Metaperception in Adolescents with and without Autism Spectrum Disorder
Saved in:
| Title: | Metaperception in Adolescents with and without Autism Spectrum Disorder |
|---|---|
| Language: | English |
| Authors: | Usher, Lauren V. (ORCID |
| Source: | Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders. Feb 2018 48(2):533-548. |
| Availability: | Springer. 233 Spring Street, New York, NY 10013. Tel: 800-777-4643; Tel: 212-460-1500; Fax: 212-348-4505; e-mail: service-ny@springer.com; Web site: http://www.springerlink.com |
| Peer Reviewed: | Y |
| Page Count: | 16 |
| Publication Date: | 2018 |
| Document Type: | Journal Articles Reports - Research |
| Descriptors: | Autism, Pervasive Developmental Disorders, Questionnaires, Attitude Measures, Peer Evaluation, Misconceptions, Adolescents, Peer Relationship, Comparative Analysis, Familiarity |
| DOI: | 10.1007/s10803-017-3356-1 |
| ISSN: | 0162-3257 |
| Abstract: | This study compared how adolescents with and without autism spectrum disorder (ASD) evaluated unfamiliar peers (i.e., perceptions), as well as how adolescents believed they were evaluated by peers (i.e., metaperceptions). The Perceptions and Metaperceptions Questionnaire was designed to quantify perceptions and metaperceptions following a live interaction. For all adolescents, more positive perceptions of the peer were associated with more positive metaperceptions. Adolescents with ASD exhibited more accurate metaperceptions than did typically developing adolescents. More positive perceptions and metaperceptions were associated with higher levels of observed social competence across groups. Findings extend our understanding of typically and atypically developing adolescents' impressions of unfamiliar peers and their ability to discern what peers think of them. |
| Abstractor: | As Provided |
| Number of References: | 74 |
| Entry Date: | 2018 |
| Accession Number: | EJ1169120 |
| Database: | ERIC |
|
Full text is not displayed to guests.
Login for full access.
|
|
| FullText | Links: – Type: pdflink Url: https://content.ebscohost.com/cds/retrieve?content=AQICAHj0k_4E0hTGH8RJwT4gCJyBsGNe_WN95AvKlDbXJGqwxwGfZ3GCDw5kQoPYMgIHm0XPAAAA4zCB4AYJKoZIhvcNAQcGoIHSMIHPAgEAMIHJBgkqhkiG9w0BBwEwHgYJYIZIAWUDBAEuMBEEDPh4XouAINQgZGwYbgIBEICBm5IqT7SxJ9KWVi9n9_ErTqiA6CHrd_N2RzJxyyS0LJd1DX2lLhki0-hiwiAnX981QztY-pVPdHP8Rn0lGFIyb24XxavTbLBXYTTFe8VlBq2ecUfLxgHu76XzVdwUxOUt6683e4623J3j26ylDDi8K5kP6SuogzgRcRNVGBdUwKrOaCNOlgQi7mXEKheCkZYqz0LSYnvHjLQMUxbn Text: Availability: 1 Value: <anid>AN0127936247;aut01feb.18;2018Feb12.12:43;v2.2.500</anid> <title id="AN0127936247-1">Metaperception in Adolescents With and Without Autism Spectrum Disorder </title> <p>This study compared how adolescents with and without autism spectrum disorder (ASD) evaluated unfamiliar peers (i.e., perceptions), as well as how adolescents believed they were evaluated by peers (i.e., metaperceptions). The Perceptions and Metaperceptions Questionnaire was designed to quantify perceptions and metaperceptions following a live interaction. For all adolescents, more positive perceptions of the peer were associated with more positive metaperceptions. Adolescents with ASD exhibited more accurate metaperceptions than did typically developing adolescents. More positive perceptions and metaperceptions were associated with higher levels of observed social competence across groups. Findings extend our understanding of typically and atypically developing adolescents’ impressions of unfamiliar peers and their ability to discern what peers think of them.</p> <p>Autism spectrum disorder; Adolescence; Social cognition; Metaperception; Perception; Social competence</p> <hd id="AN0127936247-2">Introduction</hd> <p>As youth transition from childhood to adolescence, the way they are viewed by their peers becomes increasingly salient. Adolescents expand their self-identities as perspective-taking skills develop (Somerville et al. [<reflink idref="bib66" id="ref1">66</reflink>] ), and those who consider others’ perspectives are more socially successful than those who do not (Fett et al. [<reflink idref="bib25" id="ref2">25</reflink>] ). Researchers have investigated what people think about the way that peers evaluate them in the laboratory, in the classroom setting, and online (Malloy et al. [<reflink idref="bib47" id="ref3">47</reflink>] ; Pozo et al. [<reflink idref="bib55" id="ref4">55</reflink>] ; Sherman et al. [<reflink idref="bib65" id="ref5">65</reflink>] ). However, little is known about the degree of accuracy between how adolescents, and particularly those with autism spectrum disorder (ASD), think peers evaluate them and how peers actually evaluate them, and how each of these factors relate to observed social competence when interacting with an unfamiliar peer.</p> <p>During social interactions, people interpret behaviors in order to form perceptions of others. Metaperception is the ability to form ideas of what social partners think of us during social interactions (Laing et al. [<reflink idref="bib43" id="ref6">43</reflink>] ). At the core of an ASD diagnosis are social-communication challenges (American Psychiatric Association [<reflink idref="bib3" id="ref7">3</reflink>] ), which may be exacerbated during adolescence (Picci and Scherf [<reflink idref="bib54" id="ref8">54</reflink>] ). Problems with metaperception may be associated with the social-communication problems evident in dyadic social interactions in ASD and may be especially evident during this critical developmental period. The purpose of this study was to quantify perception and metaperception abilities of adolescents with and without ASD in dyadic interactions with unfamiliar peers using a novel self-report measure, and to examine perceptions and metaperception in relation to observed social competence.</p> <hd id="AN0127936247-3">Metaperception</hd> <p>Laing et al. ([<reflink idref="bib43" id="ref9">43</reflink>] ) coined the term metaperception to refer to a person’s ability to consider another person’s impressions. Metaperception, sometimes referred to as reflected self-appraisal (Pfeifer et al. [<reflink idref="bib53" id="ref10">53</reflink>] ), involves the ability to see oneself from another individual’s perspective (Oltmanns et al. [<reflink idref="bib51" id="ref11">51</reflink>] ), and is typically assessed in dyadic interactions (e.g., Cooper [<reflink idref="bib19" id="ref12">19</reflink>] ). Although theory of mind, the ability to ascribe mental states such as beliefs and emotions to oneself and to others (Baron-Cohen [<reflink idref="bib5" id="ref13">5</reflink>] ), is necessary for metaperception, metaperception is a more advanced skill involving the integration of self- and other-perceptions. Given that theory of mind does not account for all variation in social competence, other within-child characteristics must be involved (Cooper [<reflink idref="bib20" id="ref14">20</reflink>] ; Klin [<reflink idref="bib41" id="ref15">41</reflink>] ).</p> <p>Early in development, children form mental representations that allow for interpretation of others’ mental states (Siegel [<reflink idref="bib74" id="ref16">74</reflink>] ). By middle childhood, children are able to form ideas about what other children think of them (Malloy et al. [<reflink idref="bib47" id="ref17">47</reflink>] ). Further, the literature on reputation management suggests that children understand that they can influence the views that others have of them (Banerjee [<reflink idref="bib4" id="ref18">4</reflink>] ). During adolescence, individuals are often highly focused on what peers think of them as they develop advanced concepts of the self (Somerville et al. [<reflink idref="bib66" id="ref19">66</reflink>] ) and continue to develop their reputation management skills. Measurement of metaperceptions is not consistent across research studies, but examinations of convergent validity reveal that more positive metaperceptions are associated with higher levels of positive and even inflated self-views. Specifically, positive metaperceptions are associated with higher self-esteem (Pfeifer et al. [<reflink idref="bib53" id="ref20">53</reflink>] ) and higher narcissism (Carlson et al. [<reflink idref="bib17" id="ref21">17</reflink>] ), in typically developing adolescents and young adults.</p> <p>Metaperception may aid people in responding appropriately during social interactions (Carlson and Kenny [<reflink idref="bib16" id="ref22">16</reflink>] ; Hall and Andrzejewski [<reflink idref="bib30" id="ref23">30</reflink>] ). Accurate metaperception may help individuals gain self-knowledge and make behavioral changes in response to social partners’ cues (Carlson and Kenny [<reflink idref="bib16" id="ref24">16</reflink>] ). Moreover, simply taking a peer’s perspective can increase reciprocity in social interactions (Fett et al. [<reflink idref="bib25" id="ref25">25</reflink>] ). It is unclear from previous literature whether metaperception accuracy is critical, or whether simply taking someone else’s perspective is sufficient to impact social behavior. When accuracy, or the extent to which metaperceptions are congruent with a social partner’s evaluations, is examined empirically, findings are mixed depending on the context, history with the social partner, types of characteristics evaluated, and whether accuracy is based on dyadic or group interactions (Carlson and Kenny [<reflink idref="bib16" id="ref26">16</reflink>] ). In many situations, adolescents and adults are not accurate in predicting how others rate them, particularly when they are asked to predict specific people’s impressions rather than the impressions of others in general (Kenny and DePaulo [<reflink idref="bib37" id="ref27">37</reflink>] ; Ranta et al. [<reflink idref="bib56" id="ref28">56</reflink>] ).</p> <hd id="AN0127936247-4">Autism Spectrum Disorder</hd> <p>The study of metaperception in ASD may provide insight into mechanisms that support or hinder the development of social competence (Garfield et al. [<reflink idref="bib28" id="ref29">28</reflink>] ). Although some individuals with ASD perform well on theory of mind measures, difficulty in social interactions persist, suggesting that the flexible implementation of social skills involves more complicated processes (Scheeren et al. [<reflink idref="bib62" id="ref30">62</reflink>] ). During real-world interactions, individuals must quickly multitask by attending to social partners’ cues, planning their own behaviors and responses serving as cues for others, imagining the perspectives of others, all while attending to conversational content (Gilbert et al. [<reflink idref="bib29" id="ref31">29</reflink>] ). Because of the “busy” nature of a social interaction, individuals with ASD may form faulty or incomplete metaperceptions that are not in line with what the social partner is thinking.