, L. (2015). Increasing adaptive behavior skill deficits from childhood to adolescence in autism spectrum disorder: Role of executive function. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 45(6), 1579–1587. doi:10.1007/s10803-014-2309-1 Race, D., Boxall, K., & Carson, I. (2005). Towards a dialogue for practice: Reconciling social role valorization and the social model of disability. Disability & Society, 20(5), 507–521. doi:10.1080/09687590500156196 Redmond, M. (2005). Co-researching with adults with learning disabilities: Roles, resonsibilities and boundaries. Qualitative Social Work, 4(1), 75–86. doi:10.1177 /1473325005050200 Renty, J., & Roeyers, H. (2006). Quality of life in high-functioning adults with autism spectrum disorder: The predictive value of disability and support characteristics. Autism, 10(5), 511–524. doi:10.1177/1362361306066604

189

Richards, C., Bouman, W. P., Seal, L., Barker, M. J., Nieder, T. O., & T’Sjoen, G. (2016). Non- binary or genderqueer genders. International Review of Psychiatry, 28(1), 95–102. doi:10.3109/09540261.2015.1106446 Rinehart, N. J., Bradshaw, J. L., Brereton, A. V., & Tonge, B. J. (2002). A clinical and neurobehavioural review of high-functioning autism and Asperger’s disorder. Australian & New Zealand Journal of Psychiatry, 36(6), 762–770. doi:10.1046 /j.1440- 1614.2002.01097.x Roekel, E., Scholte, R., & Didden, R. (2010). Bullying among adolescents with autism spectrum disorders: Prevalence and perception. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 40(1), 63–73. doi:10.1007/s10803-009-0832-2 Roller, M. R., & Lavrakas, P. J. (2015). Applied qualitative research design: A total quality framework approach. New York, NY: The Guilford Press. Rose, A. J., & Asher, S. R. (2017). The social tasks of friendship: Do boys and girls excel in different tasks? Child Development Perspectives, 11(1), 3–8. doi:10.1111/cdep.12214 Rose, A. J., & Rudolph, K. D. (2006). A review of sex differences in peer relationship processes: Potential tradeoffs for the emotional and behavioral development of girls and boys. Psychological Bulletin, 132(1), 98–131. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.132.1.98 Rosenberg, R., Daniels, A., Law, J., Law, P., & Kaufmann, W. (2009). Trends in autism spectrum disorder diagnoses: 1994–2007. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 39(8), 1099–1111. doi:10.1007/s10803-009-0723-6 Ross, S. E., Niebling, B. C., & Heckert, T. M. (1999). Sources of stress among college students. College Student Journal, 33(2), 312–317. Retrieved from http://search.ebscohost.com.myaccess.library.utoronto.ca/login.aspx?direct=true& db=eue&AN=507635214&site=ehost-live Ruiz Calzada, L., Pistrang, N., & Mandy, W. (2012). High-functioning autism and Asperger’s disorder: Utility and meaning for families. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 42(2), 230–243. doi:10.1007/s10803-011-1238-5 Runswick-Cole, K. (2014). “Us” and “them”: The limits and possibilities of a “politics of neurodiversity” in neoliberal times. Disability & Society, 29(7), 1117–1129. doi:10.1080/09687599.2014.910107 Rusbult, C. E. (1980). Satisfaction and commitment in friendships. Representative Research in Social Psychology, 11(2), 96–105. Rusbult, C. E., Morrow, G. D., & Johnson, D. J. (1987). Self-esteem and problem-solving behaviour in close relationships. British Journal of Social Psychology, 27(4), 293–303. doi.org/10.1111/j.2044-8309.1987.tb00792.x Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000). Intrinsic and extrinsic motivations: Classic definitions and new directions. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 25(1), 54–67. doi:10.1006/ceps.1999.1020 Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2008). Self-determination theory and the role of basic psychological needs in personality and the organization of behavior. In O. P. John, R. W. Robins, & L. A. Pervins (Eds.), Handbook of personality: Theory and research (3rd ed., pp. 654–678). New York, NY: The Guilford Press.

190

Sachse, M., Schlitt, S., Hainz, D., Ciaramidaro, A., Schirman, S., Walter, H., . . . Freitag, C. (2013). Executive and visuo-motor function in adolescents and adults with autism spectrum disorder. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 43(5), 1222–1235. doi:10.1007/s10803-012-1668-8 Sampasa-Kanyinga, H., & Lewis, R. F. (2015). Frequent use of social networking sites is associated with poor psychological functioning among children and adolescents. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking, 18(7), 380–385. doi:10.1089 /cyber.2015.0055 Saulnier, C. A., & Klin, A. (2007). Brief report: Social and communication abilities and disabilities in higher functioning individuals with autism and Asperger syndrome. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 37(4), 788–793. doi:10.1007 /s10803- 006-0288-6 Savarese, E. T., Baggs, A., Burke, J., Kochmeister, S., Rubin, S., Schwarz, P., . . . Tresher, T. (2010). Self-advocate roundtable with members of AutCom. Disability Studies Quarterly, 30(1). doi:10.18061/dsq.v30i1.1073 Schalock, R. (2000). Three decades of quality of life. Focus on Autism and Other Developmental Disabilities, 15(2), 116–127. doi:10.1177/108835760001500207 Schroeder, J., Cappadocia, M., Bebko, J., Pepler, D., & Weiss, J. (2014). Shedding light on a pervasive problem: A review of research on bullying experiences among children with autism spectrum disorders. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 44(7), 1520–1534. doi:10.1007/s10803-013-2011-8 Schunk, D. H. (1990). Goal setting and self-efficacy during self-regulated learning. Educational Psychologist, 25(1), 71–86. doi:10.1207/s15326985ep2501_6 Schwalbe, M., & Staples, C. (1991). Gender differences in sources of self-esteem. Social Psychology Quarterly, 54(2), 158–168. doi:10.2307/2786933 Sciutto, M. J., & Cantwell, C. (2005). Factors influencing the differential diagnosis of Asperger’s disorder and high-functioning autism. Journal of Developmental and Physical Disabilities, 17(4), 345–359. doi:10.1007/s10882-005-6618-3 Sedgewick, F., Hill, V., & Pellicano, E. (2019). “It’s different for girls”: Gender differences in the friendships and conflict of autistic and neurotypical adolescents. Autism, 23(5), 1119– 1132. doi:10.1177/1362361318794930 Sedgewick, F., Hill, V., Yates, R., Pickering, L., & Pellicano, E. (2016). Gender differences in the social motivation and friendship experiences of autistic and non-autistic adolescents. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 46(4), 1297–1306. doi:10.1007/s10803- 015-2669-1 Selman, R. L. (1980). The growth of interpersonal understanding: Developmental and clinical analyses. New York, NY: Academic Press. Shakespeare, T., & Watson, N. (2001). The social model of disability: An outdated ideology? In S. N. Barnartt & B. M. Altman (Eds.), Exploring theories and expanding methodologies: Where we are and where we need to go, (pp. 9–28). Bingley, UK: Emerald Group. Retrieved from

