View in EDS HTML Full Text PDF Full Text

Self-Reported Strengths and Talents of Autistic Adults

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Title: Self-Reported Strengths and Talents of Autistic Adults
Language: English
Authors: Linnea A. Lampinen (ORCID 0000-0003-4379-5782), Joseph Singer, Xinyue Wang, Benjamin VanHook, Ellen Wilkinson, Vanessa H. Bal (ORCID 0000-0003-0750-823X)
Source: Autism: The International Journal of Research and Practice. 2026 30(1):37-48.
Availability: SAGE Publications. 2455 Teller Road, Thousand Oaks, CA 91320. Tel: 800-818-7243; Tel: 805-499-9774; Fax: 800-583-2665; e-mail: journals@sagepub.com; Web site: https://sagepub.com
Peer Reviewed: Y
Page Count: 12
Publication Date: 2026
Document Type: Journal Articles
Reports - Research
Descriptors: Autism Spectrum Disorders, Adults, Gender Differences, Age Differences, Educational Attainment, Clinical Diagnosis, Symptoms (Individual Disorders), Ability, Talent, Self Concept, Executive Function, Cognitive Ability, Personality Traits, Creativity, Academic Ability, Interpersonal Competence, Individual Characteristics
DOI: 10.1177/13623613251364361
ISSN: 1362-3613
1461-7005
Abstract: Many adults express dissatisfaction with the autism diagnostic process, and concerns have been cited regarding the lack of neurodiversity-affirming assessment methods. In part, this is due to instruments framing behaviors as symptoms causing impairment, overlooking potential benefits. Systematically measuring strengths and talents during assessment may inform diagnosis and support planning in a more neurodiversity-affirming manner. Historically, research has relied on caregiver-reported strengths; more information on self-reported strengths is needed to inform self-report instrument development and assessment practices. Participants included 127 legally independent autistic adults recruited primarily through SPARK Research Match, who completed open-ended questions regarding strengths and talents. Qualitative content analysis identified themes of strengths, and associations between strengths and gender, age, age of diagnosis, and education level were examined. Autistic and nonautistic team members collaborated on qualitative coding, data interpretation, and manuscript writing. Themes emerging from the qualitative responses included Cognitive/Executive Functioning (61%), Character Strengths (55%), Creative/Artistic (52%), Academic (33%), and Interpersonal (30%). Overlap between strength domains and Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (5th ed.) autism diagnostic criteria suggest that more nuance is needed in how we conceptualize autism, considering both strengths and challenges. Domains of strengths identified in this study can be used to inform measure development and strengths-based assessment and support planning.
Abstractor: As Provided
Entry Date: 2026
Accession Number: EJ1493954
Database: ERIC
Full text is not displayed to guests.
FullText Links:
  – Type: pdflink
    Url: https://content.ebscohost.com/cds/retrieve?content=AQICAHj0k_4E0hTGH8RJwT4gCJyBsGNe_WN95AvKlDbXJGqwxwFXUNL2GGyj-aWMLQNFFKJ9AAAA4jCB3wYJKoZIhvcNAQcGoIHRMIHOAgEAMIHIBgkqhkiG9w0BBwEwHgYJYIZIAWUDBAEuMBEEDFADOV3e_QyDgPSbGwIBEICBmj99qXlTqNdeAHajn47qejw7uiemcnHKa_ftB1cki-ajJ89HIO5biSyPYhHM59U6sWQKRth9jKxMjL7oyf4OUAhLOB3GopJPRkX6ZNJ3oiXozW5ah5TVn7APQXm-hYCltBG4JC6dm8JeBSTMk3HZtrCINGfZOfkc1cuVu22PD5JEoQNmM0oJhLX79g0UlVSYgUFYp3OBi6Ywf1w=
Text:
  Availability: 1
  Value: <anid>AN0190387816;f9d01jan.26;2025Dec23.05:52;v2.2.500</anid> <title id="AN0190387816-1">Self-reported strengths and talents of autistic adults </title> <p>Many adults express dissatisfaction with the autism diagnostic process, and concerns have been cited regarding the lack of neurodiversity-affirming assessment methods. In part, this is due to instruments framing behaviors as symptoms causing impairment, overlooking potential benefits. Systematically measuring strengths and talents during assessment may inform diagnosis and support planning in a more neurodiversity-affirming manner. Historically, research has relied on caregiver-reported strengths; more information on self-reported strengths is needed to inform self-report instrument development and assessment practices. Participants included 127 legally independent autistic adults recruited primarily through SPARK Research Match, who completed open-ended questions regarding strengths and talents. Qualitative content analysis identified themes of strengths, and associations between strengths and gender, age, age of diagnosis, and education level were examined. Autistic and nonautistic team members collaborated on qualitative coding, data interpretation, and manuscript writing. Themes emerging from the qualitative responses included Cognitive/Executive Functioning (61%), Character Strengths (55%), Creative/Artistic (52%), Academic (33%), and Interpersonal (30%). Overlap between strength domains and Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (5th ed.) autism diagnostic criteria suggest that more nuance is needed in how we conceptualize autism, considering both strengths and challenges. Domains of strengths identified in this study can be used to inform measure development and strengths-based assessment and support planning. Autism research and testing has had a heavy focus on difficulties, without much attention to the strengths of autistic people. Most surveys ask about challenges associated with autism, but do not consider the positive qualities and talents of autistic adults. Previous research on strengths in autistic individuals has mostly been based on what parents report, so we do not know as much about how autistic adults see their own strengths. We asked 127 autistic adults to tell us about their strengths and talents in an online survey. Both autistic and nonautistic team members worked together to group answers by similar themes or categories. We explained categories and compared how they were related to participants' characteristics. Autistic adults shared many different strengths, including skills in problem-solving, character, creativity, academics, and getting along with others. Some strengths were more likely to be mentioned by people of different ages, education levels, or genders. The results show that autistic adults have many different strengths. It is important for researchers, doctors, and the public to recognize both the strengths and challenges of autistic adults to create a more balanced view of autism. Thinking about these strengths when diagnosing autism and planning supports can improve the well-being of autistic adults, reduce stigma, and help people understand autism in a more balanced way.</p> <p>Keywords: adults; assessment; autism; strengths; talent</p> <p>Adults are increasingly seeking first-time autism diagnoses ([<reflink idref="bib25" id="ref1">25</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib33" id="ref2">33</reflink>]). Research on how to best approach assessment in adults remains limited, and many adults express dissatisfaction with the assessment process ([<reflink idref="bib29" id="ref3">29</reflink>]). This gap in research and practice highlights a critical need for improved assessment methods for autistic adults. Diagnoses are often conceptualized through a deficit-focused medical model. Increasing calls for neurodiversity-affirming assessment procedures emphasize that while assessing challenges is important, focusing <emph>only</emph> on deficits can be harmful ([<reflink idref="bib14" id="ref4">14</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib23" id="ref5">23</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib56" id="ref6">56</reflink>]). Receiving a diagnosis can help adults develop more confidence and pride in their individuality ([<reflink idref="bib10" id="ref7">10</reflink>]), with more positive views of autism being linked to greater pride in differences and less shame ([<reflink idref="bib22" id="ref8">22</reflink>]).</p> <p>The impacts of autistic features are often context-dependent, with autistic adults reporting both benefits and challenges associated with these characteristics ([<reflink idref="bib17" id="ref9">17</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib31" id="ref10">31</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib34" id="ref11">34</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib41" id="ref12">41</reflink>]). One study found that autistic adults endorse comparable numbers of behaviors when asked about the level of benefits versus problems associated with restricted and repetitive behaviors (RRBs), suggesting that diagnostic features can be identified when framing questions in a positive manner ([<reflink idref="bib34" id="ref13">34</reflink>]). Outside of the diagnostic context, capturing strengths is important for services such as career and educational planning. Strengths-based interventions may promote greater success in educational and employment settings, and improve well-being for autistic individuals ([<reflink idref="bib28" id="ref14">28</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib37" id="ref15">37</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib52" id="ref16">52</reflink>], [<reflink idref="bib53" id="ref17">53</reflink>]). These findings underscore a need to incorporate measurement of strengths in autism assessment and intervention planning. Assessing autistic adults' views of their own strengths could improve acceptability of the assessment process and inform diagnosis in a more neurodiversity-affirming manner. Greater attention to strengths may also help autistic people better identify and leverage their strengths, foster positive self-views, and destigmatize autism in the broader community. Currently, there is a dearth of measures to explore strengths in autistic adults, and poor understanding of which strengths domains are meaningful to autistic people.</p> <p>There is a long history of researching exceptional strengths and talents in autistic individuals. "Savant skills," henceforth referred to as "extraordinary talents,"[<reflink idref="bib10" id="ref18">10</reflink>] are strengths that extend beyond what is expected for a person based on their age or profile of other skills ([<reflink idref="bib30" id="ref19">30</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib36" id="ref20">36</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib50" id="ref21">50</reflink>]). Most research on autistic strengths focuses on children based on parent-report. Studies have largely drawn upon the "Special Isolated Skills" section of the Autism Diagnostic Interview–Revised (ADI-R; [<reflink idref="bib43" id="ref22">43</reflink>]), including visuospatial, memory, musical, drawing, reading, and computational abilities ([<reflink idref="bib4" id="ref23">4</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib6" id="ref24">6</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib15" id="ref25">15</reflink>]). In mixed child-adult samples, prevalence of ADI-R skills ranged from 56% to 63%, with memory being the most commonly reported skill ([<reflink idref="bib6" id="ref26">6</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib35" id="ref27">35</reflink>]).