</p> <p>However, the study of reputation management in the ASD literature reveals that individuals with ASD are not only able to understand that they have reputations in others’ eyes, but also that they can change the way they represent themselves when being evaluated (Begeer et al. [<reflink idref="bib7" id="ref32">7</reflink>] ; Cage et al. [<reflink idref="bib11" id="ref33">11</reflink>] ). For example, Scheeren et al. ([<reflink idref="bib60" id="ref34">60</reflink>] , [<reflink idref="bib61" id="ref35">61</reflink>] ) demonstrated that adolescents with ASD strategically used more positive words to describe themselves when told they were being evaluated, although to a lesser extent than TD adolescents. Given evidence that adolescents with ASD possess awareness of their reputations amongst peers, it is important to understand to what extent individuals with ASD may be accurate in their metaperceptions.</p> <p>No previous studies have investigated the accuracy of metaperception in adolescents with ASD. Additionally, previous studies in both typical and atypical literature assessing components of metaperceptions are limited in their ecological validity and often use informants who have long social histories with the target individual. For example, in previous work, participants have considered hypothetical social interaction vignettes (e.g., Ranta et al. [<reflink idref="bib56" id="ref36">56</reflink>] ), responded to one or two questions indexing perceptions and metaperceptions (e.g., Pozo et al. [<reflink idref="bib55" id="ref37">55</reflink>] ), or assessed metaperceptions of familiar classmates’ impressions that involve factors based on previous interaction history (Ranta et al. [<reflink idref="bib56" id="ref38">56</reflink>] ). In contrast, in the present study, the examination of adolescents’ perceptions and metaperceptions of unfamiliar peers will increase our understanding of these constructs following a brief social interaction with an unfamiliar peer.</p> <hd id="AN0127936247-5">Present Study</hd> <p>There is a lack of research on metaperception in adolescents, and in those with ASD. To address this gap in research, we first examined the psychometrics of the novel Perceptions and Metaperceptions Questionnaire. We hypothesized that, consistent with previous literature and supporting the validity of the measure, more positive metaperceptions would be positively correlated with measures of self-esteem and narcissism for all adolescents (with the opposite true for negative metaperceptions). We did not expect significant associations of perceptions with either self-esteem or narcissism. Second, we examined the relation between theory of mind and metaperception accuracy in adolescents with and without ASD, predicting moderate positive correlations. Third, we compared metaperception accuracy in adolescents with and without ASD. We hypothesized that adolescents with ASD would show greater discrepancy between their metaperceptions and their peers’ actual ratings than would adolescents without ASD. Fourth, we examined associations between perceptions and metaperceptions and one’s own social competence, hypothesizing that for all adolescents more positive metaperceptions would be associated with social competence as it may aid in the reciprocity and flow of the interaction.</p> <hd id="AN0127936247-6">Method</hd> <hd id="AN0127936247-7">Participants</hd> <p>The sample consisted of 50 individuals (25 with ASD, 25 without ASD) between 12 and 16 years of age (M<subs>age</subs> = 14.40, SD = 1.41) who participated in a study investigating social and behavioral functioning. See Table 1 for sample characteristics. Recruitment for participants with ASD was carried out through emails sent to families registered with the Center for Autism and Related Disabilities (CARD) at the University of Miami. Recruitment for adolescents without ASD, referred to as the typically developing (TD) group, was completed (<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref39">1</reflink>) using a commercially available list of families in the community with children in the appropriate age range (12 to 16 years of age), and (<reflink idref="bib2" id="ref40">2</reflink>) through the Miami-Dade County Public Schools system, and (<reflink idref="bib3" id="ref41">3</reflink>) through community groups. Families who had previously participated in research at the University of Miami and consented to being contacted for future studies were also contacted.</p> <p></p> <p>Adolescents were included in the ASD group if they had a community diagnosis, met diagnostic criteria for ASD (score of 7 or above) on the Social Affect score of the Autism Diagnostic Observation Schedule-Second Edition (ADOS-2; Lord et al. [<reflink idref="bib44" id="ref42">44</reflink>] ), and met diagnostic criteria for ASD on either or both the Social Communication Questionnaire (SCQ; Berument et al. [<reflink idref="bib8" id="ref43">8</reflink>] ; clinical cutoff &gt; 12) and Autism Spectrum Screening Questionnaire (ASSQ; Ehlers et al. [<reflink idref="bib23" id="ref44">23</reflink>] ; clinical cutoff &gt; 13). Participants in the TD group were excluded if they met the clinical cutoff on either the SCQ or the ASSQ.</p> <p>Eighty-five individuals were ascertained for the study, and 81 completed one of two study visits. Seven participants were excluded for not meeting group diagnostic criteria. Twenty-four individuals did not complete the second study visit during which the social interaction paradigm was carried out, due to scheduling conflicts or lack of an age- and IQ-matched peer. The 50 participants in the final sample were ethnically-diverse—Hispanic (60%), non-Hispanic (40%), with racial categories of White/Caucasian (68%), Black/African American (16%), mixed or other (12%), and not reporting (2%). Parents had 4-year college degrees (33%), advanced or professional degrees (27%), some college (15%), high school degrees or less (14%) and 2-year college degrees (11%). Families’ annual household incomes were $50,000–74,000 (28%), greater than $100,000 (28%), $75,000–99,000 (14%), $10,000–24,000 (10%), $35,000–49,000 (10%), and less than $10,000 (8%). Those who completed both visits did not differ from those who completed one visit on age, gender, race/ethnicity, parent education, autism symptom severity, or theory of mind (ps &gt; 0.05). However, participants completing both visits had significantly higher verbal IQ (M = 106.74, SD = 14.28) than those who completed one visit (M = 96.90, SD = 18.30), t(<reflink idref="bib79" id="ref45">79</reflink>)=-2.70, p = .01.</p> <hd id="AN0127936247-8">Procedure</hd> <p>This study was approved by the University of Miami Institutional Review Board. Parents and adolescents completed written informed consent and assent, respectively, in the laboratory. A brief version of the Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children-Fourth Edition (WISC-IV; Wechsler [<reflink idref="bib70" id="ref46">70</reflink>] ; described below), was administered. Adolescents with ASD were administered the Autism Diagnostic Observation Schedule (described below). Parents completed the SCQ and ASSQ. Participants completed a theory of mind assessment, described below, individually.</p> <p>In a second visit in the laboratory, adolescents interacted with an unfamiliar peer (matched on gender, age, and verbal IQ). Dyads were composed of one adolescent with ASD and one adolescent without. Adolescents and parents were unaware of the diagnostic status of the other adolescent. All participants were informed that they might feel uncomfortable meeting someone for the first time and that they could take a break or stop any part of the study. After consent/assent, each dyad was seated at a table together in a quiet observation room and told that they had 5 min to “get to know each other.” Previously developed coding schemes from our laboratory were adapted to quantify social competence during the video-recorded interaction (Usher et al. [<reflink idref="bib69" id="ref47">69</reflink>] ). Immediately following this five-minute task, each participant completed a questionnaire rating the social partner on several characteristics (perceptions) and how he/she believed the peer answered the same questions about him/herself (metaperceptions). Participants were separated to ensure privacy, and were informed that there were no right or wrong answers, that their responses would be confidential, and they were given the opportunity to ask questions. Following the questionnaires, dyads completed additional tasks not reported here.</p> <hd id="AN0127936247-9">Measures</hd> <hd id="AN0127936247-10">Intelligence</hd> <p>A brief version of the WISC-IV (Wechsler [<reflink idref="bib70" id="ref48">70</reflink>] ), comprised of the vocabulary and similarities subtests, was administered to all participants to obtain a verbal comprehension index (VCI). These scales have high loadings on the VCI factor, strong test–retest reliabilities, and good internal consistencies among the WISC-IV scales (Williams et al. [<reflink idref="bib71" id="ref49">71</reflink>] ).</p> <hd id="AN0127936247-11">Observed Autism Spectrum Disorder Symptoms</hd> <p>The Autism Diagnostic Observation Schedule-Second Edition (ADOS-2; Lord et al. [<reflink idref="bib44" id="ref50">44</reflink>] ) consists of a series of semi-structured activities that elicit social-communicative and repetitive behaviors associated with ASD. For this study, participants received a Module 3 for verbally fluent children/adolescents. Items are scored from 0 (no concern) to 3 (indicative of ASD). Cronbach’s α for the ADOS in this study was 0.90.</p> <hd id="AN0127936247-12">Parent-Reported Autism Spectrum Disorder Symptoms</hd> <p>The Autism Spectrum Screening Questionnaire (ASSQ; Ehlers et al. [<reflink idref="bib23" id="ref51">23</reflink>] ) is a 27-item instrument intended to screen for symptoms of ASD. Raters are asked to indicate whether a child “stands out as different from other children of his/her age” on each item by choosing “no”, “somewhat”, or “yes.” Scores range from 0 to 54, with higher scores indicating more symptoms. For this study, a cutoff score of 13 was used, as suggested by the developers.</p> <p>The Social Communication Questionnaire (SCQ; Berument et al. [<reflink idref="bib8" id="ref52">8</reflink>] ; Rutter et al. [<reflink idref="bib58" id="ref53">58</reflink>] ) is a parent report instrument for screening ASD symptoms. It was developed from 40 critical items of the autism diagnostic interview (Lord et al. [<reflink idref="bib45" id="ref54">45</reflink>] ). Parents choose “yes” or “no” in response to questions regarding children’s current behavior and behavior between 4 and 5 years of age. For this study, the Lifetime SCQ total score was used as a measure of individual differences in ASD symptoms, and a cutoff of 12 was used. The Cronbach’s α for the SCQ in this study was 0.74.