191

http://myaccess.library.utoronto.ca/login?url=http://www.emeraldinsight.com/147 9- 3547/2 Shakespeare, T., & Watson, N. (2010). Beyond models: Understanding the complexity of disabled people’s lives. In G. Scambler & S. J. Scambler (Eds.), New directions in the sociology of chronic and disabling conditions: Assaults on the lifeworld (pp. 57–76). New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan. Sharma, S., Woolfson, L., & Hunter, S. (2012). Confusion and inconsistency in diagnosis of Asperger syndrome: A review of studies from 1981 to 2010. Autism, 16(5), 465–486. doi:10.1177/136236131141193 Shattuck, P. T., & Grosse, S. D. (2007). Issues related to the diagnosis and treatment of autism spectrum disorders. Mental Retardation and Developmental Disabilities Research Reviews, 13(2), 129–135. doi:10.1002/mrdd.20143 Shattuck, P. T., Narendorf, S. C., Cooper, B., Sterzing, P. R., Wagner, M., & Taylor, J. L. (2012). Postsecondary education and employment among youth with an autism spectrum disorder. Pediatrics, 129(6), 1042–1049. doi:10.1542/peds.2011-2864 Shattuck, P. T., Orsmond, G. I., Wagner, M., & Cooper, B. P. (2011). Participation in social activities among adolescents with an autism spectrum disorder. PloS One, 6(11), e27176. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0027176 Shattuck, P. T., Seltzer, M. M., Greenberg, J. S., Orsmond, G. I., Bolt, D., Kring, S., . . . Lord, C. (2007). Change in autism symptoms and maladaptive behaviors in adolescents and adults with an autism spectrum disorder. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 37(9), 1735–1747. doi:10.1007/s10803-006-0307-7 Shattuck, P. T., Wagner, M., Narendorf, S., Sterzing, P., & Hensley, M. (2011). Post–high school service use among young adults with an autism spectrum disorder. Archives of Pediatrics & Adolescent Medicine, 165(2), 141–146. doi:10.1001/archpediatrics.2010.279 Shaver, P., Furman, W., & Buhrmester, D. (1985). Transition to college: Network changes, social skills, and loneliness. In S. Duck & D. Perlman (Eds.), Understanding personal relationships: An interdisciplinary approach (pp. 193–219). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE. Shenton, A. K. (2004). Strategies for ensuring trustworthiness in qualitative research projects. Education for Information, 22(2), 63–75. doi:10.3233/EFI-2004-22201 Shriberg, L. D., Paul, R., McSweeny, J. L., Klin, A., Cohen, D. J., & Volkmar, F. R. (2001). Speech and prosody characteristics of adolescents and adults with high-functioning autism and Asperger syndrome. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 44(5), 1097–1115. doi:10.1044/1092-4388(2001/087) Sim, A. J., Milner, J., Love, J., & Lishman, J. (1998). Definitions of need: Can disabled people and care professionals agree? Disability & Society, 13(1), 53–74. doi:10.1080/09687599826911 Sinclair, J. (1993). Don’t mourn for us. Our Voice, 1(3). Retrieved from http://www .autreat.com/dont_mourn.html Sinclair, J. (2005). Autism network international: The development of a community and its culture. Retrieved from http://autreat.com/History_of_ANI.html

192

Singer, J. (1999). Why can’t you be normal for once in your life? From a problem with no name to the emergence of a new category of difference. In M. Corker & S. French (Eds.), Disability discourse (pp. 59–70). Buckingham, UK: Open University Press. Smith, C. (2007). Support services for students with Asperger’s syndrome in higher education. College Student Journal, 41(3), 515–531. Retrieved from http://link .galegroup.com.myaccess.library.utoronto.ca/apps/doc/A169306797/CIC?u=utoro nto_main&sid=CIC&xid=771b5ee3 Solomon, M., Miller, M., Taylor, S., Hinshaw, S., & Carter, C. (2012). Autism symptoms and internalizing psychopathology in girls and boys with autism spectrum disorders. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 42(1), 48–59. doi:10.1007/s10803-011-1215-z Spain, D., Sin, J., Linder, K. B., McMahon, J., & Happé, F. (2018). Social anxiety in autism spectrum disorder: A systematic review. Research in Autism Spectrum Disorders, 52(2018), 51-68. doi:10.1016/j.rasd.2018.04.007 Spek, A. A., Scholte, E. M., & Berckelaer-Onnes, I. A. (2008). Brief report: The use of WAIS-III in adults with HFA and Asperger syndrome. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 38(4), 782–787. doi:10.1007/s10803-007-0446-5 Spence, M. A. (1976). Genetic studies. In R. Ritvo (Ed.), Autism: Diagnosis, current research and management (pp. 169–174). New York, NY: Spectrum. Spillers, J. L., Sensui, L. M., & Linton, K. F. (2014). Concerns about identity and services among people with autism and Asperger’s regarding DSM-5 changes. Journal of Social Work in Disability & Rehabilitation, 13(3), 247–260. doi:10.1080/1536710X.2014.912186 Stake, R. E. (1994). Case studies. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (pp. 236–247). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE. Statistics Canada. (2018). Back to school . . . by the numbers. Retrieved from https://www.statcan.gc.ca/eng/dai/smr08/2018/smr08_220_2018 Steiger, A. E., Fend, H. A., & Allemand, M. (2015). Empathy development in adolescence predicts social competencies in adulthood. Journal of Personality, 83(2), 229–241. doi:10.1111/jopy.12098 Steinberg, L., & Morris, A. S. (2001). Adolescent development. Annual Review of Psychology, 52(1), 83–110. doi:10.1146/annurev.psych.52.1.83 Sterling, A. (2015). Persistence in the sophomore year following transition from successful first- year program (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Northeastern University, Boston, MA. Retrieved from https://repository.library.northeastern.edu/files /neu:rx917z81w/fulltext.pdf Sterzing, P. R., Shattuck, P. T., Narendorf, S. C., Wagner, M., & Cooper, B. P. (2012). Bullying involvement and autism spectrum disorders: Prevalence and correlates of bullying involvement among adolescents with an autism spectrum disorder. Archives of Pediatrics and Adolescent Medicine, 166(11), 1058–1064. doi:10.1001/archpediatrics.2012.790 Stoddart, K. P., Burke, L., Muskat, B., Manett, J., Duhaime, S., Accardi, C., . . . & Bradley, E. (2013). Diversity in Ontario’s youth and adults with autism spectrum disorders: Complex needs in unprepared systems. Toronto, ON: The Redpath Centre. Retrieved from

193

https://books-scholarsportal- info.myaccess.library.utoronto.ca/uri/ebooks/ebooks0/gibson_cppc-chrc/2013-07- 25/1/10709019 Street, R. L. & Giles, H. (1982). Speech accommodation theory: A social cognitive approach to language and speech behavior. In M. Roloff & C. R. Berger (Eds.), Social cognition and communication (pp. 193–226). Beverly Hills, CA: SAGE. Strauss, A. L., & Corbin, J. M. (1994). Grounded theory methodology. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (pp. 273–285). Thousand Oaks: SAGE. Strauss, A. L., & Corbin, J. M. (1998). Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE. Strunz, S., Schermuck, C., Ballerstein, S., Ahlers, C. J., Dziobek, I., & Roepke, S. (2017). Romantic relationships and relationship satisfaction among adults with Asperger syndrome and high‐functioning autism. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 73(1), 113–125. doi:10.1002/jclp.22319 Subrahmanyam, K., Reich, S. M., Waechter, N., & Espinoza, G. (2008). Online and offline social networks: Use of social networking sites by emerging adults. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 29(6), 420–433. doi.org/10.1016 /j.appdev.2008.07.003 Sundberg, M. (2018). Online gaming, loneliness and friendships among adolescents and adults with ASD. Computers in Human Behavior, 79(2018), 105–110. doi:10.1016 /j.chb.2017.10.020 Swain, D., Scarpa, A., White, S., & Laugeson, E. (2015). Emotion dysregulation and anxiety in adults with ASD: Does social motivation play a role? Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 45(12), 3971–3977. doi:10.1007/s10803-015-2567-6 Szatmari, P., Bremner, R., & Nagy, J. (1989). Asperger’s syndrome: A review of clinical features. The Canadian Journal of Psychiatry, 34(6), 554–560. doi:10.1177 /070674378903400613 Szatmari, P., & Jones, M. B. (1991). IQ and the genetics of autism. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 32(6), 897–908. doi:10.1111/j.1469-7610.1991 .tb01917.x Tager‐Flusberg, H., & Anderson, M. (1991). The development of contingent discourse ability in autistic children. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 32(7), 1123–1134. doi:10.1111/j.1469-7610.1991.tb00353.x Tagliamonte, S. A., & Denis, D. (2008). Linguistic ruin? LOL! Instant messaging and teen language. American Speech, 83(1), 3–34. doi:10.1215/00031283-2008-001 Tantam, D. (1991). Asperger syndrome in adulthood. In U. Frith (Ed.), Autism and Asperger syndrome (147–183). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press. Tantam, D. (2000). Adolescence and adulthood of individuals with Asperger syndrome. In A. Klin, F. R. Volkmar, & S. S. Sparrow (Eds.), Asperger syndrome (pp. 367–399). New York, NY: The Guilford Press. Taylor, J. L., Henninger, N. A., & Mailick, M. R. (2015). Longitudinal patterns of employment and postsecondary education for adults with autism and average-range IQ. Autism, 19(7), 785–793. doi:10.1177/1362361315585643