</p> <p>More recently, qualitative studies in autistic children have expanded our notion of strengths beyond the initial focus on extraordinary talents. In a study examining clinical notes of parent-reported strengths in young autistic children, cognitive strengths were the most common, but strengths related to personality, social skills, and coping mechanisms were prevalent as well ([<reflink idref="bib44" id="ref28">44</reflink>]). Studies examining parent responses to open-ended questions about children with autism or other developmental disabilities have identified additional strengths such as intelligence, creativity, physical abilities, kindness, and humor ([<reflink idref="bib11" id="ref29">11</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib13" id="ref30">13</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib51" id="ref31">51</reflink>]). Such studies suggest that autistic children and adolescents exhibit a range of strengths, beyond the specific extraordinary talents emphasized by previous research.</p> <p>While research on strengths in autistic children informs our understanding of autistic adults, longitudinal parent-report studies suggest that profiles of strengths change as autistic children approach adolescence ([<reflink idref="bib13" id="ref32">13</reflink>]) and it is unclear which strengths persist or change as autistic individuals age. Focusing on strengths identified in childhood may miss strengths that emerge or become more prevalent in adulthood.</p> <p>A smaller body of research has examined profiles of strengths specifically in autistic adults. Of these, many have utilized informant-report ([<reflink idref="bib7" id="ref33">7</reflink>], [<reflink idref="bib8" id="ref34">8</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib24" id="ref35">24</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib54" id="ref36">54</reflink>]). [<reflink idref="bib24" id="ref37">24</reflink>] found that 37% of an autistic adult sample exhibited exceptional visuospatial, working memory, and mathematical abilities. Studies utilizing the Assessment Scale for Positive Character Traits-Developmental Disabilities (ASPeCT-DD; [<reflink idref="bib55" id="ref38">55</reflink>]), an informant-report measure designed to capture character strengths in individuals with developmental disabilities, have found high rates of kindness, caring, humor, and happiness in adolescents and young adults with autism or intellectual disability (ID; [<reflink idref="bib7" id="ref39">7</reflink>], [<reflink idref="bib8" id="ref40">8</reflink>]). In a recent qualitative study of 15- to 30-year-olds with autism and/or ID, [<reflink idref="bib54" id="ref41">54</reflink>] found parent-reported strengths of character and sociability, as well as specific skills such as academic and visuospatial. In addition, 25% of the parents reported strengths in work ethic and motivation, a category that had not clearly emerged in child studies.</p> <p>While informant-report offers valuable insights into the strengths of autistic adults, there is growing recognition of the importance of capturing the lived experiences and self-perceptions of autistic individuals. Consequently, recent research has begun to examine self-reported strengths in autistic adults. [<reflink idref="bib26" id="ref42">26</reflink>] created a nine-item extraordinary talents checklist and found that memory, math, art, absolute pitch, and fluency for different languages were the most reported skills in a group of autistic adults recruited from savant networks. In a study examining character strengths, [<reflink idref="bib32" id="ref43">32</reflink>] used the Values in Action Inventory (VIA-IS) in a sample of 32 autistic adults without ID. The most frequently reported character strengths included open-mindedness, authenticity, love of learning, and creativity.</p> <p>A recent thematic synthesis by [<reflink idref="bib10" id="ref44">10</reflink>] identified four overarching themes of self-reported strengths in autistic individuals: wired differently, focused interests enrich life, embracing an autism identity, and context-dependent strengths. Subdomains within these themes provide more detailed insights into self-perceived strengths. While this systematic review is the most comprehensive qualitative analysis of self-reported autistic strengths to date, the study included participants of all ages. Furthermore, studies were limited by small sample sizes, as most were not specifically designed to explore strengths ([<reflink idref="bib10" id="ref45">10</reflink>]). Notably, only two qualitative studies specifically focused on self-reported strengths in autistic adults. [<reflink idref="bib49" id="ref46">49</reflink>] utilized interviewing and Photovoice, a photography-based method, to examine strength and resilience of autistic young adults (<emph>n</emph> = 11). While specific strengths were not reported, subthemes included special interests, skills that evoked pride, and reframing autism as special versus a disadvantage. [<reflink idref="bib41" id="ref47">41</reflink>] conducted semi-structured interviews about advantages of personal traits attributed to autism (<emph>n</emph> = 24 adults). Participants described positive benefits including perceptual differences, memory, focus, attention to detail, and honesty. However, questions were only intended to capture traits that participants attributed to autism and therefore may have missed strengths perceived to be unrelated to autism.</p> <p>Existing studies provide initial information regarding the types of strengths prevalent in autistic people. However, most studies have utilized informant-report, focused on pre-determined strength domains, or included small samples. Thus, we are still lacking in our understanding of the range of strengths autistic adults perceive in themselves, limiting our ability to conduct comprehensive, strengths-based evaluations. To address this gap, the current study leverages a large sample primarily recruited through Simons Powering Autism Research (SPARK; [<reflink idref="bib46" id="ref48">46</reflink>]) to identify domains of self-reported strengths in autistic adults. Qualitative coding of open-ended responses was used to capture the full range of strengths and talents reported by autistic adults, and associations between strengths and gender, age, age of diagnosis, and education level were examined. As this study is descriptive and these analyses were viewed as exploratory, no specific hypotheses regarding group differences were made.</p> <hd id="AN0190387816-2">Methods</hd> <p></p> <hd id="AN0190387816-3">Participants</hd> <p>The sample included 127 autistic adults ages 20 to 70 years recruited to a study of strengths and talents in autistic adults (see Table 1). Eligibility criteria included (<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref49">1</reflink>) 18 years or older, (<reflink idref="bib2" id="ref50">2</reflink>) legally independent (i.e. do not have a guardian/conservator), and (<reflink idref="bib3" id="ref51">3</reflink>) self-reported professional autism diagnosis (i.e. autism, autistic disorder, Asperger's, pervasive developmental disorder not otherwise specified (PDD-NOS), autism spectrum disorder (ASD)).</p> <p>Table 1. Demographic and clinical characteristics of the sample (N = 127).</p> <p>Graph</p> <p> <ephtml> <table><colgroup><col align="left" /><col align="char" char="." /></colgroup><thead><tr><th /><th align="left"><italic>M</italic> (<italic>SD</italic>) or <italic>N</italic> (%)</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td><bold>Age (years)</bold></td><td>35.33 (9.92)</td></tr><tr><td><bold>SRS-2</bold><xref ref-type="table-fn" rid="tfn1">a</xref><bold>T-score</bold></td><td>70 (11.18)</td></tr><tr><td colspan="2"><bold>Gender</bold></td></tr><tr><td> Female</td><td>65 (51%)</td></tr><tr><td> Male</td><td>45 (35%)</td></tr><tr><td> Nonbinary/Other</td><td>17 (13%)</td></tr><tr><td colspan="2"><bold>Race</bold></td></tr><tr><td> White</td><td>82 (65%)</td></tr><tr><td> Black or African American</td><td>11 (9%)</td></tr><tr><td> American Indian or Alaskan Native</td><td>10 (8%)</td></tr><tr><td> Asian</td><td>9 (7%)</td></tr><tr><td> Other</td><td>11 (9%)</td></tr><tr><td> Unknown/Decline to answer</td><td>4 (3%)</td></tr><tr><td colspan="2"><bold>Ethnicity</bold></td></tr><tr><td> Hispanic or Latino</td><td>21 (17%)</td></tr><tr><td> Not Hispanic or Latino</td><td>102 (80%)</td></tr><tr><td> Unknown/Decline to answer</td><td>4 (3%)</td></tr><tr><td colspan="2"><bold>Age at Autism Diagnosis</bold></td></tr><tr><td> <21 years</td><td>61 (48%)</td></tr><tr><td> ⩾21 years</td><td>64 (50%)</td></tr><tr><td> Unknown/Missing</td><td>2 (2%)</td></tr><tr><td colspan="2"><bold>Current Employment</bold></td></tr><tr><td> Yes</td><td>69 (54%)</td></tr><tr><td> No</td><td>58 (46%)</td></tr><tr><td colspan="2"><bold>Highest Level of Education</bold></td></tr><tr><td> High School Degree/Some High School</td><td>26 (20%)</td></tr><tr><td> Some college/Associate's Degree</td><td>40 (31%)</td></tr><tr><td> Baccalaureate Degree</td><td>34 (27%)</td></tr><tr><td> Graduate/Professional Degree</td><td>27 (21%)</td></tr></tbody></table> </ephtml> </p> <p>1 SRS-2 = Social Responsiveness Scale, 2nd Edition.</p> <hd id="AN0190387816-4">Procedures</hd> <p>Of 127 participants, 117 were recruited through SPARK ([<reflink idref="bib46" id="ref52">46</reflink>]), a nation-wide study of autistic individuals with an established professional autism diagnosis. In February 2024, two rounds of study invitations were sent to SPARK participants who met the criteria listed above and had completed the Social Responsiveness Scale, 2nd Edition and the ASEBA Adult Self Report form. In March 2024, invitations were sent to individuals who identified as Black, American Indian or Alaskan, Asian, Other, or Hispanic or Latino to increase representation of these groups. Across rounds, invitations were balanced so approximately half were to participants diagnosed with autism before age 18, and half diagnosed with autism after 18. In December 2023 and January 2024, recruitment emails were also sent to adults who had consented to be contacted about future research at Rutgers University.</p> <p>The recruitment email linked to a screening survey to confirm eligibility. Eligible participants were directed to an online consent, followed by the surveys. Of 170 participants who completed screening, 151 were eligible and consented, and 127 completed the main study questionnaire and demographics form. Participants received a $50 gift card after completing the surveys. REDCap was used to collect all data. Study procedures were approved by the Institutional Review Board at Rutgers University (Pro2023001546) on September 6, 2023. Written consent was obtained from all participants.