</p> <hd id="AN0127936247-13">Narcissism</hd> <p>A version of the narcissistic personality inventory (NPI; Raskin and Hall [<reflink idref="bib57" id="ref55">57</reflink>] ) created for adolescents’ reading and comprehension levels (Calhoun et al. [<reflink idref="bib14" id="ref56">14</reflink>] ) was used to obtain a measure of symptoms of narcissism, or exaggerated favorable self-appraisal. Overall, the measure is designed to index individual differences in narcissism traits, and not narcissistic personality disorder (Raskin and Hall [<reflink idref="bib57" id="ref57">57</reflink>] ). The questionnaire has 40 forced-choice items consisting of pairs of statements in which adolescents were asked to choose the statement with which they identified most. For example, “I am just as good as everybody else” versus “I am a really great person.” Of interest in this study was the total score, for which higher scores indicate more narcissism traits. Cronbach’s α for the NPI in this sample was 0.86.</p> <hd id="AN0127936247-14">Self-Esteem</hd> <p>The 36-item self-perception profiles for children (Harter [<reflink idref="bib32" id="ref58">32</reflink>] ) was used to obtain an index of adolescents’ general self-esteem. Of interest for this study was the global self-worth score, which consists of six items designed to assess how much individuals generally like themselves. Questionnaire items consist of two statements, and adolescents are first asked to choose which statement is more like them. For example, “Some kids like the kind of person they are BUT other kids often wish they were someone else.” Second, they are asked to identify whether the chosen statement is “really” like them or “sort of” like them. Each response was scored on a four-point scale from 1 to 4, where 1 indicates the lowest perceived competence at 4 indicates the highest level of competence. Cronbach’s α in this sample was 0.93.</p> <hd id="AN0127936247-15">Theory of Mind</hd> <p>The strange stories task (Happé [<reflink idref="bib31" id="ref59">31</reflink>] ) consists of 12 vignettes that assess the ability to attribute mental states to others. Participants were asked a comprehension question to confirm understanding of story events (“Was it true, what __ said?”), followed by an open-ended question about why events happened (“Why did __ say that?”). Responses were recorded in writing and audiotaped for later coding as correct or incorrect. Approximately 30% of Strange Stories responses were double-coded by two undergraduate research assistants, supervised by a graduate student. Cohen’s Kappa scores ranged from 0.79 to 1.00. A summary score was computed by adding the number of correct responses on the comprehension and open-ended questions. Higher scores indicate more advanced theory of mind abilities.</p> <p>The reading the mind in the eyes task (Baron-Cohen et al. [<reflink idref="bib6" id="ref60">6</reflink>] ) assesses the ability to recognize facial affect in 28 photographs of the eye region of different adult faces. Participants were asked to pick which of four words best describes what the person in each photo is thinking or feeling. Responses were scored as either correct or incorrect. Higher scores indicate more advanced theory of mind abilities.</p> <hd id="AN0127936247-16">Observed Social Competence</hd> <p>Video-recorded interactions were coded for each participant’s proportion of time talking, latency to first utterance, latency to first spontaneous utterance, frequency of sharing ideas, and frequency of seeking information from the peer. Global eye contact, conversational efficacy (turn-taking, answering and asking questions), and social ease were coded on 5-point scales ranging from 1 (behaviors hindering the continuation of a social interaction) to 5 (behaviors supporting the continuation of a social interaction). See Table 2 for an abbreviated description of codes. All recorded interactions were double-coded by the first author and a trained research assistant who was blind to the diagnosis of participants and study hypotheses, and interrater reliability was achieved with average measures intraclass correlations ranging from 0.75 to 0.99. Composite scores were created for use in analyses (see page 14).</p> <p></p> <hd id="AN0127936247-17">Perceptions and Metaperceptions</hd> <p>The 52-item Perceptions and Metaperceptions Questionnaire was given to each participant immediately following the observed social interaction. Perceptions of the peer (e.g., “How happy is [name of partner]?”) and metaperceptions (e.g., How happy does [name of partner] think you are?”) were assessed on a 5-point scale from 1 (not at all) to 5 (the most). Items were split between positively-valenced (e.g., polite) and negatively-valenced (e.g., uncool) items. In addition, two items not examined in the present study assessed each participant’s global evaluation of the interaction (“How well did your interaction with [name of partner] go overall?” and “How much would you want to continue a friendship with [name of partner] outside of the lab?”). These items were excluded from the present study’s analysis because they did not assess metaperceptions, which was the primary focus of this paper.</p> <p>For clarity, we use the terms “liking” and “disliking” to differentiate positively- and negatively-valenced adjectives. For example, positively-valenced perceptions reflect a person’s ratings of liking for the peer, while negatively-valenced perceptions reflect ratings of disliking for the peer. Positively-valenced metaperceptions reflect a person’s prediction of the peer’s liking rating, and negatively-valenced metaperceptions reflect predictions of the peer’s rating of disliking. See the Appendix for specific items.</p> <p>Sums were created for perceptions of liking, perceptions of disliking, metaperceptions of being liked, and metaperceptions of being disliked by summing the scores for each group of items. Specifically, positively-valenced perception items were summed, negatively-valenced perception items were summed, and the same was completed for positively-valenced metaperception items and negatively-valenced metaperception items.</p> <hd id="AN0127936247-18">Analytic Approach</hd> <p>First, we present psychometrics for the novel Perceptions and Metaperceptions Questionnaire, including reliability and validity for perceptions and metaperceptions and examination of mean differences between adolescents with and without ASD on main constructs of interest. Second, we used Pearson correlations to examine the associations between theory of mind and both perceptions and metaperceptions within diagnostic group. Third, actor–partner interdependence model (APIM) analyses, described below, were used to examine the association of an adolescent’s perception of the peer with his/her own metaperceptions (actor effect), as well as the association of the peer’s perceptions with the adolescent’s metaperceptions (partner effect, indexing accuracy). Fourth, APIM analyses were used to examine the association of one’s own metaperceptions (actor effect) and one’s partner’s perceptions (partner effect) with one’s own observed social competence.</p> <p>The Actor-Partner Interdependence Model (Cook and Kenny [<reflink idref="bib18" id="ref61">18</reflink>] ; Kashy and Kenny [<reflink idref="bib36" id="ref62">36</reflink>] ; Kenny et al. [<reflink idref="bib39" id="ref63">39</reflink>] ) uses multilevel modeling to examine associations between the two members of a dyad, accounting for the interdependent behavior of the two individuals. This method is less biased for dyadic analyses than statistical tests that assume independence of observations, such as hierarchical regression analysis (Kenny and Ledermann [<reflink idref="bib40" id="ref64">40</reflink>] ). Analyses examine both a person’s effects on their own behavior (actor effects), and a partner’s effects on the person’s behavior (partner effects). Two separate models can be run for each APIM analysis (Kenny and Kashy [<reflink idref="bib38" id="ref65">38</reflink>] ; Kenny et al. [<reflink idref="bib39" id="ref66">39</reflink>] ). The first model tests for group differences between adolescents with and without ASD. If there are significant group differences, a follow up model is conducted to obtain coefficients for each group.</p> <hd id="AN0127936247-19">Results</hd> <hd id="AN0127936247-20">Preliminary Analyses and Data Reduction</hd> <p>All analyses were conducted in IBM SPSS Version 22. See Table 3 for descriptive statistics for all primary variables. See Tables 4 and 5 for correlations between all primary variables within each diagnostic group.</p> <p></p> <p></p> <p></p> <hd id="AN0127936247-21">Observed Social Competence</hd> <p>To reduce the number of variables in subsequent analyses, consistent with previous practices used in our laboratory (Usher et al. [<reflink idref="bib69" id="ref67">69</reflink>] ), inter-relations among observed behavioral codes were examined using Principal Component Analysis (PCA; Abdi and Williams [<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref68">1</reflink>] ). Variables were entered into a PCA using a Varimax rotation and a two-factor solution was specified. Proportion of time talking, latency to first utterance (reversed), latency to first spontaneous utterance (reversed), and sharing loaded onto the first factor, labeled Social Initiative. Seeking, eye contact, conversational efficacy, and social ease loaded onto the second factor, labeled Social Reciprocity. See Table 6 for eigenvalues and loadings. Composite scores were created by standardizing (subtracting the mean and dividing by the standard deviation) and averaging the standardized scores (Z-scores) that loaded onto each component.</p> <p></p> <p></p> <hd id="AN0127936247-22">Perceptions and Metaperceptions Questionnaire Psychometrics</hd> <hd id="AN0127936247-23">Reliability</hd> <p>Cronbach’s α reliability coefficients were examined to index participants’ internal consistency in responding to the questionnaire items. Values for Cronbach’s α were as follows: 0.90 for liking of the peer, 0.70 for disliking of the peer, 0.93 for metaperception of being liked, and 0.81 for metaperception of being disliked.</p> <hd id="AN0127936247-24">Validity</hd> <p>Correlations with theoretically related measures were examined across the full sample to ascertain the validity of the Perceptions and Metaperceptions Questionnaire. Metaperceptions of being liked were significantly associated with higher self-reported narcissism scores, r(<reflink idref="bib44" id="ref69">44</reflink>) = 0.42, p = .005, and higher self-esteem, r(<reflink idref="bib44" id="ref70">44</reflink>) = 0.45, p = .002. Metaperceptions of being disliked were marginally associated with lower self-reported narcissism scores, r(<reflink idref="bib43" id="ref71">43</reflink>) = − 0.28, p = .07, and lower self-esteem, r(<reflink idref="bib43" id="ref72">43</reflink>) = − 0.28, p = .07. Fisher r to z transformations revealed that there were no significant differences between the magnitude of the correlations for adolescents with and without ASD, ps &gt; 0.05. Additionally, perceptions of liking and perceptions of disliking were not associated with either narcissism or self-esteem, supporting the discriminant validity of the perceptions assessed by the Perceptions and Metaperceptions Questionnaire.