194

Taylor, J. L., & Seltzer, M. (2011). Employment and postsecondary educational activities for young adults with autism spectrum disorders during the transition to adulthood. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 41(5), 566–574. doi:10.1007/s10803-010-1070- 3 Tierney, S., Burns, J., & Kilbey, E. (2016). Looking behind the mask: Social coping strategies of girls on the autistic spectrum. Research in Autism Spectrum Disorders, 23(2016), 73–83. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rasd.2015.11.013 Tsai, L. (2013). Asperger’s disorder will be back. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 43(12), 2914–2942. doi:10.1007/s10803-013-1839-2 Tsai, L., & Beisler, J. (1983). The development of sex differences in infantile autism. The British Journal of Psychiatry, 142(4), 373–378. doi:10.1192/bjp.142.4.373 Tsai, L., & Ghaziuddin, M. (2014). DSM-5 ASD moves forward into the past. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 44(2), 321–330. doi:10.1007/s10803-013-1870-3 Valkenburg, P., & Peter, J. (2009). Social consequences of the internet for adolescents: A decade of research. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 18(1), 1–5. doi:10.1111/j.1467- 8721.2009.01595.x Van den Brink, D., Van Berkum, J., Bastiaansen, M., Tesink, C., Kos, M., Buitelaar, J., & Hagoort, P. (2012). Empathy matters: ERP evidence for inter-individual differences in social language processing. Social Cognitive and Affective Neuroscience, 7(2), 173–183. doi:10.1093/scan/nsq094 van der Miesen, A. I., de Vries, A. L., Steensma, T. D., & Hartman, C. A. (2018). Autistic symptoms in children and adolescents with gender dysphoria. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 48(5), 1537–1548. doi:10.1007/s10803-017-3417-5 van Schalkwyk, G. I., Klingensmith, K., McLaughlin, P., & Qayyum, Z. (2015). The use of social networking sites by adolescents with psychiatric illnesses: A qualitative study. Scandinavian Journal of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry and Psychology, 3(2), 108– 114. doi:10.21307/sjcapp-2015-011 van Schalkwyk, G. I., Klingensmith, K., & Volkmar, F. R. (2015). Gender identity and autism spectrum disorders. The Yale Journal of Biology and Medicine, 88(1), 81–83. Retrieved from: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4345542/ van Schalkwyk, G. I., Marin, C. E., Ortiz, M., Rolison, M., Qayyum, Z., McPartland, J. C., . . . Silverman, W. K. (2017). Social media use, friendship quality, and the moderating role of anxiety in adolescents with autism spectrum disorder. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 47(9), 2805–2813. doi:10.1007/s10803-017-3201-6 Vaterlaus, J. M., Barnett, K., Roche, C., & Young, J. A. (2016). “Snapchat is more personal”: An exploratory study on snapchat behaviors and young adult interpersonal relationships. Computers in Human Behavior, 62(Complete), 594–601. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2016.04.029 Vine Foggo, R. S., & Webster, A. A. (2017). Understanding the social experiences of adolescent females on the autism spectrum. Research in Autism Spectrum Disorders, 35(2017), 74– 85. doi:10.1016/j.rasd.2016.11.006

195

Vivanti, G., Hudry, K., Trembath, D., Barbaro, J., Richdale, A., & Dissanayake, C. (2013). Towards the DSM ‐5 criteria for autism: Clinical, cultural, and research implications. Australian Psychologist, 48(4), 258–261. doi:10.1111/ap.12008 Volkmar, F. R., & McPartland, J. C. (2014). From Kanner to DSM-5: Autism as an evolving diagnostic concept. Annual Review of Clinical Psychology, 10, 193–212. doi:10.1146/annurev-clinpsy-032813-153710 Volkmar, F. R., State, M., & Klin, A. (2009). Autism and autism spectrum disorders: Diagnostic issues for the coming decade. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 50(1–2), 108– 115. doi:10.1111/j.1469-7610.2008.02010.x Voss, K., Markiewicz, D., & Doyle, A. (1999). Friendship, marriage and self-esteem. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 16(1), 103–122. doi:10.1177 /0265407599161006 Wang, Z., Tchernev, J., & Solloway, T. (2012). A dynamic longitudinal examination of social media use, needs, and gratifications among college students. Computers in Human Behavior, 28(5), 1829–1839. doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2012.05.001 Waterloo, S. F., Baumgartner, S. E., Peter, J., & Valkenburg, P. M. (2018). Norms of online expressions of emotion: Comparing Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, and WhatsApp. New Media & Society, 20(5), 1813–1831. doi:10.1177 /1461444817707349 Webopedia (n.d.). Webopedia: Online tech dictionary for students, educators and IT professionals. Retrieved from https://www.webopedia.com Wellman, B., Haase, A. Q., Witte, J., & Hampton, K. (2001). Does the internet increase, decrease, or supplement social capital? Social networks, participation, and community commitment. American Behavioral Scientist, 45(3), 436–455. doi:10.1177/00027640121957286 Wendell, S. (1996). The rejected body: Feminist philosophical reflections on disability. London, UK: Routledge. White, S., Ollendick, T., & Bray, B. (2011). College students on the autism spectrum: Prevalence and associated problems. Autism, 15(6), 683–701. doi:10.1177 /1362361310393363 Whitehouse, A. J. O., Durkin, K., & Jaquet, E. (2009). Friendship, loneliness and depression in adolescents with Asperger’s syndrome. Journal of Adolescence, 32(2), 309–322. doi:10.1016/j.adolescence.2008.03.004 Whitmore, E. (1994). To tell the truth: Working with oppressed groups in participatory approaches to inquiry. In P. Reason (Ed.), Participation in human inquiry (pp. 82–98). London, UK: SAGE. Wijngaarden-Cremers, P., Eeten, E., Groen, W., Deurzen, P., Oosterling, I., & Gaag, R. (2014). Gender and age differences in the core triad of impairments in autism spectrum disorders: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 44(3), 627–635. doi:10.1007/s10803-013-1913-9 Williams, K., Tuck, M., Helmer, M., Bartak, L., Mellis, C., & Peat, J. K. (2008). Diagnostic labelling of autism spectrum disorders in NSW. Journal of Paediatrics and Child Health, 44(3), 108–113. doi:10.1111/j.1440-1754.2007.01232.x

196

Williams, S. J. (1999). Is anybody there? Critical realism, chronic illness and the disability debate. Sociology of Health & Illness, 21(6), 797–819. doi:10.1111/1467-9566.00184 Wilson, C. E., Happé, F., Wheelwright, S. J., Ecker, C., Lombardo, M. V., Johnston, P., . . . Chakrabarti, B. (2014). The neuropsychology of male adults with high‐functioning autism or Asperger syndrome. Autism Research, 7(5), 568–581. doi10.1002/aur.1394 Wilson, R. E., Gosling, S. D., & Graham, L. T. (2012). A review of Facebook research in the social sciences. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 7(3), 203–220. doi:10.1177/1745691612442904 Wing, L. (1991). The relationship between Asperger’s syndrome and Kanner’s autism. In U. Frith (Ed.), Autism and Asperger syndrome (pp. 93–121). London, UK: Cambridge University Press. Witwer, A., & Lecavalier, L. (2008). Examining the validity of autism spectrum disorder subtypes. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 38(9), 1611–1624. doi:10.1007/s10803-008-0541-2 Wright, P. H. (1988). Interpreting research on gender differences in friendship: A case for moderation and a plea for caution. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 5(3), 367–373. doi:10.1177/0265407588053006 Wright, P. H., & Scanlon, M. B. (1991). Gender role orientations and friendship: Some attenuation, but gender differences abound. Sex Roles, 24(9), 551–566. doi:10.1007/BF00288413 Yang, C., Brown, B., & Braun, M. (2014). From facebook to cell calls: Layers of electronic intimacy in college students’ interpersonal relationships. New Media & Society, 16(1), 5– 23. doi:10.1177/1461444812472486 Yergeau, M. (2009). Circle wars: Reshaping the typical autism essay. Disability Studies Quarterly, 30(1). Retrieved from http://dsq sds.org.myaccess.library.utoronto.ca /article/view/1063 Zell, E., Krizan, Z., & Teeter, S. R. (2015). Evaluating gender similarities and differences using metasynthesis. The American Psychologist, 70(1), 10–20. doi:10.1037/a0038208 Zhao, S., Grasmuck, S., & Martin, J. (2008). Identity construction on Facebook: Digital empowerment in anchored relationships. Computers in Human Behavior, 24(5), 1816– 1836. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2008.02.012

197

198

Appendices

199 Appendix A Terminology and Diagnostic Classification of ASD Without ID: Background and Debates

Understandings of the causes and manifestations of autism, including views regarding the intellectual abilities of those who exhibit symptoms, have varied considerably since the early 20th century. Conceptualizations of ASD and approaches to intervention have been the subject of significant debate, which is reflected by changing descriptive and diagnostic terms associated with autism with and without intellectual disability. A brief history of the ways in which ASD without intellectual disability (ASD-NoID) has been described and classified is included below.