</p> <hd id="AN0190387816-5">Measures</hd> <p></p> <hd id="AN0190387816-6">Sample characteristics</hd> <p>Participants were asked to provide current age, gender, race, ethnicity, highest level of education, current employment, and age of autism diagnosis in years. For analysis, participants were grouped into younger (18–35) and middle/older adults (36+) based on guidelines in the APA Dictionary of Psychology ([<reflink idref="bib3" id="ref53">3</reflink>].); and childhood-diagnosed (autism diagnosis before 21 years) and adult-diagnosed (diagnosis 21+ years). While initial selection criteria focused on diagnosis before or after 18 years, it was later decided to divide the sample by age of diagnosis before or after 21 years for data analysis to increase comparability with previous research ([<reflink idref="bib21" id="ref54">21</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib27" id="ref55">27</reflink>]).</p> <hd id="AN0190387816-7">Open ended strengths questionnaire</hd> <p>Participants completed an open-ended strengths questionnaire developed by the research team. The survey asked, "What would you say are your greatest strengths?" This can include qualities that may only be apparent to you or people who know you well, as well as special skills that other people notice. Next, the survey asked, "In addition to these strengths, do you have any special skills that stand out from your other abilities?" These may also be called "talents." These skills or talents could be things that come "naturally" to you (i.e. you did not have to be taught or practice a lot) or that you could do without a lot of effort after they were learned. Both questions were included to capture a range of different strengths and talents for each participant; data were combined across questions for analysis.</p> <hd id="AN0190387816-8">Qualitative coding</hd> <p>Qualitative content analysis using an inductive approach was conducted to examine themes emerging from the open-ended strengths questionnaire ([<reflink idref="bib19" id="ref56">19</reflink>]). Authors LL and JS independently reviewed the first 10 survey responses (five participants from the community and five from SPARK) and used inductive coding to generate initial themes. LL and JS compared their generated themes and integrated initial codes into themes and subthemes. In collaboration with VB and BV, the codebook was revised and definitions were generated for the initial 10 themes and 35 subthemes to ensure consistency and clarity across codes. Each response was separated into phrases, and each phrase was assigned one subtheme. Using the finalized codebook, LL and JS coded all responses independently, then met to compare codes, discuss inconsistencies, and reach a consensus decision. Data presented here reflect consensus decisions.</p> <p>Several subthemes were identified in the initial review but ultimately yielded few (<5%) endorsements. For parsimony, these subthemes were collapsed into an "Other" category within the corresponding theme. Notably, 48 (38%) of participants provided responses that were coded in the "Other" theme, which had initially been created to capture responses not fitting into the 10 original themes. Re-review of these responses yielded two additional themes (Animal Skills; Culinary Arts). Thus, the final codebook included 25 subthemes across 12 themes (and one Other category for responses not captured in the main (sub) themes).</p> <hd id="AN0190387816-9">Statistical analyses</hd> <p>Chi-square analyses were conducted to examine relationships between endorsement of strength themes and gender, age of autism diagnosis, chronological age, and education level for themes endorsed by at least 15 participants (consistent with [<reflink idref="bib54" id="ref57">54</reflink>]). Yates's continuity correction was used for chi-square analyses where the demographic variable had only two levels. Data are not public but may be available upon request.</p> <hd id="AN0190387816-10">Community involvement statement</hd> <p>This study was conducted in collaboration with three autistic adults. Before data collection, two provided feedback on wording, formatting, and response options of the survey. Two autistic adults were actively involved throughout the qualitative coding process (one was involved in generation of the codebook and coding, the other made substantive contributions to the codebook and operationalizing categories), as well as data interpretation and manuscript preparation. The third autistic adult was not included in the later parts of the study due to other commitments.</p> <hd id="AN0190387816-11">Results</hd> <p>Twelve themes comprising 25 subthemes accounted for 95% of participant responses (see Table 2). The remaining 5% fell into "Other." Importantly, 98% of the sample reported at least one strength or talent, with only three individuals reporting no strengths or talents. Most participants identified multiple (<emph>M</emph><emph>=</emph> 4.35, <emph>SD</emph> = 2.56) subthemes of strengths.</p> <p>Table 2. Qualitative themes and subthemes of strengths and talents (N = 127).</p> <p>Graph</p> <p> <ephtml> <table><colgroup><col align="left" /><col align="char" char="." /><col align="char" char="." /></colgroup><thead><tr><th align="left">Themes & subthemes</th><th align="left">Examples</th><th align="left"><italic>N</italic> (%)</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td><bold>Cognitive/Executive Functioning</bold></td><td /><td><bold>77 (61%)</bold></td></tr><tr><td> Logical thinking</td><td><italic>I am talented at logical problem-solving</italic></td><td>28 (22%)</td></tr><tr><td> Attention to detail</td><td><italic>analyzing the details to make sense of the whole</italic></td><td>23 (18%)</td></tr><tr><td> Intelligence</td><td><italic>I am a very intelligent person</italic></td><td>18 (14%)</td></tr><tr><td> Organization</td><td><italic>I am very organized</italic></td><td>14 (11%)</td></tr><tr><td> Focus and concentration</td><td><italic>hyperfocus- delving into things deeply and staying focused on that thing</italic></td><td>11 (9%)</td></tr><tr><td> Pattern recognition</td><td><italic>I can find patterns in things that most people don't</italic></td><td>8 (6%)</td></tr><tr><td> Cognitive/Executive Functioning-Other</td><td><italic>Visualization/spatialization- I can see what I am thinking about and think in pictures; I can sort large amounts of complex data into a usable format</italic></td><td>31 (24%)</td></tr><tr><td><bold>Character</bold></td><td /><td><bold>70 (55%)</bold></td></tr><tr><td> Goodwill</td><td><italic>friendly, caring and do anything to help</italic></td><td>29 (23%)</td></tr><tr><td> Determination</td><td><italic>working hard & persisting</italic></td><td>15 (12%)</td></tr><tr><td> Humor</td><td><italic>Making people laugh</italic></td><td>14 (11%)</td></tr><tr><td> Patience</td><td><italic>Patient</italic></td><td>8 (6%)</td></tr><tr><td> Independence</td><td><italic>not really needing much guidance on something new</italic></td><td>6 (5%)</td></tr><tr><td> Flexibility</td><td><italic>Flexibility</italic></td><td>6 (5%)</td></tr><tr><td> Character Strengths-Other</td><td><italic>The desire to learn new things; Introspective; Humbleness; Willpower</italic></td><td>36 (28%)</td></tr><tr><td><bold>Creative/Artistic</bold></td><td /><td><bold>66 (52%)</bold></td></tr><tr><td> Music</td><td><italic>I can play music by ear well enough my band mates noticed</italic></td><td>23 (18%)</td></tr><tr><td> Drawing, Painting, & Sculpting</td><td><italic>I try a bunch of forms of art. I mainly sketch on paper, but I like sculpting clay</italic></td><td>12 (10%)</td></tr><tr><td> Crafting</td><td><italic>many handicrafts (such as crochet)</italic></td><td>12 (10%)</td></tr><tr><td> Creative writing</td><td><italic>I love to write creatively</italic></td><td>8 (6%)</td></tr><tr><td> Creativity/Artistic-Other</td><td><italic>Creativity; Create different designs daily</italic></td><td>37 (29%)</td></tr><tr><td><bold>Academic</bold></td><td /><td><bold>42 (33%)</bold></td></tr><tr><td> Reading</td><td><italic>My reading comprehension is super high</italic></td><td>19 (15%)</td></tr><tr><td> Writing</td><td><italic>I am a very strong writer</italic></td><td>14 (11%)</td></tr><tr><td> Math</td><td><italic>Easy to memorize and understand math</italic></td><td>10 (8%)</td></tr><tr><td> Academic-Other</td><td><italic>I'm a generally good test taker; Researching</italic></td><td>14 (11%)</td></tr><tr><td><bold>Interpersonal</bold></td><td /><td><bold>38 (30%)</bold></td></tr><tr><td> Empathy</td><td><italic>empathy, understanding different people</italic></td><td>19 (15%)</td></tr><tr><td> Listening skills</td><td><italic>I am a good listener</italic></td><td>8 (6%)</td></tr><tr><td> Interpersonal-Other</td><td><italic>I can talk with anyone about any given topic; being able to read people well</italic></td><td>17 (13%)</td></tr><tr><td><bold>Advocacy/Communication</bold></td><td><italic>I'm pretty gifted at working with policy makers to create new state policies; I've always been pretty good at public speaking</italic></td><td><bold>19 (15%)</bold></td></tr><tr><td><bold>Memory</bold></td><td><italic>I have a photographic memory and a great memory for dates, numbers, and time; my ability to remember random things</italic></td><td><bold>18 (14%)</bold></td></tr><tr><td><bold>Technology/Computer Science</bold></td><td><italic>Technology; I am good with computers and electronics</italic></td><td><bold>15 (12%)</bold></td></tr><tr><td><bold>Physical</bold></td><td><italic>I'm physically strong, agile; I'm a pretty good soccer player; Physical fortitude</italic></td><td><bold>11 (9%)</bold></td></tr><tr><td><bold>Animal Skills</bold></td><td><italic>Caring about animals; knowing how to be around animals as not to frighten them</italic></td><td><bold>10 (8%)</bold></td></tr><tr><td><bold>Culinary Arts</bold></td><td><italic>cooking (and improvising with cooking); Baking & pastry arts</italic></td><td><bold>6 (5%)</bold></td></tr><tr><td><bold>Sensory Acuity</bold></td><td><italic>sensory acuity; strong perceptions. sight, hearing, smell, touch</italic></td><td><bold>4 (3%)</bold></td></tr><tr><td><bold>Other</bold></td><td><italic>My special interest in things; Lack of emotional response; solo activities; I'm a good occupational therapist</italic></td><td><bold>29 (23%)</bold></td></tr></tbody></table> </ephtml> </p> <hd id="AN0190387816-12">Qualitative strengths (Table 2)</hd> <p> <bold>Cognitive/Executive Functioning (61% of sample)</bold> was the most commonly reported theme, and captured various cognitive skills and strengths related to managing tasks, problem-solving, and achieving goals. Participants emphasized strengths such as <emph>Attention to Detail</emph> and <emph>Pattern Recognition</emph>, as well as <emph>Logical Thinking</emph> and problem-solving abilities, <emph>Organization</emph>, and <emph>Focus and Concentration</emph>. Finally, participants noted strengths in <emph>Intelligence</emph> more broadly.