</p> <p>Mean scores on liking/disliking and metaperceptions of being liked/disliked were not significantly different for adolescents with and without ASD (See Table 3 for means, standard deviations, and group comparisons). A repeated measures ANOVA was conducted with domain (perception, metaperception) and valence (liking, disliking) as within-group factors and group (ASD, TD) as a between-group factor. Results revealed a significant effect of valence across diagnostic groups, F(<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref73">1</reflink>, 45) = 124.96, p &lt; .001. Adolescents reported liking their social partners significantly more than they disliked them, and predicted that their social partners liked them significantly more than they predicted they disliked them. For all adolescents, ratings of liking and disliking were moderately and negatively correlated, as were ratings of metaperceptions of being liked and disliked, indicating that constructs were related but distinct. See Table 4.</p> <p>For adolescents with ASD, raw perception and metaperception scores had acceptable values for skew and kurtosis (ranging from − 1 to 1). For TD adolescents, most scores had acceptable skew and kurtosis, but metaperceptions of being disliked were skewed (2.55) and kurtotic (9.18). Examination of the distribution of metaperceptions of being disliked revealed one participant in the TD group with a value of 47. Skew and kurtosis values calculated without this individual fell within an acceptable range. Analyses conducted with and without this individual were comparable, and results are reported with the outlier retained.</p> <hd id="AN0127936247-25">Hypothesis Testing</hd> <hd id="AN0127936247-26">Associations Between Perceptions and Metaperceptions with Theory of Mind</hd> <p>Bivariate correlation analyses were conducted within diagnostic group to examine the association between theory of mind and both perceptions and metaperceptions. There were no significant correlations between the theory of mind measures and perceptions or metaperceptions for adolescents in either diagnostic group. See Tables 4 and 5.</p> <hd id="AN0127936247-27">Metaperception Accuracy</hd> <p>The APIM was used to examine (<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref74">1</reflink>) the association between an adolescent’s perception of the peer and his/her own metaperceptions of being liked or disliked, controlling for the peer’s perception, and (<reflink idref="bib2" id="ref75">2</reflink>) the association between the peer’s perceptions and the adolescent’s metaperceptions, controlling for the adolescent’s own perception. We conceptualized this second association as “accuracy” in that it represents how closely an adolescent’s metaperceptions of being liked or disliked matched with the evaluation given by the peer. Predictors were grand mean centered Perceptions and Metaperceptions Questionnaire perception scores, and outcomes were metaperception scores. Separate models were conducted for liking and one for disliking.</p> <hd id="AN0127936247-28">Liking</hd> <p>The APIM revealed a significant association of all adolescents’ ratings of liking with their own metaperceptions of being liked, b = 0.66, β = 0.57, t(<reflink idref="bib28" id="ref76">28</reflink>) = 4.19, p &lt; .001, indicating that overall, participants who liked their peers more predicted that their peers liked them more. This association was not moderated by diagnostic group, b = − 0.10, β = − 0.09, t(<reflink idref="bib41" id="ref77">41</reflink>) = − 0.76, p = .45.</p> <p>There was no overall association of the peer’s liking with adolescents’ metaperceptions of being liked, b = 0.17, β = 0.15, t(<reflink idref="bib27" id="ref78">27</reflink>) = 1.08, p = .29. However, the association of the partner’s liking with adolescents’ metaperceptions of being liked differed by group, b = 0.32, β = 0.28, t(<reflink idref="bib36" id="ref79">36</reflink>) = 2.34, p = .03. For TD adolescents, ratings of how much ASD peers liked TD adolescents did not relate to TD adolescents’ metaperceptions of being liked, b = − 0.15, β = − 0.13, t(<reflink idref="bib21" id="ref80">21</reflink>) = − 0.87, p = .39, suggesting lack of accuracy. For adolescents with ASD, the association was also not significant. However, the more TD peers liked adolescents with ASD, the more adolescents with ASD tended to believe peers liked them, b = 0.50, β = 0.43, t(<reflink idref="bib21" id="ref81">21</reflink>) = 2.02, p = .06. See Fig. 1.</p> <p>Actor-partner interdependence model (APIM) illustrating dyadic perception and metaperception for liking. For TD adolescents, one’s liking of the peer has a stronger effect on metaperceptions (horizontal association) than does the partner’s liking rating (diagonal association). For adolescents with ASD, associations are similar, although the partner’s liking is marginally associated with metaperceptions. *p &lt; .05, <sups>†</sups>p &lt; .10, ns non-significant. ASD autism spectrum disorder, TD typically developing</p> <hd id="AN0127936247-29">Disliking</hd> <p>Analyses revealed a significant association of adolescents’ disliking with their metaperceptions of being disliked, b = 0.73, β = 0.59, t(<reflink idref="bib31" id="ref82">31</reflink>) = 4.40, p &lt; .001. This suggests that the more adolescents disliked their peers, the more they thought peers disliked them. This association was not moderated by diagnostic group.</p> <p>There was no significant association between peers’ disliking and adolescents’ metaperceptions of being disliked, b = 0.04, β = 0.03, t(<reflink idref="bib32" id="ref83">32</reflink>) = 0.23, p = .82, indicating that across groups, adolescents were not accurate in their metaperceptions of being disliked. These findings did not differ by group.</p> <hd id="AN0127936247-30">Associations of Perceptions and Metaperceptions with Social Competence</hd> <p>Separate APIMs were conducted with perception and metaperception scores as predictors of Social Reciprocity and Social Initiative to examine the association between an adolescent’s metaperceptions and his/her own social competence, controlling for the peer’s perception, and the association between the peer’s perceptions and the adolescent’s social competence, controlling for the adolescent’s own perception.</p> <hd id="AN0127936247-31">Liking</hd> <p>Overall, adolescents who predicted that peers liked them more displayed higher Social Reciprocity, b = 0.03, β = 0.37, t(<reflink idref="bib33" id="ref84">33</reflink>) = 3.13, p = .004. In addition, there was no significant association between peers’ liking and an adolescent’s Social Reciprocity, b = 0.02, β = 0.24, t(<reflink idref="bib32" id="ref85">32</reflink>) = 1.77, p = .09. Similarly, a separate model revealed that adolescents who predicted that peers liked them more displayed significantly more Social Initiative, b = 0.03, β = 0.43, t(<reflink idref="bib37" id="ref86">37</reflink>) = 3.09, p &lt; .01. However, there was no significant association between peers’ liking and an adolescent’s Social Initiative, b = 0.02, β = 0.23, t(<reflink idref="bib33" id="ref87">33</reflink>) = 1.60, p = .12. Associations did not differ by group, ps &gt; 0.05.</p> <hd id="AN0127936247-32">Disliking</hd> <p>Across the full sample, adolescents who predicted peers to dislike them more displayed lower SocialReciprocity, b = 0− .03, β = − 0.30, t(<reflink idref="bib34" id="ref88">34</reflink>)=− 2.40, p = .02. However, there was no significant association between peers’ disliking and adolescents’ Social Reciprocity, b = − 0.03, β = − 0.18, t(<reflink idref="bib35" id="ref89">35</reflink>) = − 1.39, p = .17. There was also no significant association between adolescents’ metaperceptions of being disliked and adolescents’ own Social Initiative, b = − 0.01, β = − 0.15, t(<reflink idref="bib35" id="ref90">35</reflink>) = − 1.18, p = .25. Adolescents whose peers disliked them more displayed significantly less Social Initiative, b = − 0.05, β = − 0.05, t(<reflink idref="bib36" id="ref91">36</reflink>) = − 0.02, p &lt; .01. Associations did not differ by group, ps &gt; 0.05.</p> <hd id="AN0127936247-33">Discussion</hd> <p>This was the first study to quantify and compare metaperception abilities in adolescents with and without ASD following a dyadic social interaction using the novel Perceptions and Metaperceptions Questionnaire, and to evaluate how perceptions and metaperceptions related to theory of mind and observed social competence. Adolescents were generally not accurate in their metaperceptions following a brief interaction with an unfamiliar peer, consistent with previous research in adults (Carlson and Kenny [<reflink idref="bib16" id="ref92">16</reflink>] ). Interestingly, adolescents with ASD displayed more accurate metaperceptions of being liked than did adolescents without ASD. Furthermore, social behavior during an interaction with an unfamiliar peer was related to how adolescents believed they were perceived by others, as well as how they were actually perceived by their peers.</p> <hd id="AN0127936247-34">Perceptions and Metaperceptions Questionnaire</hd> <p>Results supported the reliability and validity of the Perceptions and Metaperceptions Questionnaire as an index of these constructs following a live social interaction. Consistent with previous research in typical development (Carlson et al. [<reflink idref="bib17" id="ref93">17</reflink>] ; Pfeifer et al. [<reflink idref="bib53" id="ref94">53</reflink>] ), metaperceptions of being liked were associated with higher narcissism and more self-esteem. Adolescents may hold inflated metaperceptions in agreement with positive (self-esteem) or inflated (narcissism) self-views (Carlson et al. [<reflink idref="bib17" id="ref95">17</reflink>] ; Pfeifer et al. [<reflink idref="bib53" id="ref96">53</reflink>] ). Importantly, self-esteem and narcissism were not significantly associated within either diagnostic group, indicating that they are discrete constructs. It is also important to note that associations with narcissism and self-esteem were specific to metaperceptions—perceptions of others were not associated with narcissism or self-esteem. This suggests that the index of metaperceptions is not simply capturing a world view or general way that adolescents view their social interaction partners.