Diagnostic and Descriptive Terminology

High-Functioning Autism

Although it has never been an official DSM diagnosis, the term high-functioning autism (HFA) or variants of it have been used since the 1970s. Terms such as “high autism,” “primary autistic (higher functioning),” and “higher functioning infantile autism” began to be used during the 1970s to describe individuals with autism with less severe cognitive impairments (DeMyer, Barton, et al., 1973; DeMyer, Churchill, Pontius, & Gilkey, 1971; DeMyer, Hingtgen, & Jackson, 1981). Beginning in approximately 1988, the use of the term HFA instead of “nonretarded” and “normally intelligent” to denote individuals with autism without intellectual disabilities became more common in academic literature (see Ameli et al., 1988; see A. Lincoln et al., 1988). HFA continues to be used to describe ASD-NoID informally, as well as in academic research and clinical contexts (de Giambattista et al., 2019; Kenny et al., 2016; Ruiz Calzada et al., 2012).

ASD-NoID Prior to the Publication of DSM -IV

Prior to the 1980s, autistic behaviour was included in the DSM as a manifestation of childhood schizophrenia (APA, 1952, 1968) and was associated with severe delays in language and cognitive skills (French et al., 2013). Infantile autism was first listed as a distinct diagnosis in the DSM -III, which was published in 1980. Mental retardation was included as an associated feature with a statement estimating that 40 percent of individuals with autism had IQ scores below 50

200 and 30 percent had IQ scores over 70 (APA, 1980). Thus, autism was still associated with cognitive delay, but the possibility of having autism without intellectual impairment was acknowledged. In addition, less severe forms of autism could be diagnosed as pervasive developmental disorder not otherwise specified (PDD-NOS; French et al., 2013).

Asperger’s Disorder and the DSM

Asperger’s disorder was first included in the DSM in 1994. It was distinguished from autistic disorder based on the absence of significant language delays (i.e., single word use by age two and use of communicative phrases by age three), the absence of delays in cognitive development, and the presence of age-appropriate self-help and adaptive skills other than social interaction (APA, 1994). Since a diagnosis of Asperger’s disorder could only be made in the absence of language delay, this led to individuals with ASD-NoID being diagnosed with either Asperger’s disorder or autistic disorder.

As a result of overlapping criteria and characteristics and diagnostic confusion (Chiang et al., 2014; K. Williams et al., 2008), Asperger’s disorder is no longer an official diagnosis. The DSM- 5 conceptualized autism as a single spectrum disorder that includes the core criteria (dimensions) of social communication impairment and restricted and repetitive behaviours, as well as three severity levels (requires “support,” “substantial support,” and “very substantial support”), and specifiers including the presence or absence of intellectual impairment, language impairment, catatonia, association with known medical, genetic, or environmental conditions, and association with other neurodevelopment, mental, or behavioural disorders. This allows diagnosticians to describe symptoms in the areas of social communication, behaviour, flexibility, and sensory sensitivity (APA, 2013). The DSM-5 also lists social communication disorder as a distinct diagnosis that includes social communication impairment without restricted and repetitive behaviours or interests (APA, 2013).

Debates About the Distinctiveness of HFA and Asperger’s Disorder

Prior to and following the removal of Asperger’s disorder from the DSM , there has been considerable debate about whether Asperger’s disorder and HFA constitute two distinct subtypes of autism (Chiang et al., 2014; Tsai, 2013; Tsai & Ghaziuddin, 2014; Volkmar, State, & Klin, 2009) or if they are variants of a the same disorder with similar underlying neuropsychological

201 functions (Attwood, 2006a; de Giambattista et al. 2019; Howlin, 2003; Wing, 1991; Witwer & Lecavalier, 2008).

HFA and Asperger’s Disorder as Distinct

A number of differences between individuals diagnosed with autistic disorder and Asperger’s disorder have been identified relatively consistently. Compared with individuals with HFA, individuals with Asperger’s disorder have higher full-scale IQ scores (Chiang et al., 2014), later symptom onset (Volkmar, State, et al., 2009), better performance on theory of mind tests (Ozonoff, Pennington, & Rogers, 1991; Montgomery et al., 2016; Paynter & Peterson, 2010), better outcomes in terms of adaptive functioning (Volkmar, State, et al., 2009), as well as milder social communication impairments (Volkmar, State, et al., 2009), more motor clumsiness (Rinehart, Bradshaw, Brereton, & Tonge, 2002; Volkmar et al., 2009) and more prominent circumscribed interests (Volkmar, State, et al., 2009). In addition, some review and meta-analytic studies report statistically or near-statistically significant differences between participants with HFA and Asperger’s disorder across a wide range of areas including motor skills, social and communication skills, intellectual, emotional, psychological, and adaptive functioning, repetitive and restricted behaviours and interests, structural and functional characteristics of the brain, executive functioning, theory of mind, psychological outcomes, language comprehension, body growth, genetic functions and associations, comorbidities, and treatment outcomes (Tsai & Ghaziuddin, 2014). This has led some authors to conclude that there are important clinical and behavioural differences between HFA and Asperger’s disorder that warrant classifying them as distinct disorders (Chiang et al., 2014; Tsai, 2013; Tsai & Ghaziuddin, 2014) or that the possibility should not be ruled out (Kaland, 2011; Rinehart, et al., 2002; Witwer & Lecavalier, 2008).

HFA and Asperger’s Disorder as Variants of a Single Disorder

Proponents of the position that HFA and Asperger’s disorder are variants of a single disorder emphasize that findings about the presence and extent of differences are inconsistent within a range of domains including neuroanatomy (see Lai, Lombardo, Auyeung, et al., 2015; see Pina- Camacho et al., 2013), executive functioning, theory of mind, motor skills, nonverbal communication, and social functioning (Sharma, Woolfson, & Hunter, 2012). For example, numerous studies have found that the verbal IQ (VIQ) scores of individuals diagnosed with

202

Asperger’s disorder is significantly higher than their performance IQ (PIQ) scores, whereas PIQ is significantly higher than VIQ in individuals with HFA (Planche & Lemonnier, 2012; see Sharma et al., 2012). However, other studies have (a) reported mixed results (Ghaziuddin & Mountain-Kimchi, 2004; K. Williams et al., 2008), (b) concluded that VIQ is higher than PIQ among individuals with Asperger’s disorder, but that VIQ and PIQ are similar among individuals with HFA (Chiang et al., 2014), and (c) that there are no differences in VIQ between individuals with Asperger’s disorder and HFA (Spek, Scholte, & van Berckelaer-Onnes, 2008; Wilson, Happé, et al., 2014).

A number of studies have also found that diagnostic practices vary considerably according to the setting (e.g., schools, hospitals, family clinics), clinicians’ experience and training, and eligibility requirements for educational placements and access to resources and support (Lord et al., 2012; Shattuck & Grosse, 2007). In addition, the likelihood of receiving a diagnosis of Asperger’s disorder corresponds with demonstrating an eagerness to engage socially and not exhibiting intellectual impairment, even in the absence of the core criteria of early language delay (Sciutto & Cantwell, 2005; Sharma et al., 2012; K. Williams et al., 2008). These findings indicate that the differences between HFA and Asperger’s disorder may not be pronounced enough to reliably distinguish between them and that the findings of studies that recruit and assign participants based on pre-existing diagnoses may not be valid. Studies that recruit and assign participants based on DSM criteria as opposed to pre-existing diagnoses may ensure that they are actually measuring differences between individuals who meet the diagnostic criteria. However, some of these studies have concluded that there are differences in terms of language development and age of onset, which is circular (Macintosh & Dissanayake, 2004; Sanders, 2009; Sharma et al., 2012; Volkmar & McPartland, 2014).