</p> <p> <bold>Character Strengths (55%)</bold> was the second most reported theme, and encompassed a range of positive personal qualities or traits. <emph>Goodwill</emph> involved traits related to kindness, friendliness, or helpful acts for others. Participants also described <emph>Determination</emph>, or perseverance in the face of challenges, as well as <emph>Independence</emph> in thinking, work-related tasks, and daily living skills. Many participants reported a strength in <emph>Humor</emph>, noting that they were naturally funny and often made people laugh. Finally, some participants noted a strength in <emph>Flexibility</emph>, allowing them to be adaptable and adjust to changing circumstances.</p> <p> <bold>Creative/Artistic (52%)</bold> encompassed various forms of artistic self-expression and creativity. Participants reported skills in visual arts, including <emph>Drawing, Painting, and Sculpting</emph>, as well as <emph>Crafting</emph>. Many participants noted skills in <emph>Music</emph>, including composing, playing instruments, and singing. Finally, participants reported strengths in <emph>Creative Writing</emph> and creating original stories or poems.</p> <p> <bold>Academic (33%)</bold> included core skills and strengths related to scholastic learning and academic achievement. Participants reported strong language abilities, including general and academic <emph>Writing</emph>, as well as <emph>Reading</emph> comprehension and analysis of texts. Participants reported abilities in <emph>Math</emph>, including understanding mathematical concepts and problem-solving.</p> <p> <bold>Interpersonal (30%).</bold> The Interpersonal theme included skills related to effective social communication and positive relationships with other people. Many participants noted a strength in <emph>Empathy</emph>, or the ability to understand and share other people's feelings. Participants also noted a particular strength in <emph>Listening Skills.</emph> Finally, several participants noted strengths captured in an <emph>Interpersonal—Other</emph> subtheme. These are related to adaptability in social situations and being able to read other people.</p> <p> <bold>Advocacy/Communication (15%)</bold> encompassed strengths and skills related to public communication and supporting particular causes. This included skills related to teaching others and public speaking. Some participants noted strengths related to advocacy, or actively communicating and defending the rights and needs of themselves or others.</p> <p> <bold>Memory (14%)</bold> included strengths related to storing and recalling information from the past. Participants noted strong abilities to remember specific types of information as well as more general memory abilities. Several participants mentioned having a photographic memory and a strong skill for remembering details.</p> <p> <bold>Technology/Computer Science (12%)</bold> included particular strengths related to technological abilities, such as skills in understanding, creating, and fixing technology, as well as writing code and programming. Participants also mentioned specific computer skills, such as typing, and a strength in computer science.</p> <p> <bold>Physical (9%)</bold> encompassed skills related to physical activities, movement, or strength. In this theme, participants noted skills in specific sports, dance, and martial arts, as well as general physical strength and abilities.</p> <p> <bold>Animal Skills (8%)</bold> included strengths related to caring for animals, as well as being particularly skilled at interacting and working with animals.</p> <p> <bold>Culinary Arts (5%)</bold> included strengths and skills related to cooking and baking. Participants noted strengths related to improvising during the cooking process, as well as pastry arts and baking.</p> <p> <bold>Sensory Acuity (3%)</bold> included reports of heightened sensitivity in various senses. Some participants reported general sensory strengths, while other participants noted strengths with particular senses, such as vision.</p> <p> <bold>Other (23%)</bold>. Participants reported a range of additional strengths and talents that did not fit into a particular theme. Some examples from this category included specific abilities to fix and tinker with objects, being able to detect when others are lying, skills related to driving and personal finance, and general mention of having a special interest.</p> <hd id="AN0190387816-13">Associations between strength themes and demographic variables</hd> <p>Young adults were more likely to endorse the Creative/Artistic theme compared with middle/older adults (Supplemental Table S1). Middle/older adults were more likely to endorse the Technology theme compared with young adults (Supplemental Table S1). Individuals with a baccalaureate or graduate degree were more likely to endorse the Cognitive/Executive Functioning theme compared with individuals who had less than a baccalaureate degree (Supplemental Table S1). Gender nonbinary or transgender individuals were more likely to endorse the Interpersonal theme than females or males (Supplemental Table S1). All other associations between strength themes and demographics were nonsignificant (Supplemental Table S1).</p> <hd id="AN0190387816-14">Discussion</hd> <p>Qualitative analyses identified 12 themes of strengths that captured 95% of participant responses. Many themes (cognitive/executive functioning, creative/artistic, academic, character, technology, memory) align with previous studies of strengths in autistic children ([<reflink idref="bib44" id="ref58">44</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib51" id="ref59">51</reflink>]) and adults ([<reflink idref="bib24" id="ref60">24</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib35" id="ref61">35</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib54" id="ref62">54</reflink>]). Other themes (interpersonal strengths, advocacy abilities, animal skills), are less commonly highlighted, though qualitative studies are beginning to recognize some of these strengths ([<reflink idref="bib10" id="ref63">10</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib54" id="ref64">54</reflink>]). Many subdomains of strengths identified in this study are reflected in subthemes identified by [<reflink idref="bib10" id="ref65">10</reflink>] recent thematic synthesis. Our findings expand on their work to define distinct domains of strengths that can be systematically measured. These domains were identified based upon responses to open-ended questions on perceived strengths; therefore, the proportions across domains should not be interpreted as prevalence estimates, as adults may have prioritized what they reported according to their values. Furthermore, absence of a specific strength reported here should not be interpreted as a weakness. Rather, the identified domains highlight the broad range of talents and skills present in autistic adults and provide guidance on specific strengths that should be further explored. As the field moves toward systematically evaluating strengths, including these 12 domains in new instruments would afford a better sense of how many autistic adults view these areas as strengths.</p> <p>Notably, 23% of the participants reported strengths that were not repeatedly mentioned. Although structured assessments of commonly reported domains will facilitate systematic investigation of strengths, they may miss idiosyncratic strengths. Especially in assessment contexts, opportunities for open-ended responses are critical for capturing more nuanced self-views and informing subsequent supports. Nonetheless, the identified themes allow for a more holistic and nuanced understanding of autistic adults and provide a basis for future research on strengths-based assessment and intervention planning for autism in adulthood. Outside of clinical settings, recognizing the strengths of autistic adults will allow for more effective supports, including better environmental adaptations in educational, employment, and home settings that build on individual strengths and support areas of challenge (e.g. similar to approaches used by the Universal Design for Learning; [<reflink idref="bib39" id="ref66">39</reflink>]). Encouraging a more balanced perspective of autism among clinicians, researchers, and the general population may help dismantle stigma and negative stereotypes of autism, leading to higher self-esteem, lower rates of mental health concerns, better employment outcomes, and a greater sense of belonging for autistic people ([<reflink idref="bib28" id="ref67">28</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib37" id="ref68">37</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib48" id="ref69">48</reflink>]).</p> <p>In this sample, 61% of participants reported strengths in <emph>Cognitive & Executive Functioning</emph>, a domain highlighted in previous studies using parent-report ([<reflink idref="bib4" id="ref70">4</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib35" id="ref71">35</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib44" id="ref72">44</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib51" id="ref73">51</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib54" id="ref74">54</reflink>]), direct testing ([<reflink idref="bib4" id="ref75">4</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib9" id="ref76">9</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib24" id="ref77">24</reflink>]), and a recent qualitative synthesis of self-report studies ([<reflink idref="bib10" id="ref78">10</reflink>]). The high level of endorsement is notable, considering that many autistic individuals also exhibit and report challenges with executive functioning ([<reflink idref="bib16" id="ref79">16</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib47" id="ref80">47</reflink>]). Responses in this theme were more frequent among those with higher education levels; this may reflect that cognitive/executive functioning skills support success in higher education, or that individuals with higher education levels have more opportunities to develop these skills, or are more likely to recognize these strengths in themselves. Identification of careers that promote utilization of these cognitive skills (i.e. through mastery of complex tasks and contribution to various projects) may enhance self-efficacy. Overall, distinctive cognitive processing styles present in some autistic adults may contribute to success and well-being when appropriately supported ([<reflink idref="bib10" id="ref81">10</reflink>]).