</p> <p>All adolescents reported liking peers more than disliking them, consistent with previous research suggesting that overall, typically developing children like, rather than dislike, peers (Hughes and Im [<reflink idref="bib35" id="ref97">35</reflink>] ), but in contrast with previous research indicating that youth with disabilities are disliked by peers (Hinshaw and Melnick [<reflink idref="bib34" id="ref98">34</reflink>] ; La Greca and Stone [<reflink idref="bib42" id="ref99">42</reflink>] ). There is also evidence that youth and adults with ASD (Sasson et al. [<reflink idref="bib59" id="ref100">59</reflink>] ) may be disliked by peers; however, these findings are based on very brief clips of audiovisual stimuli of individuals with ASD, in contrast to the naturalistic social interaction paradigm used in this study. In the present study, adolescents interacted with one other person, in contrast to the study conducted by Sasson et al. ([<reflink idref="bib59" id="ref101">59</reflink>] ), in which many individuals were rated during one session. In the present study, adolescents had a chance to modify behavior in response to a social partner over the course of the dyadic interaction. The five-minute interaction paradigm in this study undoubtedly provides a brief experience with peers; however, the initial moments of a social interaction provide important information about first impressions, which are critical for formation of relationships and friendships (Hall and Andrzejewski [<reflink idref="bib30" id="ref102">30</reflink>] ). In contrast with previous studies demonstrating that children and young adolescents with disabilities predicted lower acceptance from their classmates than those without disabilities (La Greca and Stone [<reflink idref="bib42" id="ref103">42</reflink>] ), all adolescents regardless of diagnostic group predicted higher mean liking than disliking ratings from peers. The adolescents in this study diagnosed with ASD had moderate to high levels of IQ, which limits generalizability of findings to the larger heterogeneous population of adolescents with ASD.</p> <p>Neither perceptions nor metaperceptions were related to theory of mind for adolescents with or without ASD in this study. Supporting this finding, Ochsner and colleagues ([<reflink idref="bib50" id="ref104">50</reflink>] ) discuss the possibility that different types of metaperceptions may recruit neural regions separate from those recruited in theory of mind. Further research is needed to understand the associations between perceptions, metaperceptions, and theory of mind abilities. Measures beyond the traditional theory of mind assessments (e.g., Canty et al. [<reflink idref="bib15" id="ref105">15</reflink>] ) may provide additional information on what features of perspective-taking are unique versus common to different social cognitive tasks.</p> <hd id="AN0127936247-35">Metaperception Accuracy</hd> <p>Overall, adolescents were not accurate in their metaperceptions. Findings indicated that during this developmental stage, perceptions of the self and of one’s social interaction partners are closely intertwined. The more adolescents liked (or disliked) their peers, the more they believed they were liked (or disliked), consistent with previous research demonstrating metaperceptions as relatively independent of others’ evaluations (Kenny and DePaulo [<reflink idref="bib37" id="ref106">37</reflink>] ; Sung et al. [<reflink idref="bib68" id="ref107">68</reflink>] ; Zimmer-Gembeck et al. [<reflink idref="bib73" id="ref108">73</reflink>] ). Adolescents may rely on their own views to determine what others may be thinking, perhaps following an “if I like you, then you must like me” logic. While this strategy can be useful, during adolescence when social contexts become more complex and salient, difficulties taking others’ perspectives into account can worsen social challenges (Fett et al. [<reflink idref="bib25" id="ref109">25</reflink>] ). It is also plausible that the direction of effects is reversed, with metaperceptions guiding perceptions (Pfeifer et al. [<reflink idref="bib53" id="ref110">53</reflink>] ). Adolescents may form judgments of whether they are liked, and subsequently decide whether they like their peers. Future studies investigating direction of effects are needed.</p> <p>Findings that, for adolescents with ASD, metaperceptions of being liked were marginally associated with peers’ liking suggests that these adolescents detected social partners’ cues and formed ideas about how they were perceived. Despite core social deficits in ASD, previous research has demonstrated that older adolescents and adults with ASD successfully detect changes in eye gaze (Fletcher-Watson et al. [<reflink idref="bib26" id="ref111">26</reflink>] ), nonverbal social cues (Schwartz et al. [<reflink idref="bib63" id="ref112">63</reflink>] ), and verbal social cues (Foxe et al. [<reflink idref="bib27" id="ref113">27</reflink>] ) in social scenes, video, or audio, performing as well as their typically developing peers. Likewise, previous research on reputation management in ASD has demonstrated that adolescents with ASD have the ability to manage their reputations by strategically describing themselves in a more positive light when being evaluated (Cage et al. [<reflink idref="bib11" id="ref114">11</reflink>] , [<reflink idref="bib13" id="ref115">13</reflink>] ). Nevertheless, this finding must be interpreted with caution and examined in a larger sample. For typically developing adolescents, the lack of accuracy may suggest that cues displayed by adolescents with ASD may be difficult for adolescents without ASD to interpret (Brewer et al. [<reflink idref="bib9" id="ref116">9</reflink>] ; Sheppard et al. [<reflink idref="bib64" id="ref117">64</reflink>] ). Adolescents with ASD may demonstrate less synchrony of gestures with verbal communication than those without ASD (de Marchena and Eigsti [<reflink idref="bib21" id="ref118">21</reflink>] ; Morett et al. [<reflink idref="bib49" id="ref119">49</reflink>] ). It important to consider the bidirectional nature of difficulties that people with and without ASD may have in understanding one another’s perspectives, which has been studied empirically as the “double empathy problem” (Heasman and Gillespie [<reflink idref="bib33" id="ref120">33</reflink>] ; Milton [<reflink idref="bib48" id="ref121">48</reflink>] ).</p> <hd id="AN0127936247-36">Associations of Perceptions and Metaperceptions with Social Competence</hd> <p>There were unique effects of perceptions and metaperceptions on observed social competence. For all adolescents, metaperceptions of being more liked and less disliked by peers, as well as being liked by peers, were associated with higher Social Reciprocity. For Social Initiative, associations were similar, as metaperceptions of being more liked and less disliked by peers were associated with higher Social Initiative. This indicates that the way that an adolescent believes he is perceived and the way that he is perceived are important factors relating to social competence. During adolescence, ratings of liking from peers have been associated with observed social competence in a summer camp setting (Englund et al. [<reflink idref="bib24" id="ref122">24</reflink>] ). Adolescents’ positive beliefs about how they are perceived may impact the way they interact socially (Burrows et al. [<reflink idref="bib10" id="ref123">10</reflink>] ). Conversely, adolescents who have a history of reciprocal social interactions may develop positive ideas of how they are perceived. Unfortunately, previous research indicates that many individuals with ASD have negative social experiences and are likely to experience bullying (Maïano et al. [<reflink idref="bib46" id="ref124">46</reflink>] ). Adolescents with ASD are often aware of their negative reputations (Cage et al. [<reflink idref="bib12" id="ref125">12</reflink>] ), which may contribute to negative self-views, internalizing problems, and avoidance of future social interactions (Burrows et al. [<reflink idref="bib10" id="ref126">10</reflink>] ).</p> <p>It is important to note that in this study, analyses were conducted using perceptions and metaperceptions as predictors of observed social competence, consistent with previous research demonstrating that an expectation of being liked by peers can lead to an increase in socially competent behavior (Parker et al. [<reflink idref="bib52" id="ref127">52</reflink>] ). However, the directionality of effects involving perceptions, metaperceptions, and social competence should be further investigated in future studies. It would be informative to obtain perception and metaperception ratings from the Perceptions and Metaperceptions Questionnaire in one setting and relate them to outcomes in a different setting to assess whether these abilities generalize across contexts and over time.</p> <hd id="AN0127936247-37">Strengths and Limitations</hd> <p>This study had several strengths, including its ethnically diverse sample, in-vivo observational design, and utilization of a novel questionnaire measure to index perception and metaperception abilities relating to a particular dyadic social interaction in adolescents with and without ASD. In addition, the unstructured unfamiliar peer interaction protocol provided a salient context upon which adolescents could base their initial impressions of peers. Finally, the APIM analyses provide unique perspectives on bidirectional influences during dyadic interactions between unfamiliar adolescents.</p> <p>These strengths should be considered in relation to relative weaknesses. One weakness was the study’s relatively small sample size, with 25 participants in each diagnostic group. Future research would benefit from a larger sample, which would provide more power to detect statistically significant differences between groups. In addition, inclusion of mixed dyads in future studies could allow for a contrast between the ways that adolescents with and without ASD interact with typically and atypically developing peers. For instance, investigation into metaperception accuracy when adolescents with ASD interact with other adolescents with ASD, and comparing their abilities to dyads composed of typically developing peers, could shed light on contextual or dyad-level factors impacting accuracy. Finally, the sample was comprised of individuals without intellectual disability, limiting interpretability to this group of adolescents.</p> <p>There are several constructs not measured in this study that could benefit future research in metaperception, such as social desirability and social motivation. In future research, these constructs would provide important information on individual differences in response patterns and social presentation of adolescents. There is evidence that temperamental dimensions relating to social desirability and social motivation, such as affiliation, relate to behavior similarly for individuals with and without ASD (Burrows et al. [<reflink idref="bib10" id="ref128">10</reflink>] ). There was also a lack of information on co-occurring diagnoses of anxiety or depression, which could potentially impact adolescents’ perceptions and metaperceptions (Pozo et al. [<reflink idref="bib55" id="ref129">55</reflink>] ), as well as their observed social behavior (Usher et al. [<reflink idref="bib69" id="ref130">69</reflink>] ). Examining these various potential sources of individual differences in metaperception abilities in both ASD and TD groups would strengthen future work in this area.