Critics of HFA and Asperger’s disorder being classified separately have also argued that some studies that have identified differences between the two groups have not controlled for IQ. This is problematic because various measures including theory of mind tests, adaptive skills, communication, patterns of comorbidities, and a variety of outcomes are associated with IQ. As a result, the extent to which differences are a function of early language development as opposed to general cognitive abilities is obscured (Sharma et al., 2012). Connectedly, a number of authors have argued that many of the identified differences between individuals with HFA and Asperger’s disorder are quantitative (i.e., related to the frequency, intensity, or severity of

203 symptoms and behaviours, and outcomes) as opposed to qualitative (i.e., reflecting distinct etiology, patterns of key behaviours and symptoms, psychological or physiological profiles, and developmental course) (Happé, 2011; Macintosh & Dissanayake, 2004; Sharma et al., 2012). This is significant because the rationale for maintaining distinct diagnostic classifications includes providing information to guide treatment and interventions (Mullins-Sweatt & Widiger, 2009). Communication differences provide one example of the limited utility of distinguishing between HFA and Asperger’s disorder. Numerous studies have found that individuals with Asperger’s disorder communicate in a way that is “active and odd” and characterized by the use of pedantic speech and tendency to include excessive detail, whereas individuals with HFA are “aloof and passive” and demonstrate more of a tendency for literal interpretation than individuals with Asperger’s disorder (de Giambattista et al., 2019; Ghaziuddin, 2010; Klin & Volkmar, 2003; Paul, Augustyn, Klin, & Volkmar, 2005). However, this latter tendency is arguably a function of participants with HFA having lower full-scale IQ scores that are associated with difficulty recognizing and understanding communicative intention and being able to adopt intellectual strategies to identify non-literal communication (de Giambattista et al., 2019). In addition, although differences in meeting early language milestones have a significant impact among young children, differences in language ability between children with Asperger’s disorder and HFA often disappear by school age (Ozonoff, South, & Miller, 2000). Furthermore, when IQ is accounted for, early language differences are not associated with differences in outcomes among adolescents and adults with ASD (Happé, 2011; Howlin, 2003), including the ability to make friends or engage in reciprocal conversations (Barahona-Correa & Filipe, 2016).

Ongoing Debate

The status of Asperger’s disorder as a distinct diagnosis continues with some authors arguing that it should be listed in future versions of the DSM (e.g., Tsai, 2013). Connectedly, research into differences between individuals who have been diagnosed with Asperger’s in the past (or who meet DSM -IV criteria of no early language or cognitive delay) and others with autistic disorder or ASD with early language delay and no intellectual disability is ongoing (e.g., de Giambattista et al., 2019).

Asperger’s syndrome is no longer an official diagnosis in the DSM-5 but the term is still used informally, including by individuals with ASD who identify with the term and use it, or “Aspies”

204 to describe themselves and others with similar traits and characteristics, sometimes in terms of constituting a community (Spillers, et al., 2014).

The term high-functioning autism also continues to be used in clinical, research, and informal settings. However, distinguishing between individuals with ASD based on functioning levels is contested. Objections to the use of the term “high-functioning” are based on the risk of limiting access to support because of incorrect perceptions that individuals without intellectual disabilities require less support to succeed in conventional situations and environments. Objections to the term “low-functioning” are based on concerns that it emphasizes deficits and may lead to lower expectations. In addition, the term is often used to not only describe individuals with intellectual disabilities, but being nonverbal or having difficulty with life skills, which can lead to inappropriately equating these characteristics with low intelligence (Kenny et al., 2016; Ruiz Calzada et al., 2012).

205 Appendix B Interview Protocol

Interview Protocol

Preliminary Questions Q.1. - Do you have friends?

Q.2a. - Tell me about your friends? (exclude if “no” to question 1.) Q.2b. - Who are your friends? (exclude if “no” to question 1.)

Q.3. (exclude if “no” to question or difficulty/distress with 2a. and/or 2b.) Q.3a. - How old are they? Q.3b. - How did you meet them? Q.3c. - How did you make friends with them? Q.3d. - How much time do you spend with your friends?

Q.4a. - What does it mean to be a friend to someone? Q.4b. - Who do you want to be a friend with? Why?

Q.5a.- Are you involved in a romantic relationship? Q.5b.- Do you have a boyfriend or girlfriend?

Q.6. (exclude if “no” to question 5a. or 5b.) Q.6a. - How old are they? Q.6b. - How did you meet them? Q.6c. - How did you make friends with them? Q.6d. - How much time do you spend with your friends?

Research Question 1: How do individuals with ASD understand and define friendship?

Preamble: Friendship can mean different things to different people. This can include how they define the term “friendship.”

206

Key Question: How do you define the term ‘friendship’?

Probes/follow-up questions: - You said ______, can you tell me more about what you mean by that? - How are friends different from acquaintances/family/strangers/peers? - Describe an acquaintance - What does friendship mean? - How have you come to understand friendship as you do? - Who or what has shaped your understanding of friendship (for example your parents, other family, teachers, classmates, TV etc.)?

Research Question 2: What factors (e.g., activities, talking, interests, personality traits etc.) do adolescents and adults with HFASD consider important in terms of friendship?

Preamble: People can have different ideas of what is important in a friend or in a friendship.

Key Question: In your opinion, what are the most important characteristics of friendship?

Probes/follow-up questions: - What are the most important characteristics of a friend to you? - What do you look for in a friend? - What is most important for you in a friendship? - What things do you think other people expect of you as a friend? - What do you try to do as a friend?

Additional probes/follow-up questions for Research Question 1 and/or 2: - Do you have any relationships that you would describe as friendships? - How many friends do you estimate that you have? - What makes them a friend? - What do you like about them? - What kinds of things do you do together? - How much time do you spend with other? - How often do you see each other?

207

- How much time do you spend communicating with each other (including in person, on the phone, by text, Facebook, online games, IM, email etc.)? - How often do you communicate with each other? - How/where did you meet your friends?

Research Question 3.: What social weaknesses and/or concerns do adolescents and adults with HFASD identify?

Preamble: Some people with Asperger’s syndrome or autism have trouble in social situations and trouble making friends. Do you have any social concerns about friendship or social weaknesses or worries?

Key Question: What, if any, concerns do you have about your social life?

Probes/follow-up questions: - How easy or difficult has it been for you to make friends? - What do you think other people think about you? - Are you comfortable in social situations? - Do you prefer individual interactions? Small groups? Large groups? Parties? - Do you have an easy time getting along with people? - How satisfied are you with your social life? - Are you happy with the number of friends that you have? - Are you satisfied with your current friendships? - If you could change anything about your social life, what would you change? - Have you experienced physical bullying? - Have you experienced others forms of bullying (people saying hurtful things to you or excluding you from group work or activities)? - Are you still being bullied? - What does it mean to feel lonely? - Do you feel lonely?

208

Research Question 4.: What social interventions, if any, do adolescent and adults with HFASD identify as potentially helpful?

Preamble: Some people with Asperger’s syndrome or autism want help meeting people or knowing how to act in social situations, or why people act the way they do in social situations.

Key Question: What, if anything, do you think would help you in terms of making friends? - Have you received any help or been in any programs that have to do with making friends, for example social skills groups, scouts, sports teams etc.? - What, if anything, do you think would help you in terms of making friends? - What kinds of things do you would be helpful for people who want to make friends? - Would you want help meeting friends/meeting people if it was available? - What do you think about meeting other people with ASDs? - Have you met or spent time with other people with Asperger’s syndrome or autism? (What has that been like?) - Do you have any friends with Asperger’s syndrome or autism? - How do your friends with ASD compare to your other friends? - Some colleges and universities have started or are starting social groups for students with Asperger’s syndrome and autism. What do you think of that? Do you have any opinions about what would help make those groups most comfortable and successful. - Do you participate in any groups for students with ASD - What would you want in a group? - As a child, what role did your family play in terms of helping you make friends or give you opportunities to spend time with other children? - As an adolescent, what role did your family play in terms of helping you make friends or give you opportunities to spend time with peers or other adults?

209 Appendix C Introductory Email Message to Directors of Disability Offices

Dear [DISABILITY OFFICE DIRECTOR NAME]:

I am a student at the University of Toronto and am conducting a study to fulfill the requirements of my PhD program. The purpose of the study is to learn more about how Ontario postsecondary students with autism spectrum disorders (ASDs) understand friendship and their experiences of friendship. I am looking for participants who are registered with a postsecondary Disability Office on the basis of a diagnosis of autism spectrum disorder (i.e., “autism,” “autism spectrum disorder,” “high-functioning autism,” or “Asperger disorder/syndrome”) who are willing to be interviewed either in person or by telephone.