</p> <p>The second most reported theme was <emph>Character Strengths</emph> (55%). This aligns with a recent qualitative study of parent-reported strengths in adolescents and adults with autism and/or ID ([<reflink idref="bib54" id="ref82">54</reflink>]). Some subthemes from the current analysis can be mapped onto domains of character strengths from existing positive psychology frameworks. For example, goodwill, determination, and humor, appear to correspond to domains of Kindness, Persistence, and Humor measured by the VIA Inventory of Strengths (VIA-IS; [<reflink idref="bib38" id="ref83">38</reflink>]). Other characterological subthemes, such as patience, independence, and flexibility are not as clearly reflected in the VIA, or measures designed to capture strengths in people with developmental disabilities, such as the ASPeCT-DD ([<reflink idref="bib55" id="ref84">55</reflink>]). While the VIA-IS also includes domains such as Creativity and Social Intelligence that overlap with our Creative/Artistic and Interpersonal themes, the many subthemes in each of these domains suggest that existing instruments such as the VIA-IS may not provide a sufficiently nuanced picture of autistic character strengths and further support the necessity of developing new instruments.</p> <p>Indeed, that 52% of the sample reported strengths and achievements related to the <emph>Creative/Artistic</emph> domain warrants further research. Creative pursuits such as music and sculpting may be soothing to autistic adults with certain sensory preferences, and visual arts, creative writing, and song writing may serve as alternative methods for self-expression and communication, as is found in use of Photovoice methodology ([<reflink idref="bib18" id="ref85">18</reflink>]). In our sample, a higher proportion of young adults reported strengths in the Creative/Artistic domain compared with older adults, which reflects trends found in the general population, suggesting that creativity may decline with age ([<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref86">1</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib40" id="ref87">40</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib42" id="ref88">42</reflink>]). Fostering creative pursuits in autistic individuals of all ages may lead to more professional opportunities, social engagement, and enhanced sense of well-being.</p> <p>Our findings not only highlight the broad range of strengths that autistic adults view in themselves but also provide a starting point for a more nuanced understanding of diagnostic features of autism. For example, while difficulties in social communication and interaction are core to <emph>Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders</emph> (5th ed.; DSM-5; [<reflink idref="bib2" id="ref89">2</reflink>]) ASD criteria, 30% of the current sample reported interpersonal strengths and others reported strengths related to positive social interactions (e.g. Goodwill). This does not mean that these individuals do not also experience difficulties in social communication or have differences in how they interact with others. It does, however, remind us of the significance of asking about difficulties <emph>and</emph> strengths in these multifaceted domains. Several other subthemes (e.g. Organization, Focus and Concentration) may also reflect behaviors that might be clinically categorized as diagnostic criteria of Insistence on sameness or Highly restricted interests. Although autistic adults in our study did not specifically report focused interests as a strength, [<reflink idref="bib10" id="ref90">10</reflink>] noted how pursuit of focused interests can serve multifaceted adaptive functions for autistic adults, including facilitating personal development, enhancing satisfaction and well-being, managing stress, and creating opportunities for social connection. In addition, Sensory Acuity is likely directly related to the DSM-5 criterion referring to hyper- or hyporeactivity to sensory input. Close attention to whether sensory sensitivities are impeding daily life or also have positive functions is necessary to inform diagnostic decisions and support planning.</p> <p>While the <emph>Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders</emph> (DSM) assumes features of autism (and other conditions) are associated with impairment, clinicians and researchers should explore how those features may have benefit in some situations ([<reflink idref="bib10" id="ref91">10</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib17" id="ref92">17</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib31" id="ref93">31</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib34" id="ref94">34</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib41" id="ref95">41</reflink>]). Studies quantifying strengths and diagnostic features are needed to better understand whether these self-reported features represent idiosyncratic strengths in some autistic individuals (i.e. not necessarily related to autism) or whether they represent a different perspective on behaviors that are often viewed through a negative lens in the context of diagnostic evaluation. On one hand, these self-reported behaviors, skills, and traits may be dimensionally variant (i.e. one can be high or low; though see [<reflink idref="bib45" id="ref96">45</reflink>] for a discussion of how absence or excess can contribute to poor mental health). On the other hand, strengths may be more context-dependent (i.e. a strength in certain environments but presenting challenges in other situations). Consideration of dimensionality vs context dependency is important to ensure response options on a new instrument capture strengths that may overlap with diagnostic features during the assessment process. Careful measurement will be essential for describing how a person meets ASD diagnostic criteria and approaching diagnosis in a neurodiversity-affirming manner. Greater attention to nuances of these behaviors will also allow for a more wholistic understanding of the individual and contribute to a greater understanding of the heterogeneity represented in the autism spectrum.</p> <p>While autism has long been described as a "heterogeneous" condition, heterogeneity often refers to the range of difficulties and lack of difficulties in specific expected areas (i.e. relative strengths, such as verbal fluency or nondelayed walking; [<reflink idref="bib5" id="ref97">5</reflink>]). Strengths have been explored as a specific research interest, but sample characterization has focused primarily on deficits (i.e. percentage in a clinical range on a measure) or relative strengths (e.g. percent IQ > 70). We hope that themes emerging from these analyses, in conjunction with previous qualitative studies ([<reflink idref="bib10" id="ref98">10</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib41" id="ref99">41</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib54" id="ref100">54</reflink>]), will be used to inform development of new instruments to quantify strengths in autistic adults. Beyond sample description in research, such measures will also facilitate strengths-based approaches to assessment and support planning. Incorporating strengths-based measurement approaches encourages a more neutral and balanced understanding of the individual that can help identify <emph>both</emph> areas of growth and current strengths that can be leveraged in support planning. Receiving a first-time diagnosis of autism in adulthood may have a significant impact on identity and self-esteem ([<reflink idref="bib10" id="ref101">10</reflink>]). Fostering positive views of autism through integration of strengths assessment in the diagnostic process may facilitate positive identity development and increase well-being ([<reflink idref="bib10" id="ref102">10</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib22" id="ref103">22</reflink>]). In settings where assessments are being used to plan educational or employment supports, capturing strengths can be useful for gaining a broader perspective on the client to develop more effective support plans ([<reflink idref="bib12" id="ref104">12</reflink>]). Strengths-based intervention approaches may promote greater success in educational and employment settings, and improve overall well-being for autistic individuals ([<reflink idref="bib28" id="ref105">28</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib37" id="ref106">37</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib52" id="ref107">52</reflink>], [<reflink idref="bib53" id="ref108">53</reflink>]). Finally, by framing autism in a more balanced manner, we encourage positive community engagement, empower autistic people, and help to reduce stigma ([<reflink idref="bib20" id="ref109">20</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib37" id="ref110">37</reflink>]). While we do not want to overlook difficulties that autistic people experience, reducing stigma surrounding autism and reminding the broader community of the many strengths autistic people contribute to our society is a step toward dismantling biases and assumptions of what autistic people can or cannot achieve. This not only has implications for individual self-esteem and belonging, but may also foster development of supports and environments to help autistic adults thrive.</p> <p>The findings of this study should be considered in the context of several limitations. Qualitative coding was based on text-response questions, which does not allow for elaboration on responses or clarification on meaning. Future studies could consider having autistic adults reflect and provide feedback on the domains of strengths reported here. All individuals in this sample were independent adults; therefore, themes may not reflect strengths that autistic adults under guardianship or conservatorship would self-identify. Systematic exclusion of legally dependent adults may underestimate variability of strengths or overestimate the prevalence of themes in this population. While our study provides important initial information on self-reported strengths in autistic adults, future research should include dependent adults. In addition, while our sample demographics loosely represent the broader US population, the sample is not large enough to explore the intersectionality of types of characteristics. Larger studies are needed to consider how domains of strengths vary based on intersectional factors impacting identity and clinical presentation. This study is strengthened by the relatively large sample size for a qualitative study, greater inclusion of racial/ethnic minorities compared with previous studies, and representation of both adult-diagnosed and childhood-diagnosed individuals. Autistic members of the research team were actively involved in the study design, analysis, and interpretation. This inclusion strengthens the findings and helps reduce bias stemming from exclusively nonautistic research teams imposing interpretations of self-report data.