</p> <hd id="AN0127936247-38">Implications</hd> <p>Findings provide important information about typically and atypically developing adolescents’ perceptions of peers and their dynamic abilities to discern what a social partner thinks of them. Overall, findings suggest that adolescents rely on their own perspectives of others to form metaperceptions of how they are perceived by others. Further, across diagnostic groups, adolescents liked their peers more when Social Reciprocity and Initiative were high. Research on metaperceptions may inform existing interventions targeting social skills and social pragmatics (Williams White et al. [<reflink idref="bib72" id="ref131">72</reflink>] ). Metaperception is a trainable skill (Albright and Malloy [<reflink idref="bib2" id="ref132">2</reflink>] ), and some current interventions for individuals with ASD utilize in-vivo feedback (Deitchman et al. [<reflink idref="bib22" id="ref133">22</reflink>] ; State and Kern [<reflink idref="bib67" id="ref134">67</reflink>] ); however, further research is needed to better understand the potential implications of manipulating metaperception abilities. The utility of the Perceptions and Metaperceptions Questionnaire should be further investigated to understand how it could be used to provide information on perception and metaperception in critical settings throughout development, such as the classroom and workplace.</p> <hd id="AN0127936247-39">Appendix</hd> <p>Perception and Metaperception Questionnaire. Items containing positively-valenced adjectives have been marked * for this paper, but are not marked on the administered questionnaire.</p> <p>See Table 7.</p> <hd id="AN0127936247-40">Funding</hd> <p>This work was supported by the Marino Autism Research Institute (“Peer Interactions in Children and Adolescents with and without Autism,” PI Henderson); the University of Miami Department of Psychology/Fred C. and Helen Donn Flipse Research Support Fund and Psychology Graduate Student Organization; and the University of Wisconsin-Madison Waisman Center (T32 HD07489, PI Mailick).</p> <hd id="AN0127936247-41">Author Contributions</hd> <p>LU obtained funding, conceived of the study, participated in its design and coordination, performed the measurement, performed the statistical analysis, participated in interpretation of the data, and drafted the manuscript; CB participated in the design, performed the measurement, and participated in interpretation of the data; DM participated in the design of the study and participated in interpretation of the data; HH obtained funding, participated in its design and coordination, participated in interpretation of the data, and helped to draft the manuscript. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.</p> <hd id="AN0127936247-42">Compliance with Ethical Standards</hd> <hd id="AN0127936247-43">Conflict of interest</hd> <p>The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.</p> <hd id="AN0127936247-44">Ethical Approval</hd> <p>All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.</p> <hd id="AN0127936247-45">Informed Consent</hd> <p>Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.</p> <hd id="AN0127936247-46">References</hd> <hd id="AN0127936247-47">Citations</hd> <p>1 Abdi H, Williams LJ, Principal component analysis, Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Computational Statistics, 2010, 2, 4, 433, 459, 10.1002/wics.101</p> <ulist> <item>2 Albright L, Malloy TE, Self-observation of social behavior and metaperception, Journal of Personality And Social Psychology, 1999, 77, 4, 726, 734, 10.1037/0022-3514.77.4.726</item> <item>3 The Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders: DSM 5, 2013, London, American Psychiatric Publishing</item> <item>4 Banerjee R, Children’s understanding of self-presentational behavior: Links with mental-state reasoning and the attribution of embarrassment, Merrill-Palmer Quarterly, 2002, 48, 4, 378, 404, 10.1353/mpq.2002.0015</item> <item>5 Baron-Cohen S, Grossenbacher PG, Consciousness of the physical and the mental: Evidence from autism, Finding consciousness in the brain: A neurocognitive approach, 2001, Amsterdam, John Benjamins Publishing Company, 61, 76</item> <item>6 Baron-Cohen S, Wheelwright S, Hill J, Raste Y, Plumb I, The “reading the mind in the eyes” test revised version: A study with normal adults, and adults with Asperger syndrome or high-functioning autism, Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 2001, 42, 2, 241, 251, 10.1111/1469-7610.00715</item> <item>7 Begeer S, Banerjee R, Lunenburg P, Terwogt MM, Stegge H, Rieffe C, Brief report: Self-presentation of children with autism spectrum disorders, Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 2008, 38, 6, 1187, 1191, 10.1007/s10803-007-0503-02440948</item> <item>8 Berument SK, Rutter M, Lord C, Pickles A, Bailey A, Autism screening questionnaire: diagnostic validity, The British Journal of Psychiatry, 1999, 175, 5, 444, 451, 10.1192/bjp.175.5.444</item> <item>9 Brewer R, Biotti F, Catmur C, Press C, Happé F, Cook R, Bird G, Can neurotypical individuals read autistic facial expressions? Atypical production of emotional facial expressions in autism spectrum disorders, Autism Research, 20154975602</item> <item>10 Burrows CA, Usher LV, Mundy PC, Henderson HA, The salience of the self: Self-referential processing and internalizing problems in children and adolescents with autism spectrum disorder, Autism Research, 2016</item> <item>11 Cage E, Bird G, Pellicano E, Reputation management in children on the autism spectrum, Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 2016, 46, 12, 3798, 3811, 10.1007/s10803-016-2923-15110591</item> <item>12 Cage E, Bird G, Pellicano L, ‘I am who I am’: Reputation concerns in adolescents on the autism spectrum, Research in Autism Spectrum Disorders, 2016, 25, 12, 23, 10.1016/j.rasd.2016.01.010</item> <item>13 Cage E, Pellicano E, Shah P, Bird G, Reputation management: Evidence for ability but reduced propensity in autism, Autism Research, 2013, 6, 5, 433, 442, 10.1002/aur.1313</item> <item>14 Calhoun GB, Glaser BA, Stefurak T, Bradshaw CP, Preliminary validation of the narcissistic personality inventory—juvenile offender, International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, 2000, 44, 5, 564, 580, 10.1177/0306624X00445004</item> <item>15 Canty AL, Neumann DL, Fleming J, Shum DHK, Evaluation of a newly developed measure of theory of mind: The virtual assessment of mentalising ability, Neuropsychological Rehabilitation, 2017, 27, 5, 834, 870, 10.1080/09602011.2015.1052820</item> <item>16 Carlson EN, Kenny DA, Vazire S, Wilson TD, Meta-accuracy: Do we know how others see us?, Handbook of self-knowledge, 2012, New York, Guilford Press, 242, 257</item> <item>17 Carlson EN, Vazire S, Oltmanns TF, You probably think this paper’s about you: Narcissists’ perceptions of their personality and reputation, Journal of Personality And Social Psychology, 2011, 101, 1, 185, 201, 10.1037/a00237813119754</item> <item>18 Cook WL, Kenny DA, The Actor-partner interdependence model: A model of bidirectional effects in developmental studies, International Journal of Behavioral Development, 2005, 29, 2, 101, 109, 10.1080/01650250444000405</item> <item>19 Cooper M, The inter-experiential field: Perceptions and metaperceptions in person-centered and experiential psychotherapy, Person-Centered and Experiential Psychotherapies, 2005, 4, 1, 54, 68, 10.1080/14779757.2005.9688368</item> <item>20 Cooper M, Interpersonal perceptions and metaperceptions: Psychotherapeutic practice in the interexperiential realm, Journal of Humanistic Psychology, 2009, 49, 1, 85, 99, 10.1177/0022167808323152</item> <item>21 Marchena A, Eigsti I-M, Conversational gestures in autism spectrum disorders: Asynchrony but not decreased frequency, Autism Research, 2010, 3, 6, 311, 322, 10.1002/aur.159</item> <item>22 Deitchman C, Reeve SA, Reeve KF, Progar PR, Incorporating video feedback into self-management training to promote generalization of social initiations by children with autism, Education &amp; Treatment of Children, 2010, 33, 3, 475, 488, 10.1353/etc.0.0102</item> <item>23 Ehlers S, Gillberg C, Wing L, A screening questionnaire for Asperger syndrome and other high-functioning autism spectrum disorders in school age children, Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 1999, 29, 2, 129, 141, 10.1023/A:1023040610384</item> <item>24 Englund MM, Levy AK, Hyson DM, Sroufe LA, Adolescent social competence: Effectiveness in a group setting, Child development, 2000, 71, 4, 1049, 1060, 10.1111/1467-8624.00208</item> <item>25 Fett A-K J, Shergill SS, Gromann PM, Dumontheil I, Blakemore S-J, Yakub F, Krabbendam L, Trust and social reciprocity in adolescence—A matter of perspective-taking, Journal of Adolescence, 2014, 37, 2, 175, 184, 10.1016/j.adolescence.2013.11.011</item> <item>26 Fletcher-Watson S, Leekam SR, Findlay JM, Stanton EC, Brief report: Young adults with autism spectrum disorder show normal attention to eye-gaze information–Evidence from a new change blindness paradigm, Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 2008, 38, 9, 1785, 1790, 10.1007/s10803-008-0548-8</item> <item>27 Foxe JJ, Molholm S, Bene D, Frey VA, Russo H-P, Blanco NN, Ross LA, Severe multisensory speech integration deficits in high-functioning school-aged children with autism spectrum disorder (ASD) and their resolution during early adolescence, Cerebral Cortex, 2015, 25, 2, 298, 312, 10.1093/cercor/bht213</item> <item>28 Garfield JL, Peterson CC, Perry T, Social cognition, language acquisition and the development of the theory of mind, Mind &amp; Language, 2001, 16, 5, 494, 541, 10.1111/1468-0017.00180</item> <item>29 Gilbert DT, Pelham BW, Krull DS, On cognitive busyness: When person perceivers meet persons perceived, Journal of personality and social psychology, 1988, 54, 5, 733, 740, 10.1037/0022-3514.54.5.733</item> <item>30 Hall JA, Andrzejewski SA, Ambady N, Skowronski JJ, Ambady N, Skowronski JJ, Who draws accurate first impressions?: Personal correlates of sensitivity to nonverbal cues, First impressions, 2008, New York, Guilford Publications, 87, 105</item> <item>31 Happé FGE, An advanced test of theory of mind: Understanding of story characters’ thoughts and feelings by able autistic, mentally handicapped, and normal children and adults, Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 1994, 24, 2, 129, 154, 10.1007/BF02172093</item> <item>32 Harter S, Manual for the self-perception profile for children:(revision of the