I ask that you to consider forwarding this information to students registered with your Office on the basis of ASD, either directly or through the Disability Counsellors in your office.

I have attached a recruitment flyer that includes information about the study, myself, and how to contact me.

Please feel free to contact me and encourage Disability Counsellors and potential participants to contact me if you or they have any questions or would like additional information.

Sincerely, Jason Manett 416-978-7499 [email protected]

Dissertation Supervisor: Judith Wiener, [email protected] Director, Office of Research Ethics, University of Toronto: Rachel Zand, [email protected]

The use of email to recruit participants for this study has been approved by the Office of Research Ethics at the University of Toronto.

210 Appendix D Recruitment Flyer

211 Appendix E Email to Potential Participants

Dear ______,

Thank you very much for your interest in participating in my study. I have attached a copy of an information sheet. Please complete it at your earliest convenience and return it to me by email. If you are selected, I will contact you to arrange the interview.

Thank you again for your interest.

Sincerely,

Jason Manett

212 Appendix F Information Form for Participants (College Version)

Information Sheet (College)

Name ______

School ______

Are you 18 Years of Age or Older ? o Yes o No

Program of Study ______

Level/Credential Type

o Certificate o Diploma o Degree

Year of Study ______

Credits Completed ______

I identify my gender as:

o Female o Male o Transgender o Prefer not to respond

Hometown ______

Are you willing to be contacted for an interview? Yes No

Contact Information ______

213 Appendix G Information Form for Participants (University Version)

Information Sheet (University)

Name ______

School ______

Are you 18 Years of Age or Older ? o Yes o No

Program of Study ______

Level/Credential Type

o Undergraduate o Masters o Doctorate o Other - Specify ______

Year of Study ______

Credits Completed ______

I identify my gender as:

o Female o Male o Transgender o Prefer not to respond

Hometown ______

Are you willing to be contacted for an interview? Yes No

Contact Information ______

214 Appendix H Email to Potential Participants Not Selected

Dear ______,

I am writing to follow up about the study that we had communicated about [AMOUNT OF TIME] ago. I have met with my committee to choose which students to interview. Unfortunately, you were not selected. The only reason is that I am only able to interview 12 postsecondary students in all of Ontario.

There is a chance that I will be able to interview more students later on in the school year. If I am able to, may I contact you again?

Thank you again for your interest in my study and for taking the time to complete the information sheet.

Sincerely,

Jason Manett

215 Appendix I Informed Consent Form

Description of the Study

The purpose of this study is to learn about the ways that Ontario postsecondary students with autism spectrum disorders (ASDs) understand friendship and their experiences of friendship. The research will be conducted by Jason Manett, a PhD student at the University of Toronto, under the supervision of Dr. Judith Wiener from the University of Toronto.

Eligible participants include postsecondary students who have been diagnosed with an autism spectrum disorder (i.e., “autism,” “autism spectrum disorder,” “high-functioning autism,” or “Asperger’s disorder/syndrome”) and who are 18 years of age or older.

You will be asked a series of questions during an interview that will take approximately 45 to 60 minutes. You have the option of being interviewed at a location of your choice or by telephone. The interviews will be audio recorded with your permission.

You may be contacted by the researcher after the interview has been completed and asked for clarification of your responses. To ensure that the interviews are accurately transcribed, you will also be sent a copy of the interview transcripts by mail to review within 60 days of the interview. You will be asked to send a revised version of the transcript back to me and/or a written indication that the transcript is accurate within 60 days of receiving it.

Risks and Benefits of the Study

While the study involves a relatively low risk to participants, it is possible that you may be distressed by the content of some of the questions that you are asked about your experiences. It is important to note that at no time will you or your responses be judged or evaluated. The researcher has considerable experience working with individuals with autism spectrum disorders and can discuss any feelings that arise with you and/or refer you to an appropriate resource at your college/university or in your community.

The benefits of your participation in the study include receiving a copy of the results if you request it. You will also be provided with written information about social opportunities (i.e.,

216 clubs and groups) at your college/university and in the community if you request it. Your participation will provide the scholarly community and service providers with a better understanding of the social perceptions and experiences of adults with ASD, which can inform decisions around social programs and supports. The findings may also be used to develop measures of friendship and friendship quality suitable to the population. You will also receive $30 for participating in the interview.

Confidentiality

All information collected from you prior to and during the interview is private and confidential. The interview will be recorded using a digital recorder and converted to typed transcripts. The interview recordings, transcripts, and information sheets will be stored on an encrypted USB key. All of the information from the recordings and transcripts will be separated from any identifying information. Only the researcher and the three members of his research committee (who are faculty and staff at the University of Toronto) will have access to identifying data. The data will be stored in a locked filing cabinet in the researcher’s locked office at the University of Toronto. The information gathered from the interview may be presented at conferences, in thesis dissertations, in reports and in journals with no identifying data. The USB key and all paper records will be destroyed 10 years after the completion of the study.

There are exceptions to the confidentiality policy that are required by law. The researcher must report to authorities when participants indicate that they may pose a significant danger to themselves or others, when participants report sexual abuse by a health care professional, or when the court issues a subpoena for records or testimony. If you reveal that you are at risk of doing harm to yourself (e.g., serious self-injury, suicidal ideation or attempts, desire to commit suicide), I will arrange for you to speak by telephone with a registered psychologist on my committee who will conduct a risk assessment and support you to find treatment and/or seek emergency assistance.

Right to Withdraw

Participation in the study is voluntary. Participants may choose to withdraw from the study, including the interview itself, at any time, or not answer any questions. There is no consequence for withdrawing or choosing to not answer specific questions. You will still receive $30 for

217 participating as well as information about social opportunities and a copy of the results if you request them. You can withdraw your interview responses entirely before September 2014.

The study has been described to me. I can ask questions about the study or the research at any time by contacting Jason Manett at 416-978-7499 or [email protected].

Consent

I agree to participate in this study.

______

Name Signature Date

I agree to the being recorded during the interview.

______

Name Signature Date

I would like to receive a copy of the results of the study.

______

Name Signature Date

Please keep a copy of this letter for your records.

Researcher Contact Information Supervisor Contact Information Jason Manett Dr. Judith Wiener Accessibility Services Applied Psychology & Human Development 130 St. George Street, 1st floor 252 Bloor Street West Toronto, Ontario Toronto, Ontario M5S 3H1 M5S 1V6

The study has been approved by the Research Ethics Boards of the University of Toronto. If you have any questions related to your rights as a participant in this study please contact the Ethics Review Office at the University of Toronto at 416 946 3272 or, [email protected].

218 Appendix J Member Checking Email

Hi ______,

We met for an interview on ______to talk about friendship. Thank you again for agreeing to be interviewed as part of my research study.

An important part of my research is to make sure that I have correctly recorded what you said during our interviews and that I understand the meaning of what you said to me.

I have attached a written transcript of our interview and a summary of our interview. Please read the summary and let me know if I have understood correctly. If there is anything that you feel I misunderstood, please correct me by telling me which statements are wrong. Please also let me know if there is anything that you want to add to your responses or want to explain more. You can also read the transcript to make sure that it seems correct. The password to open the file is: *******

If possible, can you please reply in the 60 days to tell me that the transcript and summary look correct or to send any corrections or additions you want to make?

Thank you very much,

Jason

219 Appendix K Coding Process Memo 1

([Interview 6] pages 17–17.2)

- Participant 6 identifies his goal of being more outgoing and reaching out to others instead of waiting for the next opportunity to arise

- goal – more outgoing, goal – initiating, tendency – wait for others to initiate

P: Um, yeah, so that’s definitely one of the things that I want to do with uh, my goals of being more outgoing [Um hmm] and uh, being able to reach out to them more rather than uh, just waiting for the next opportunity to uh, connect with them so.

(Phase 2 Memos p. 60)

220 Appendix L Coding Process Memo 2

I set out with a series of research questions. I am coding by question at the moment, but much of the data does not fit my questions. At a later stage, I will review my codes to see what doesn’t fit and generate questions “Jeopardy” style.10 One such question might be: “What obstacles to friendship development do participants face?”. This is close to Question 3: What social difficulties and/or concerns do postsecondary students with HFASD identify? The difference is that instead of being experienced as challenges, there are behaviours that are aimed at avoiding negative outcomes as opposed to promoting positive ones. Examples include conflict avoidance generally and “not saying anything” specifically. A related question might be “What obstacles to enjoying social experiences/relationships do participants face?”