</p> <hd id="AN0190387816-15">Conclusions</hd> <p>Attention to strengths provides important insights into the heterogeneity frequently observed in the autistic population. Results from this study suggest that autistic adults self-identify a broad range of strengths across cognitive, character, creative, and interpersonal domains. The overlap between strength domains and DSM-5 diagnostic criteria for autism suggest that more nuance is needed in how researchers and clinicians conceptualize autism, emphasizing both strengths and challenges. Themes identified in this study will be used to inform future measure development to systematically evaluate autistic strengths that will advance strengths-based assessment and person-centered supports.</p> <hd id="AN0190387816-16">Supplemental Material</hd> <p>Graph: Supplemental material, sj-docx-1-aut-10.1177_13623613251364361 for Self-reported strengths and talents of autistic adults by Linnea A Lampinen, Joseph Singer, Xinyue Wang, Benjamin VanHook, Ellen Wilkinson and Vanessa H Bal in Autism</p> <p>The authors are grateful to all of the individuals and families enrolled in SPARK, the SPARK clinical sites and SPARK staff. We appreciate obtaining access to demographic and phenotypic data on SFARI Base. Approved researchers can obtain the SPARK population dataset by applying at https://base.sfari.org. We gratefully acknowledge Elizabeth Dicker for her review and feedback on early drafts of the survey.</p> <ref id="AN0190387816-17"> <title> References </title> <blist> <bibl id="bib1" idref="ref49" type="bt">1</bibl> <bibtext> Alpaugh P. K., Parham I. A., Cole K. D., Birren J. E. (1982). Creativity in adulthood and old age: An exploratory study. Educational Gerontology, 8(2), 101–116. https://doi.org/10.1080/0380127820080202</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib2" idref="ref50" type="bt">2</bibl> <bibtext> American Psychiatric Association. (2013). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders (DSM-5) (21st ed.).</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib3" idref="ref51" type="bt">3</bibl> <bibtext> American Psychological Association. (n.d.). In APA dictionary of psychology. https://dictionary.apa.org/adulthood</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib4" idref="ref23" type="bt">4</bibl> <bibtext> Bal V. H., Wilkinson E., Fok M. (2022). Cognitive profiles of children with autism spectrum disorder with parent-reported extraordinary talents and personal strengths. Autism, 26(1), 62–74. https://doi.org/10.1177/13623613211020618</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib5" idref="ref97" type="bt">5</bibl> <bibtext> Bishop S. L., Farmer C., Bal V., Robinson E. B., Willsey A. J., Werling D. M., Havdahl K. A., Sanders S. J., Thurm A. (2017). Identification of developmental and behavioral markers associated with genetic abnormalities in autism spectrum disorder. American Journal of Psychiatry, 174(6), 576–585. https://doi.org/10.1176/appi.ajp.2017.16101115</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib6" idref="ref24" type="bt">6</bibl> <bibtext> Bölte S., Poustka F. (2004). Comparing the intelligence profiles of savant and nonsavant individuals with autistic disorder. Intelligence, 32(2), 121–131. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intell.2003.11.002</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib7" idref="ref33" type="bt">7</bibl> <bibtext> Carter E. W., Boehm T. L., Biggs E. E., Annandale N. H., Taylor C. E., Loock A. K., Liu R. Y. (2015). Known for my strengths: Positive traits of transition-age youth with intellectual disability and/or autism. Research and Practice for Persons with Severe Disabilities, 40(2), 101–119. https://doi.org/10.1177/1540796915592158</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib8" idref="ref34" type="bt">8</bibl> <bibtext> Carter E. W., Carlton M. E., Travers H. E. (2020). Seeing strengths: Young adults and their siblings with autism or intellectual disability. Journal of Applied Research in Intellectual Disabilities, 33(3), 574–583. https://doi.org/10.1111/jar.12701</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib9" idref="ref76" type="bt">9</bibl> <bibtext> Charman T., Jones C. R. G., Pickles A., Simonoff E., Baird G., Happé F. (2011). Defining the cognitive phenotype of autism. Brain Research, 1380, 10–21. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.brainres.2010.10.075</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Chow C., Cooper K. (2024). What are the lived experiences of strengths in autistic individuals? A systematic review and thematic synthesis. Autism in Adulthood. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1089/aut.2023.0172</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Colavita V. A., Luthra N., Perry A. (2014). Brief report: Strengths and challenges of children with a developmental disability: A qualitative analysis of parent perceptions. Journal on Developmental Disabilities, 20(3), 80.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Cosden M., Koegel L. K., Koegel R. L., Greenwell A., Klein E. (2006). Strength-based assessment for children with autism spectrum disorders. Research and Practice for Persons with Severe Disabilities, 31(2), 134–143. https://doi.org/10.1177/154079690603100206</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Cost K. T., Zaidman-Zait A., Mirenda P., Duku E., Zwaigenbaum L., Smith I. M., Ungar W. J., Kerns C., Bennett T., Szatmari P., Georgiades S., Waddell C., Elsabbagh M., Vaillancourt T. (2021). "Best things": Parents describe their children with autism spectrum disorder over time. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 51(12), 4560–4574. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10803-021-04890-4</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Curnow E., Utley I., Rutherford M., Johnston L., Maciver D. (2023). Diagnostic assessment of autism in adults—Current considerations in neurodevelopmentally informed professional learning with reference to ADOS-2. Frontiers in Psychiatry, 14, Article 1258204. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyt.2023.1258204</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Daniel E., Menashe I. (2020). Exploring the familial role of social responsiveness differences between savant and non-savant children with autism. Scientific Reports, 10(1), 2255. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-020-59209-7</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Demetriou E. A., Lampit A., Quintana D. S., Naismith S. L., Song Y. J. C., Pye J. E., Hickie I., Guastella A. J. (2018). Autism spectrum disorders: A meta-analysis of executive function. Molecular Psychiatry, 23(5), 1198–1204. https://doi.org/10.1038/mp.2017.75</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> DePape A.-M., Lindsay S. (2016). Lived experiences from the perspective of individuals with autism spectrum disorder: A qualitative meta-synthesis. Focus on Autism and Other Developmental Disabilities, 31(1), 60–71. https://doi.org/10.1177/1088357615587504</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Do P. L., Frawley P., Goldingay S., O'Shea A. (2021). The use of photovoice in research with people on the autism spectrum: A meta-synthesis of the literature. Research in Autism Spectrum Disorders, 87, 101828. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rasd.2021.101828</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Elo S., Kyngäs H. (2008). The qualitative content analysis process. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 62(1), 107–115. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2648.2007.04569.x</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Ferreira G. J., Getten J., Pesonen H. (2024). Strengths-based approaches to autism language and communications research: Where are we? Review Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 1–8. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40489-024-00455-0</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Fombonne E., Green Snyder L., Daniels A., Feliciano P., Chung W., Abbeduto L., Aberbach G., Acampado J., Ace A. J., Albright C., Alessandri M., Amaral D. G., Amatya A., Anglo C., Annett R. D., Arriaga I., Ashley R., Astrovskaya I., Baalman K.. The SPARK Consortium. (2020). Psychiatric and medical profiles of autistic adults in the SPARK cohort. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 50(10), 3679–3698. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10803-020-04414-6</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Gray S. M., McMorris C. A., Mudry T. E., McCrimmon A. W. (2024). An exploration of diagnostic identity for autistic individuals: A systematic review of existing literature. Research in Autism Spectrum Disorders, 114, 102394. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rasd.2024.102394</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Hartman D., O'Donnell-Killen T., Doyle J. K., Kavanagh D. M., Day D. A., Azevedo D. J. (2023). The adult autism assessment handbook: A neurodiversity affirmative approach. Jessica Kingsley Publishers.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Howlin P., Goode S., Hutton J., Rutter M. (2009). Savant skills in autism: Psychometric approaches and parental reports. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 364(1522), 1359–1367. https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2008.0328</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Huang Y., Arnold S., Foley K.-R., Trollor J. N. (2020). Diagnosis of autism in adulthood: A scoping review. Autism, 24(6), 1311–1327. https://doi.org/10.1177/1362361320903128</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Hughes J. E. A., Ward J., Gruffydd E., Baron-Cohen S., Smith P., Allison C., Simner J. (2018). Savant syndrome has a distinct psychological profile in autism. Molecular Autism, 9(1), 53. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13229-018-0237-1</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Jadav N., Bal V. H. (2022). Associations between co-occurring conditions and age of autism diagnosis: Implications for mental health training and adult autism research. Autism Research, 15(11), 2112–2125. https://doi.org/10.1002/aur.2808</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Johnson K. R. (2022). Using a strengths–based approach to improve employment opportunities for individuals with autism spectrum disorder. New Horizons in Adult Education and Human Resource Development, 34(1), 16–25. https://doi.org/10.1002/nha3.20321</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Jones L., Goddard L., Hill E. L., Henry L. A., Crane L. (2014). Experiences of receiving a diagnosis of autism spectrum disorder: A survey of adults in the United Kingdom. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 44(12), 3033–3044. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10803-014-2161-3</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Kanner L. (1943). Autistic disturbances of affective contact. Nervous Child, 2, 217–250.