perceived competence scale for children, 1985, Denver, University of Denver</item> <item>33 Heasman B, Gillespie A, Perspective-taking is two-sided: Misunderstandings between people with Asperger’s syndrome and their family members, Autism: The International Journal Of Research And Practice, 2017, 3, 1362361317708287</item> <item>34 Hinshaw SP, Melnick SM, Peer relationships in boys with attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder with and without comorbid aggression, Development and Psychopathology, 1995, 7, 4, 627, 647, 10.1017/S0954579400006751</item> <item>35 Hughes JN, Im MH, Teacher–student relationship and peer disliking and liking across grades 1–4, Child Development, 2016</item> <item>37 Kenny DA, DePaulo BM, Do people know how others view them? An empirical and theoretical account, Psychological Bulletin, 1993, 114, 1, 145, 161, 10.1037/0033-2909.114.1.145</item> <item>36 Kashy DA, Kenny DA, Reis HT, Judd CM, The analysis of data from dyads and groups, Handbook of research methods in social and personality psychology, 2000, New York, Cambridge University Press, 451, 477</item> <item>38 Kenny DA, Kashy DA, Hox JJ, Roberts JK, Dyadic data analysis using multilevel modeling, Handbook for advanced multilevel analysis, 2011, New York, Routledge/Taylor &amp; Francis Group, 335, 370</item> <item>39 Kenny DA, Kashy DA, Cook WL, Dyadic data analysis, 2006, New York, Guilford Press</item> <item>40 Kenny DA, Ledermann T, Detecting, measuring, and testing dyadic patterns in the actor–partner interdependence model, Journal of Family Psychology, 2010, 24, 3, 359, 366, 10.1037/a0019651</item> <item>41 Klin A, Attributing social meaning to ambiguous visual stimuli in higher-functioning autism and Asperger syndrome: The Social Attribution Task, Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 2000, 41, 7, 831, 846, 10.1111/1469-7610.00671</item> <item>42 Greca AM, Stone WL, LD status and achievement: Confounding variables in the study of children’s social status, self-esteem, and behavioral functioning, Journal of Learning Disabilities, 1990, 23, 8, 483, 490, 10.1177/002221949002300806</item> <item>43 Laing RD, Phillipson H, Lee AR, Interpersonal perception: A theory and a method of research, 1966, Oxford, Springer</item> <item>44 Lord C, Rutter M, DiLavore P, Risi S, Gotham K, Bishop S, Autism Diagnostic Observation Schedule–2nd edition (ADOS-2), 2012, Los Angeles, Western Psychological Corporation</item> <item>45 Lord C, Rutter M, Couteur A, Autism diagnostic interview-revised: A revised version of a diagnostic interview for caregivers of individuals with possible pervasive developmental disorders, Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 1994, 24, 5, 659, 685, 10.1007/BF02172145</item> <item>46 Maïano C, Normand CL, Salvas MC, Moullec G, Aimé A, Prevalence of school bullying among youth with autism spectrum disorders: A systematic review and meta-analysis, Autism Research, 2016, 9, 6, 601, 615, 10.1002/aur.1568</item> <item>47 Malloy TE, Albright L, Scarpati S, Awareness of peers’ judgments of oneself: Accuracy and process of metaperception, International Journal of Behavioral Development, 2007, 31, 6, 603, 610, 10.1177/0165025407080590</item> <item>48 Milton DEM, On the ontological status of autism: The ‘double empathy problem’, Disability &amp; Society, 2012, 27, 6, 883, 887, 10.1080/09687599.2012.710008</item> <item>49 Morett LM, O’Hearn K, Luna B, Ghuman AS, Altered gesture and speech production in ASD detract from in-person communicative quality, Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 2016, 46, 3, 998, 1012, 10.1007/s10803-015-2645-95111859</item> <item>50 Ochsner KN, Beer JS, Robertson ER, Cooper JC, Gabrieli JDE, Kihsltrom JF, D’Esposito M, The neural correlates of direct and reflected self-knowledge, NeuroImage, 2005, 28, 4, 797, 814, 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2005.06.069</item> <item>51 Oltmanns TF, Gleason MEJ, Klonsky ED, Turkheimer E, Meta-perception for pathological personality traits: Do we know when others think that we are difficult?, Consciousness and Cognition: An International Journal, 2005, 14, 4, 739, 751, 10.1016/j.concog.2005.07.001</item> <item>52 Parker JG, Rubin KH, Erath SA, Wojslawowicz JC, Buskirk AA, Cicchetti D, Cohen DJ, Peer relationships, child development, and adjustment: A developmental psychopathology perspective, Developmental Psychopathology, Vol 1: Theory and method, 2006, 2, Hoboken, NJ, Wiley, 419, 493</item> <item>53 Pfeifer JH, Masten CL, Borofsky LA, Dapretto M, Fuligni AJ, Lieberman MD, Neural correlates of direct and reflected self-appraisals in adolescents and adults: When social perspective-taking informs self-perception, Child Development, 2009, 80, 4, 1016, 1038, 10.1111/j.1467-8624.2009.01314.x3229828</item> <item>54 Picci G, Scherf KS, A two-hit model of autism: Adolescence as the second hit, Clinical Psychological Science, 2015, 3, 3, 349, 371, 10.1177/2167702614540646</item> <item>55 Pozo C, Carver CS, Wellens AR, Scheier MF, Social anxiety and social perception: Construing others’ reactions to the self, Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 1991, 17, 4, 355, 362, 10.1177/0146167291174001</item> <item>56 Ranta K, Laakkonen E, Niemi PM, Patterns of metaperception in adolescents with social anxiety: Mind reading in the classroom, Journal of Child and Family Studies, 2016</item> <item>57 Raskin RN, Hall CS, A narcissistic personality inventory, Psychological Reports, 1979, 45, 2, 1, 590, 10.2466/pr0.1979.45.2.590</item> <item>58 Rutter M, Bailey A, Lord C, Cianchetti C, Fancello GS, SCQ: Social Communication Questionnaire: manuale, 2007, Firenze, Giunti OS</item> <item>59 Sasson NJ, Faso DJ, Nugent J, Lovell S, Kennedy DP, Grossman RB, Neurotypical peers are less willing to interact with those with autism based on thin slice judgments, Scientific Reports, 2017, 7, 40700, 10.1038/srep407005286449</item> <item>60 Scheeren AM, Banerjee R, Koot HM, Begeer S, Self-presentation and the role of perspective taking and social motivation in autism spectrum disorder, Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 2016, 46, 2, 649, 657, 10.1007/s10803-015-2610-7</item> <item>61 Scheeren AM, Begeer S, Banerjee R, Terwogt MM, Koot HM, Can you tell me something about yourself?: Self-presentation in children and adolescents with high functioning autism spectrum disorder in hypothetical and real life situations, Autism: The International Journal Of Research And Practice, 2010, 14, 5, 457, 473, 10.1177/1362361310366568</item> <item>62 Scheeren AM, Rosnay M, Koot HM, Begeer S, Rethinking theory of mind in high-functioning autism spectrum disorder, Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 2013, 54, 6, 628, 635, 10.1111/jcpp.12007</item> <item>63 Schwartz C, Dratsch T, Vogeley K, Bente G, Brief report: Impression formation in high-functioning autism: Role of nonverbal behavior and stereotype activating information, Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 2014, 44, 7, 1759, 1765, 10.1007/s10803-013-2021-6</item> <item>64 Sheppard E, Pillai D, Wong G T-L, Ropar D, Mitchell P, How easy is it to read the minds of people with autism spectrum disorder?, Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 2016, 46, 4, 1247, 1254, 10.1007/s10803-015-2662-8</item> <item>65 Sherman RC, End C, Kraan E, Cole A, Campbell J, Klausner J, Birchmeier Z, Metaperception in cyberspace, Cyber Psychology &amp; Behavior, 2001, 4, 1, 123, 129, 10.1089/10949310151088497</item> <item>74 Siegel DJ, Toward an interpersonal neurobiology of the developing mind:Attachment relationships, “mindsight,” and neural integration, Infant Mental Health Journal, 2001, 22, 1–2, 67, 94, 10.1002/1097-0355(200101/04)22:1&lt;67::AID-IMHJ3&gt;3.0.CO;2-G</item> <item>66 Somerville LH, Jones RM, Ruberry EJ, Dyke JP, Glover G, Casey BJ, The medial prefrontal cortex and the emergence of self-conscious emotion in adolescence, Psychological Science, 2013, 24, 8, 1554, 1562, 10.1177/09567976134756333742683</item> <item>67 State TM, Kern L, A comparison of video feedback and in vivo self-monitoring on the social interactions of an adolescent with Asperger syndrome, Journal of Behavioral Education, 2012, 21, 1, 18, 33, 10.1007/s10864-011-9133-x</item> <item>68 Sung Y-T, Chang K-E, Chang T-H, Yu W-C, How many heads are better than one? The reliability and validity of teenagers’ self- and peer assessments, Journal of Adolescence, 2010, 33, 1, 135, 145, 10.1016/j.adolescence.2009.04.004</item> <item>69 Usher LV, Burrows CA, Schwartz CB, Henderson HA, Social competence with an unfamiliar peer in children and adolescents with high functioning autism: Measurement and individual differences, Research in Autism Spectrum Disorders, 2015, 17, 2539, 10.1016/j.rasd.2015.05.005</item> <item>70 Wechsler D, Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children–Fourth Edition (WISC-IV), 2003, San Antonio, TX, The Psychological Corporation</item> <item>71 Williams, P. E., Weiss, L. G., &amp; Rolfhus, E. (2003). Clinical validity (WISC–IV Technical Report No. 2). Retrieved June 15, 2003 from, http://images.pearsonassessments.com/images/tmrs/tmrs_rg/WISCIVTechReport2.pdf?WT.mc_id=TMRS_WISC_IV_Technical_Report_2_Psychometric.</item> <item>72 Williams White S, Keonig K, Scahill L, Social skills development in children with autism spectrum disorders: A review of the intervention research, Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 2007, 37, 10, 1858, 1868, 10.1007/s10803-006-0320-x</item> <item>73 Zimmer-Gembeck MJ, Nesdale D, McGregor L, Mastro S, Goodwin B, Downey G, Comparing reports of peer rejection: Associations with rejection sensitivity, victimization, aggression, and friendship, Journal of Adolescence, 2013, 36, 6, 1237, 1246, 10.1016/j.adolescence.2013.10.002</item> </ulist> <p>PHOTO (COLOR)</p> <aug> <p>By Lauren V. Usher; Catherine A. Burrows; Daniel S. Messinger and Heather A. Henderson</p> </aug> <nolink