(Phase 2 Memos p. 41-42)

* * *

Jeopardy Questions Brainstorm Part 1

- What is the role of siblings in terms of understanding friendship?

- What is the role of siblings in terms of engaging socially?

- What previous supports have participants had?

- How effective have previous supports been?

10 Although inspired by the game show, the use of the word ‘Jeopardy’ does not refer to an attempt to replicate any aspect of it. My use of the word ‘Jeopardy’ in my memos was imprecise but based on the game show presenting answers prior to questions. I treated participants’ statements that did not directly relate to specific research questions as answers to which I had to generate matching questions for as a tentative step within the process of identifying categories.

221

- Are there any statements linking experience of previous supports to seeking support in postsecondary

- What relationship do participants have with their ASD diagnosis?

- What observations/opinions do participants have about others with ASD?

- Do participants describe bullying?

- What relationship do participants see between past and current social experiences?

- What role have parents had in participants’ social lives?

- In what ways do participants attempt to help others?

- what, if any, additional social opportunities do participants see as a result of being in postsecondary?

- What is different socially between high school and postsecondary?’

(Phase 2 Memos p. 42)

222 Appendix M Recoded Categories and Dimensions Version 1

Current Social Challenges

Maintaining contact

Initiating contact

Interaction level concerns

Concern with how viewed by others/in relation to societal expectations

Limited social endurance

Areas of Confidence

Personality traits

Skills/attributes

Boundaries/limits

Intact Understanding of Friendship

Different types (intimacy---activity---by negation (i.e., not acquaintance, romantic partner, family)

Commonalities---complementary aspects

Support/help---conflict resolution---effort

Intact Social Awareness

Social conventions/expectations---how actions/inaction viewed by others--- observations

223

Relationship with ASD/Diagnosis

Favourable comparison with others with ASD---less favourable comparison with

peers without ASD

Acceptance of diagnosis---concern with others’ views/misunderstandings of/about ASD

Able/unable to relate to others with ASD

Social Lives

Types: Engagement with friends/non-friends---at postsecondary/outside of post-

secondary---overall friend/peer group size---in person friend/peer group size--- activity level---activity type (in touch/in person/structured/unstructured)

Satisfaction levels

Types of dissatisfaction (number of friends/social contacts---quantity of social activity---enjoyment/comfort---skills/confidence)

Support Orientations

Want vs. do not want support (want vs. do not want social skills support--- receiving vs. not receiving social support---help for self vs. help for others only)

Strategic Orientations

Stage/phase based/developmental view of social development

Pre interaction-decision stage (determining engagement)

Pre interaction-planning stage

Interaction/situation level stage

224

Social Goals/Orientations

Stage/phase based/developmental view of social development

Pre interaction-decision stage (determining engagement)

Pre interaction-planning stage

Interaction/situation level stage

Composite Category

Stuck in the Middle

Comparison with others with ASD (favourable)/without ASD (less favourable)

Do not want differential treatment vs. need/want help

Fitting in vs. Being Myself

Motivation vs. Limited Endurance (achievement vs. stress)

Satisfied but …

Tradeoffs (engagement-stress/discomfort---enjoyment/comfort-skill/confidence (‘strive pride’)

Types of social lives (postsecondary/non-postsecondary; overall friend/peer group size (1-2 vs. small group); in person friend/peer group size (1-2 vs. small group); availability of friends/peers (‘regularly’ available vs. not); activity level (high/low); activity type (in touch with friends and/or in-person activities; structured and/or unstructured)

Level of satisfaction (high/medium/low)

Types of dissatisfaction (quantity-friends/peers---quantity-activity/interactions--- quality-enjoyment/comfort---quality-skill/confidence)

225 Appendix N Category Development Process Memo

- Participants have solid/sophisticated understandings of what friendship is and are socially aware (Intact Understandings of Friendship/Social Awareness) (this is context but may also be a standalone factor for engagement/activation)

- Participants are socially motivated, describe successes and areas of confidence, and have active social lives (Factors for Activation)

But/And:

- Participants experience social challenges (interaction level/not knowing what to say or do, relationship level, effortful, confusion, fear of social errors/concern about others’ judgments), which at a broad level leads to limited social endurance (Social Challenges)

- The combination of knowledge, ability, and motivation on one hand and challenges on the other leads to participants being Strategic in two ways: Strategies for Engagement (determining engagement level, planning level, interaction/situation level, observation, stage/phase based approach) and Strategies for Self-Preservation (limited number of friends, limited size of interactions, limited range (old/new), limited time)

- Employing combinations of Strategies for Engagement and Strategies for Self-Preservation results in practices of Strategic Limited Engagement (old/new/both; postsecondary important/unimportant socially; friendship/activity/coping-effectiveness)

- Strategic Limited Engagement is a compromise and is associated with participants being “Satisfied But …” with their social lives

- Participants engage in Social Comparison (with others with ASD, with peers without ASD, and in relation to perceived societal expectations and standards) that incorporates how they evaluate their social lives

- Social Comparison for participants involves viewing themselves favourably in relation to others with ASD and less favourably/more ambiguously than peers without ASD and when

226 situating themselves in relation to perceived (salient to them) societal expectations and is associated with participants being “In the Middle”

(Phase 2 and 3 Memos p. 429)

227 Appendix O Recoded Categories and Dimensions Version 2

Constituent Category

Understanding of Friendship

Mantaining regular contact (spending time together, keeping in touch)

Compatible interests (shared, complementary, different)

Intimacy

Similar and complementary traits/behaviours

Variation: (gender: intimacy vs. activity emphasis; intimacy vs. practical emphasis; friendship requiring work)

Social Challenges

Initiating/approaching others

Interaction level concerns

Concern with how viewed by others/in relation to societal expectations

Limited social endurance

Motivating Factors

Personality traits

Skills/attributes

Boundaries/limits

In the Middle

Comparison with others with ASD (favourable)/without ASD (less favourable)

228

Acceptance of diagnosis---concern with others’ views/misunderstandings of/about ASD

Able/unable to relate to others with ASD

Want vs. do not want support (want vs. do not want social skills support--- receiving vs. not receiving social support---help for self vs. help for others only)

Social conventions/expectations---how actions/inaction viewed by others--- observations

Do not want differential treatment vs. need/want help

Fitting in vs. Being Myself

Motivation vs. Limited Endurance (achievement vs. stress)

Strategic Limited Engagement

Strategies for Engagement---Strategies for Self-Preservation

Stage/phase based/developmental view of social development

Pre interaction-decision stage (determining engagement)---pre interaction- planning stage---interaction/situation level stage

Stage/phase based/developmental view of social development

Pre interaction-decision stage (determining engagement)

Pre interaction-planning stage

Interaction/situation level stage

Postsecondary as important socially (yes/no)

Old vs. New friends/social experiences prioritized (old/new/both)

Social Goal Orientation (friendship/activity/coping-effectiveness)

229

Types: Engagement with friends/non-friends---at postsecondary/outside of Postsecondary---overall friend/peer group size---in person friend/peer group size-- -activity level---activity type (in touch/in person/structured/unstructured)

Maintaining contact---initiating contact

Composite Category

Satisfied but …

Tradeoffs (engagement-stress/discomfort---enjoyment/comfort-skill/confidence (‘strive pride’)

Level of satisfaction (high/medium/low)

Types of dissatisfaction (quantity-friends/peers---quantity-activity/interactions--- quality-enjoyment/comfort---quality-skill/confidence)

230 Appendix P Ellen’s Selective Engagement Story

Ellen described a uniquely comprehensive, conscious, and sequential approach to her social development that spanned a nine year period from the latter part of high school to the time of our interview. Her social experiences during university are outlined in detail below in order to capture the complex and integrated nature of the way that she enacted her social life and the considerations underlying her approach.

When we met, Ellen had a friend from childhood, participated in various social activities on campus, had two friends from university, interacted with a range of acquaintances, and was actively pursuing a romantic relationship with another student. She was able to achieve this by employing strategies that contributed to acclimatizing herself to specific locations, contexts, and social setting. Her efforts involved placing herself in uncomfortable situations to address her challenges. However, she placed limits on which areas she addressed at any given time and her expectations about the immediate benefits that her actions would yield in terms of developing her social skills and relationships.