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Kapp S. K., Steward R., Crane L., Elliott D., Elphick C., Pellicano E., Russell G. (2019). "People should be allowed to do what they like": Autistic adults' views and experiences of stimming. Autism, 23(7), 1782–1792. https://doi.org/10.1177/1362361319829628</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Kirchner J., Ruch W., Dziobek I. (2016). Brief report: Character strengths in adults with autism spectrum disorder without intellectual impairment. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 46(10), 3330–3337. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10803-016-2865-7</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Lai M.-C., Baron-Cohen S. (2015). Identifying the lost generation of adults with autism spectrum conditions. The Lancet Psychiatry, 2(11), 1013–1027. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2215-0366(15)00277-1</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Lee H., Jadav N., Wilkinson E., Bal V. H. (2024). Benefit or problem: Exploration of how response options affect self-reported behaviors and interests in autistic adults. Healthcare, 12(9), Article 9. https://doi.org/10.3390/healthcare12090911</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Meilleur A.-A. S., Jelenic P., Mottron L. (2015). Prevalence of clinically and empirically defined talents and strengths in autism. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 45(5), 1354–1367. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10803-014-2296-2</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Miller L. K. (1999). The savant syndrome: Intellectual impairment and exceptional skill. Psychological Bulletin, 125(1), 31–46. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.125.1.31</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Murthi K., Chen Y.-L., Shore S., Patten K. (2023). Strengths-based practice to enhance mental health for autistic people: A scoping review. The American Journal of Occupational Therapy, 77(2), 7702185060. https://doi.org/10.5014/ajot.2023.050074</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Peterson C., Seligman M. E. P. (2004). Character strengths and virtues: A handbook and classification. American Psychological Association.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Rose D. (2000). Universal design for learning. Journal of Special Education Technology, 15(4), 47–51. https://doi.org/10.1177/016264340001500407</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Roskos-Ewoldsen B., Black S. R., Mccown S. M. (2008). Age-related changes in creative thinking. The Journal of Creative Behavior, 42(1), 33–59. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2162-6057.2008.tb01079.x</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Russell G., Kapp S. K., Elliott D., Elphick C., Gwernan-Jones R., Owens C. (2019). Mapping the autistic advantage from the accounts of adults diagnosed with autism: A qualitative study. Autism in Adulthood, 1(2), 124–133. https://doi.org/10.1089/aut.2018.0035</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Ruth J.-E., Birren J. E. (1985). Creativity in adulthood and old age: Relations to intelligence, sex and mode of testing. International Journal of Behavioral Development, 8(1), 99–109. https://doi.org/10.1177/016502548500800107</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Rutter M., Le Couteur A., Lord C. (2003). Autism diagnostic interview-revised. Western Psychological Services.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Sabapathy T., Madduri N., Deavenport-Saman A., Zamora I., Schrager S. M., Vanderbilt D. L. (2017). Parent-reported strengths in children with autism spectrum disorders at the time of an interdisciplinary diagnostic evaluation. Journal of Developmental & Behavioral Pediatrics, 38(3), 181. https://doi.org/10.1097/DBP.0000000000000423</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Seligman M. E. P. (2015). Chris Peterson's unfinished masterwork: The real mental illnesses. The Journal of Positive Psychology, 10(1), 3–6. https://doi.org/10.1080/17439760.2014.888582</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> SPARK Consortium. (2018). SPARK: A US cohort of 50,000 families to accelerate autism research. Neuron, 97(3), 488–493. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuron.2018.01.015</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> St John T., Woods S., Bode T., Ritter C., Estes A. (2022). A review of executive functioning challenges and strengths in autistic adults. The Clinical Neuropsychologist, 36(5), 1116–1147. https://doi.org/10.1080/13854046.2021.1971767</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Taylor E. C., Livingston L. A., Clutterbuck R. A., Callan M. J., Shah P. (2023). Psychological strengths and well-being: Strengths use predicts quality of life, well-being and mental health in autism. Autism, 27(6), 1826–1839. https://doi.org/10.1177/13623613221146440</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Teti M., Cheak-Zamora N., Lolli B., Maurer-Batjer A. (2016). Reframing autism: Young adults with autism share their strengths through photo-stories. Journal of Pediatric Nursing, 31(6), 619–629. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pedn.2016.07.002</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Treffert D. A. (2009). The savant syndrome: An extraordinary condition. A synopsis: Past, present, future. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 364(1522), 1351–1357. https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2008.0326</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Warren N., Eatchel B., Kirby A. V., Diener M., Wright C., D'Astous V. (2021). Parent-identified strengths of autistic youth. Autism, 25(1), 79–89. https://doi.org/10.1177/1362361320945556</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> White J., McGarry S., Falkmer M., Scott M., Williams P. J., Black M. H. (2023). Creating inclusive schools for autistic students: A scoping review on elements contributing to strengths-based approaches. Education Sciences, 13(7), Article 7. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci13070709</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> White J., Williams P. J., McGarry S., Black M. H. (2025). "Let them show what they can do": Parents' views on strengths-based approaches for autistic high school students. Educational Review, 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1080/00131911.2025.2485448</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Wilkinson E., Vo L. T. V., London Z., Wilson S., Bal V. H. (2022). Parent-reported strengths and positive qualities of adolescents and adults with autism spectrum disorder and/or intellectual disability. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 52(12), 5471–5482. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10803-021-05405-x</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Woodard C. (2009). Psychometric properties of the ASPeCT-DD: Measuring positive traits in persons with developmental disabilities. Journal of Applied Research in Intellectual Disabilities, 22(5), 433–444. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-3148.2009.00494.x</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Woods S. E. O., Brook A., Angoff L. (2025). Principles of neurodiversity-affirming collaborative assessment. Neurodiversity, 3, 27546330251342069. https://doi.org/10.1177/27546330251342069</bibtext> </blist> </ref> <ref id="AN0190387816-18"> <title> Footnotes </title> <blist> <bibtext> Linnea A Lampinen</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext>Graph</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4379-5782 Vanessa H Bal</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext>Graph https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0750-823X</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> This study was approved by the Rutgers Institutional Review Board (approval Pro2023001546) on September 6, 2023.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Written consent was obtained from all participants.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Not applicable.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Linnea A Lampinen: Formal analysis; Methodology; Project administration; Writing—original draft; Writing—review & editing.Joseph Singer: Formal analysis; Writing—review & editing.Xinyue Wang: Formal analysis; Writing—review & editing.Benjamin VanHook: Formal analysis; Writing—review & editing.Ellen Wilkinson: Methodology; Project administration; Writing—review & editing.Vanessa H Bal: Conceptualization; Formal analysis; Funding acquisition; Investigation; Methodology; Supervision; Writing—review & editing.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> The author(s) disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: This project was funded by a gift from the Emergent Ventures program through Mercatus Center, George Mason University.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Data from this study are not publicly available, but may be available upon request. Please contact the corresponding author with any questions regarding the data.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Supplemental material for this article is available online.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Given the negative historical connotation of the term "savant skills," we have chosen to use the terminology "extraordinary talents," in keeping with other recent studies in this area ([4]).