nlid="nl1" bibid="bib66" firstref="ref1"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl2" bibid="bib25" firstref="ref2"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl3" bibid="bib47" firstref="ref3"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl4" bibid="bib55" firstref="ref4"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl5" bibid="bib65" firstref="ref5"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl6" bibid="bib43" firstref="ref6"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl7" bibid="bib3" firstref="ref7"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl8" bibid="bib54" firstref="ref8"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl9" bibid="bib53" firstref="ref10"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl10" bibid="bib51" firstref="ref11"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl11" bibid="bib19" firstref="ref12"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl12" bibid="bib5" firstref="ref13"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl13" bibid="bib20" firstref="ref14"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl14" bibid="bib41" firstref="ref15"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl15" bibid="bib74" firstref="ref16"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl16" bibid="bib4" firstref="ref18"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl17" bibid="bib17" firstref="ref21"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl18" bibid="bib16" firstref="ref22"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl19" bibid="bib30" firstref="ref23"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl20" bibid="bib37" firstref="ref27"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl21" bibid="bib56" firstref="ref28"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl22" bibid="bib28" firstref="ref29"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl23" bibid="bib62" firstref="ref30"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl24" bibid="bib29" firstref="ref31"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl25" bibid="bib7" firstref="ref32"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl26" bibid="bib11" firstref="ref33"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl27" bibid="bib60" firstref="ref34"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl28" bibid="bib61" firstref="ref35"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl29" bibid="bib1" firstref="ref39"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl30" bibid="bib2" firstref="ref40"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl31" bibid="bib44" firstref="ref42"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl32" bibid="bib8" firstref="ref43"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl33" bibid="bib23" firstref="ref44"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl34" bibid="bib79" firstref="ref45"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl35" bibid="bib70" firstref="ref46"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl36" bibid="bib69" firstref="ref47"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl37" bibid="bib71" firstref="ref49"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl38" bibid="bib58" firstref="ref53"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl39" bibid="bib45" firstref="ref54"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl40" bibid="bib57" firstref="ref55"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl41" bibid="bib14" firstref="ref56"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl42" bibid="bib32" firstref="ref58"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl43" bibid="bib31" firstref="ref59"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl44" bibid="bib6" firstref="ref60"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl45" bibid="bib18" firstref="ref61"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl46" bibid="bib36" firstref="ref62"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl47" bibid="bib39" firstref="ref63"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl48" bibid="bib40" firstref="ref64"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl49" bibid="bib38" firstref="ref65"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl50" bibid="bib27" firstref="ref78"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl51" bibid="bib21" firstref="ref80"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl52" bibid="bib33" firstref="ref84"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl53" bibid="bib34" firstref="ref88"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl54" bibid="bib35" firstref="ref89"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl55" bibid="bib42" firstref="ref99"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl56" bibid="bib59" firstref="ref100"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl57" bibid="bib50" firstref="ref104"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl58" bibid="bib15" firstref="ref105"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl59" bibid="bib68" firstref="ref107"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl60" bibid="bib73" firstref="ref108"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl61" bibid="bib26" firstref="ref111"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl62" bibid="bib63" firstref="ref112"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl63" bibid="bib13" firstref="ref115"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl64" bibid="bib9" firstref="ref116"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl65" bibid="bib64" firstref="ref117"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl66" bibid="bib49" firstref="ref119"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl67" bibid="bib48" firstref="ref121"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl68" bibid="bib24" firstref="ref122"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl69" bibid="bib10" firstref="ref123"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl70" bibid="bib46" firstref="ref124"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl71" bibid="bib12" firstref="ref125"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl72" bibid="bib52" firstref="ref127"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl73" bibid="bib72" firstref="ref131"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl74" bibid="bib22" firstref="ref133"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl75" bibid="bib67" firstref="ref134"></nolink> |
|---|---|
| Header | DbId: eric DbLabel: ERIC An: EJ1169120 AccessLevel: 3 PubType: Academic Journal PubTypeId: academicJournal PreciseRelevancyScore: 0 |
| IllustrationInfo | |
| Items | – Name: Title Label: Title Group: Ti Data: Metaperception in Adolescents with and without Autism Spectrum Disorder – Name: Language Label: Language Group: Lang Data: English – Name: Author Label: Authors Group: Au Data: <searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Usher%2C+Lauren+V%2E%22">Usher, Lauren V.</searchLink> (ORCID <externalLink term="http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6536-4903">0000-0001-6536-4903</externalLink>)<br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Burrows%2C+Catherine+A%2E%22">Burrows, Catherine A.</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Messinger%2C+Daniel+S%2E%22">Messinger, Daniel S.</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Henderson%2C+Heather+A%2E%22">Henderson, Heather A.</searchLink> – Name: TitleSource Label: Source Group: Src Data: <searchLink fieldCode="SO" term="%22Journal+of+Autism+and+Developmental+Disorders%22"><i>Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders</i></searchLink>. Feb 2018 48(2):533-548. – Name: Avail Label: Availability Group: Avail Data: Springer. 233 Spring Street, New York, NY 10013. Tel: 800-777-4643; Tel: 212-460-1500; Fax: 212-348-4505; e-mail: service-ny@springer.com; Web site: http://www.springerlink.com – Name: PeerReviewed Label: Peer Reviewed Group: SrcInfo Data: Y – Name: Pages Label: Page Count Group: Src Data: 16 – Name: DatePubCY Label: Publication Date Group: Date Data: 2018 – Name: TypeDocument Label: Document Type Group: TypDoc Data: Journal Articles<br />Reports - Research – Name: Subject Label: Descriptors Group: Su Data: <searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Autism%22">Autism</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Pervasive+Developmental+Disorders%22">Pervasive Developmental Disorders</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Questionnaires%22">Questionnaires</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Attitude+Measures%22">Attitude Measures</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Peer+Evaluation%22">Peer Evaluation</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Misconceptions%22">Misconceptions</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Adolescents%22">Adolescents</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Peer+Relationship%22">Peer Relationship</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Comparative+Analysis%22">Comparative Analysis</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Familiarity%22">Familiarity</searchLink> – Name: DOI Label: DOI Group: ID Data: 10.1007/s10803-017-3356-1 – Name: ISSN Label: ISSN Group: ISSN Data: 0162-3257 – Name: Abstract Label: Abstract Group: Ab Data: This study compared how adolescents with and without autism spectrum disorder (ASD) evaluated unfamiliar peers (i.e., perceptions), as well as how adolescents believed they were evaluated by peers (i.e., metaperceptions). The Perceptions and Metaperceptions Questionnaire was designed to quantify perceptions and metaperceptions following a live interaction. For all adolescents, more positive perceptions of the peer were associated with more positive metaperceptions. Adolescents with ASD exhibited more accurate metaperceptions than did typically developing adolescents. More positive perceptions and metaperceptions were associated with higher levels of observed social competence across groups. Findings extend our understanding of typically and atypically developing adolescents' impressions of unfamiliar peers and their ability to discern what peers think of them. – Name: AbstractInfo Label: Abstractor Group: Ab Data: As Provided – Name: Ref Label: Number of References Group: RefInfo Data: 74 – Name: DateEntry Label: Entry Date Group: Date Data: 2018 – Name: AN Label: Accession Number Group: ID Data: EJ1169120 |
| PLink | https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&site=eds-live&db=eric&AN=EJ1169120 |
| RecordInfo | BibRecord: BibEntity: Identifiers: – Type: doi Value: 10.1007/s10803-017-3356-1 Languages: – Text: English PhysicalDescription: Pagination: PageCount: 16 StartPage: 533 Subjects: – SubjectFull: Autism Type: general – SubjectFull: Pervasive Developmental Disorders Type: general – SubjectFull: Questionnaires Type: general – SubjectFull: Attitude Measures Type: general – SubjectFull: Peer Evaluation Type: general – SubjectFull: Misconceptions Type: general – SubjectFull: Adolescents Type: general – SubjectFull: Peer Relationship Type: general – SubjectFull: Comparative Analysis Type: general – SubjectFull: Familiarity Type: general Titles: – TitleFull: Metaperception in Adolescents with and without Autism Spectrum Disorder Type: main BibRelationships: HasContributorRelationships: – PersonEntity: Name: NameFull: Usher, Lauren V. – PersonEntity: Name: NameFull: Burrows, Catherine A. – PersonEntity: Name: NameFull: Messinger, Daniel S. – PersonEntity: Name: NameFull: Henderson, Heather A. IsPartOfRelationships: – BibEntity: Dates: – D: 01 M: 02 Type: published Y: 2018 Identifiers: – Type: issn-print Value: 0162-3257 Numbering: – Type: volume Value: 48 – Type: issue Value: 2 Titles: – TitleFull: Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders Type: main |
| ResultId | 1 |