During her second last year of high school, she made a conscious decision to wait until university to socialize with peers from school:

Ellen: I didn’t put the effort [in] socially because I am like they are just going to disappear in two years, so I was waiting until university to be social. So, university, when I started university it’s like okay, I am allowed to be social now. I am back in a scene where my peers are here, lots of new people but back in my age group and older, but like back in my age group. So, finally I had permission to be social and you know, it was going to be worth my while ….

Interviewer: … Permission from yourself?

Ellen: Permission from myself because why bother? I am not going to be friends with someone if they are going to disappear out of my life in two years because we’re all graduating from high school that was stupid so …

231

During her first year of university, Ellen’s goal was to become accustomed to the classroom environment and begin to socialize as a foundation for developing acquaintanceships. She committed to engaging with her peers, but limited her efforts to speaking with classmates immediately before and after classes:

Ellen discussed planning ahead and employing interaction level strategies in order to pursue the above goals. In addition to putting forth effort to engage, her response below reflects circumscribed goals and expectations:

Interviewer: … what kinds of things would you do?

Ellen: Sit near the people, girls who, and guys too, there was a guy he’d come to class, theory class early, I’d be early, we’d be the first ones in he’d say hey, I’d say hey, he would drink his coffee might ask a theory question, I’d answer his theory question and be kind of oh okay, I could talk, which is huge for me. But I would sit near the girls who were nice, who talked, who initiated conversations and included the people who were sitting nearby them in those conversations. So … then just by my presence of sitting there nearby [I] would end up being included in a little conversation, even just mostly as a listener. So, that’s kind of my strategy in first year. So, I would work on, not friendships but, social skills, like social interactions with my peers …

Ellen described feeling more comfortable and integrated within her program and the university by the start of her second year. As a result, she made efforts to socialize outside of classroom settings and with students from outside of her program:

Ellen: Then in second year, I forced myself to go into the music lounge . . . We had African drumming which helped me socialize. It allowed me to get to know my classmates in music really quickly [because] when you are

232

standing around making a goof of yourself because you are uncoordinated and you can’t do all of these crazy complicated African drumming rhythms and clapping things and dancing and singing, we would get to know each other really quickly. So, I had the class scenario, the music stuff that I was really excited about helped me get to know my classmates so … I was included … basically, we took classes together, we had African drumming together. So, I had a circle of, not circle but, I had classmates, I knew them, knew them by name, that kind of thing, felt comfortable around them …

Interviewer: And at that point, were you still only talking to those people in class …?

Ellen: Yes. Waiting outside of class and gradually throughout the year, I got a little more comfortable talking to them, but on campus and I worked at it, and I got to know people outside of music, outside of my program. I would go to workshops, like time management, career stuff, and any kind of academic workshop and there was a [leadership] program … for first- year students and I did that, had a little bit of community volunteering so I, volunteered at a conference on reading week. So, I did in my own ways, get involved in the [university] community.

Interviewer: And was that consciously to meet people?

Ellen: Yes, deliberately, maybe not to meet people but to be social. It was very consciously to be social, so I found ways to fit in with the [university] community. I never made friends but I certainly met a ton of people and I was social so I was forcing myself to be social, and to fit in …

Between her second and fourth years of university, Ellen described “bridging the gap between acquaintances, classmates and maybe making some friends”. The statement below reflects her approach during her second year of university and attempt to befriend a peer named Nancy:

Ellen: … I sort of went along with [my counsellor’s advice] in terms of being interested in [developing friendships]. I wanted to learn how to develop

233

friendships a little bit …That was my first opportunity to be like okay, I am going to develop a friendship, I am going to make friends. I can go a little bit beyond this acquaintanceship stuff … so in second year … [I was] starting to make friends on campus. There was this girl [Nancy], she had a locker near me, so the way that sort of started was just me being a helpful student. She was very shy, so I was encouraging her to come go in the music lounge …. and so it ended up being I would encourage her a little bit and we became friends. Okay we didn’t really become friends, I put effort into being friends.

Ellen also described making efforts to connect with another student, Marissa, based on their shared interests:

Ellen: We met in second year at the same time when I was working on friendships. We struck it off because of the academic thing, she was in African drumming ensemble, she had similar interests to me but was doing psychology. She was in psychology interested in music, I was in music interested in psychology. The music therapy conference I went to at the end of my second year … we went together, we met, we strategized okay, we will go to different sessions and then swap notes. That was cool, that was the very first time I had ever met someone [from] on campus off campus … I got her cellphone number, I had never done that before … It was a start …

Ellen’s description of her efforts to expand her range of social activities and to begin to develop friendships with Nancy and Marissa illustrates how effortful these processes were for her, and in turn, the extent of her commitment to engaging socially. Her statements also demonstrate her strategic use of shared interests and structured activities to pursue her goals, and the reciprocal relationship between acclimatizing to new settings and expanding her range of relationship and social activities.

During her third year of university, one of Ellen’s professors discussed some of her social skills issues with her and helped her to understand the social functions of small talk and conventional activities, such as meeting for lunch or coffee in public spaces. She followed up with her

234 disability counsellor, who arranged for a mentor to help her be able to spend time in these types of locations campus. Ellen’s statement below illustrates the connection that she made between her limitations in terms of which environments she could socialize within and developing a friendship with Nancy:

Ellen: I was having a little bit of a hard time meeting with her. I was wanting to try and be friends on campus for now … I could meet outside of classrooms before and after class or hanging around the music department, or hanging around tables and chairs on campus but not food places, so I was very limited on where I could meet her because I wasn’t exposed to it, or hadn’t practised and worked my way up to being in more social places.

During this period Ellen also attempted to become more comfortable with three-person social interactions. She explained that Nancy had a friend who sometimes joined them when they were spending time together and that she had been responding by removing herself from the situation:

Ellen: I am good at one on one, three people is tricky, she had other friends … so the minute you are in the tunnels you see someone you say hey, they see someone I would disappear. The minute two became three [and] they started talking, I would politely [leave] them to it and go away because I hadn’t quite mastered that.

By the end of her fourth year of university, Ellen was able to eat in one of the cafés on campus and manage social situations involving three people:

Ellen: … by the end of fourth year with her [the mentor], I could get the very basic not …whatever you know, two people you run into a third person, you are chatting in tunnels … hallway that kind of thing. I could survive without disappearing. I could do that.

Interviewer: So, not so enjoyable yet?

Ellen: No, no, no, I could …

Interviewer: … survive?

235

Ellen: Yes.

Ellen: so it was fourth year when I was finally starting to deliberately spend time and eat my lunch even when I was on my own, once in a while in the little café on campus …

Ellen described how her earlier social efforts provided a foundation for pursuing a romantic relationships. She approached a student who she was interested in at a concert. Over the course of the next year-and-a-half, she communicated with him by email and they began to meet in person:

Ellen: So, then having had the social skills to be able to do this … We get along so, I emailed him and I did the whole like this is what friends, acquaintances, we don’t know what we are we’re just on campus like this is what everybody does . . . I am like do you want to like meet up after exams are over? So I was starting to do [the] people hang out together when the exams are done right? So, I emailed him and we decided to meet at R*** [café on campus] after his last exam. I put effort into it. I didn’t know if it was because I liked him [or] because I could, because I learnt how to go into R*** the year before, or because other people do this and I never have, I hang out not because it’s class, so I did it and thought I might have liked him, I did … and so … we would start to have lunch on campus a little bit, hang out and so we were whatever we were friends, acquaintances, not friends, whatever did I like him maybe I don’t know, did he like me, really weird concept I don’t know. …

She also described meeting with him and a third person:

Ellen: … I could do the three-person thing, we would have lunch together with a third person … So, we would have lunch the three of us a lot, I enjoyed it … So, I had an interest for one of them, and I can do this because I had developed my social skills so, and because of my age and I am girl and I am normal as much as I am normal …

236

Ellen’s description highlights the importance of having acclimatized to three-person interactions and the café on campus. Her statements also demonstrate how challenging defining relationship was for her and how ensuring that she could engage in conventional social situations and relationships was a prerequisite for determining if doing so was worthwhile and for these experiences to become enjoyable.

Ellen’s description of her social progress during her seven years of university reflects her commitment to acclimatizing herself to social settings, situations and locations in order to engage in social activities and develop social skills and relationships. Her approach and the strategies that she employed to expand her social life are characterized by limiting which specific goals she pursued, her evaluation of the progress that each step represented, and her short-term expectations about the contribution it would make in terms of developing relationships.