</bibtext> </blist> </ref> <aug> <p>By Linnea A Lampinen; Joseph Singer; Xinyue Wang; Benjamin VanHook; Ellen Wilkinson and Vanessa H Bal</p> <p>Reported by Author; Author; Author; Author; Author; Author</p> </aug> <nolink nlid="nl1" bibid="bib25" firstref="ref1"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl2" bibid="bib33" firstref="ref2"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl3" bibid="bib29" firstref="ref3"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl4" bibid="bib14" firstref="ref4"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl5" bibid="bib23" firstref="ref5"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl6" bibid="bib56" firstref="ref6"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl7" bibid="bib10" firstref="ref7"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl8" bibid="bib22" firstref="ref8"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl9" bibid="bib17" firstref="ref9"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl10" bibid="bib31" firstref="ref10"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl11" bibid="bib34" firstref="ref11"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl12" bibid="bib41" firstref="ref12"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl13" bibid="bib28" firstref="ref14"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl14" bibid="bib37" firstref="ref15"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl15" bibid="bib52" firstref="ref16"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl16" bibid="bib53" firstref="ref17"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl17" bibid="bib30" firstref="ref19"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl18" bibid="bib36" firstref="ref20"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl19" bibid="bib50" firstref="ref21"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl20" bibid="bib43" firstref="ref22"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl21" bibid="bib15" firstref="ref25"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl22" bibid="bib35" firstref="ref27"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl23" bibid="bib44" firstref="ref28"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl24" bibid="bib11" firstref="ref29"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl25" bibid="bib13" firstref="ref30"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl26" bibid="bib51" firstref="ref31"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl27" bibid="bib24" firstref="ref35"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl28" bibid="bib54" firstref="ref36"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl29" bibid="bib55" firstref="ref38"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl30" bibid="bib26" firstref="ref42"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl31" bibid="bib32" firstref="ref43"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl32" bibid="bib49" firstref="ref46"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl33" bibid="bib46" firstref="ref48"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl34" bibid="bib21" firstref="ref54"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl35" bibid="bib27" firstref="ref55"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl36" bibid="bib19" firstref="ref56"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl37" bibid="bib39" firstref="ref66"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl38" bibid="bib48" firstref="ref69"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl39" bibid="bib16" firstref="ref79"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl40" bibid="bib47" firstref="ref80"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl41" bibid="bib38" firstref="ref83"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl42" bibid="bib18" firstref="ref85"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl43" bibid="bib40" firstref="ref87"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl44" bibid="bib42" firstref="ref88"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl45" bibid="bib45" firstref="ref96"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl46" bibid="bib12" firstref="ref104"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl47" bibid="bib20" firstref="ref109"></nolink>
Header DbId: eric
DbLabel: ERIC
An: EJ1493954
AccessLevel: 3
PubType: Academic Journal
PubTypeId: academicJournal
PreciseRelevancyScore: 0
IllustrationInfo
Items – Name: Title
  Label: Title
  Group: Ti
  Data: Self-Reported Strengths and Talents of Autistic Adults
– Name: Language
  Label: Language
  Group: Lang
  Data: English
– Name: Author
  Label: Authors
  Group: Au
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Linnea+A%2E+Lampinen%22">Linnea A. Lampinen</searchLink> (ORCID <externalLink term="https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4379-5782">0000-0003-4379-5782</externalLink>)<br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Joseph+Singer%22">Joseph Singer</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Xinyue+Wang%22">Xinyue Wang</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Benjamin+VanHook%22">Benjamin VanHook</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Ellen+Wilkinson%22">Ellen Wilkinson</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Vanessa+H%2E+Bal%22">Vanessa H. Bal</searchLink> (ORCID <externalLink term="https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0750-823X">0000-0003-0750-823X</externalLink>)
– Name: TitleSource
  Label: Source
  Group: Src
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="SO" term="%22Autism%3A+The+International+Journal+of+Research+and+Practice%22"><i>Autism: The International Journal of Research and Practice</i></searchLink>. 2026 30(1):37-48.
– Name: Avail
  Label: Availability
  Group: Avail
  Data: SAGE Publications. 2455 Teller Road, Thousand Oaks, CA 91320. Tel: 800-818-7243; Tel: 805-499-9774; Fax: 800-583-2665; e-mail: journals@sagepub.com; Web site: https://sagepub.com
– Name: PeerReviewed
  Label: Peer Reviewed
  Group: SrcInfo
  Data: Y
– Name: Pages
  Label: Page Count
  Group: Src
  Data: 12
– Name: DatePubCY
  Label: Publication Date
  Group: Date
  Data: 2026
– 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+Spectrum+Disorders%22">Autism Spectrum Disorders</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Adults%22">Adults</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Gender+Differences%22">Gender Differences</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Age+Differences%22">Age Differences</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Educational+Attainment%22">Educational Attainment</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Clinical+Diagnosis%22">Clinical Diagnosis</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Symptoms+%28Individual+Disorders%29%22">Symptoms (Individual Disorders)</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Ability%22">Ability</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Talent%22">Talent</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Self+Concept%22">Self Concept</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Executive+Function%22">Executive Function</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Cognitive+Ability%22">Cognitive Ability</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Personality+Traits%22">Personality Traits</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Creativity%22">Creativity</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Academic+Ability%22">Academic Ability</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Interpersonal+Competence%22">Interpersonal Competence</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Individual+Characteristics%22">Individual Characteristics</searchLink>
– Name: DOI
  Label: DOI
  Group: ID
  Data: 10.1177/13623613251364361
– Name: ISSN
  Label: ISSN
  Group: ISSN
  Data: 1362-3613<br />1461-7005
– Name: Abstract
  Label: Abstract
  Group: Ab
  Data: Many adults express dissatisfaction with the autism diagnostic process, and concerns have been cited regarding the lack of neurodiversity-affirming assessment methods. In part, this is due to instruments framing behaviors as symptoms causing impairment, overlooking potential benefits. Systematically measuring strengths and talents during assessment may inform diagnosis and support planning in a more neurodiversity-affirming manner. Historically, research has relied on caregiver-reported strengths; more information on self-reported strengths is needed to inform self-report instrument development and assessment practices. Participants included 127 legally independent autistic adults recruited primarily through SPARK Research Match, who completed open-ended questions regarding strengths and talents. Qualitative content analysis identified themes of strengths, and associations between strengths and gender, age, age of diagnosis, and education level were examined. Autistic and nonautistic team members collaborated on qualitative coding, data interpretation, and manuscript writing. Themes emerging from the qualitative responses included Cognitive/Executive Functioning (61%), Character Strengths (55%), Creative/Artistic (52%), Academic (33%), and Interpersonal (30%). Overlap between strength domains and Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (5th ed.) autism diagnostic criteria suggest that more nuance is needed in how we conceptualize autism, considering both strengths and challenges. Domains of strengths identified in this study can be used to inform measure development and strengths-based assessment and support planning.
– Name: AbstractInfo
  Label: Abstractor
  Group: Ab
  Data: As Provided
– Name: DateEntry
  Label: Entry Date
  Group: Date
  Data: 2026
– Name: AN
  Label: Accession Number
  Group: ID
  Data: EJ1493954
PLink https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&site=eds-live&db=eric&AN=EJ1493954
RecordInfo BibRecord:
  BibEntity:
    Identifiers:
      – Type: doi
        Value: 10.1177/13623613251364361
    Languages:
      – Text: English
    PhysicalDescription:
      Pagination:
        PageCount: 12
        StartPage: 37
    Subjects:
      – SubjectFull: Autism Spectrum Disorders
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Adults
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Gender Differences
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Age Differences
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Educational Attainment
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Clinical Diagnosis
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Symptoms (Individual Disorders)
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Ability
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Talent
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Self Concept
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Executive Function
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Cognitive Ability
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Personality Traits
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Creativity
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Academic Ability
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Interpersonal Competence
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Individual Characteristics
        Type: general
    Titles:
      – TitleFull: Self-Reported Strengths and Talents of Autistic Adults
        Type: main
  BibRelationships:
    HasContributorRelationships:
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Linnea A. Lampinen
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Joseph Singer
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Xinyue Wang
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Benjamin VanHook
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Ellen Wilkinson
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Vanessa H. Bal
    IsPartOfRelationships:
      – BibEntity:
          Dates:
            – D: 01
              M: 01
              Type: published
              Y: 2026
          Identifiers:
            – Type: issn-print
              Value: 1362-3613
            – Type: issn-electronic
              Value: 1461-7005
          Numbering:
            – Type: volume
              Value: 30
            – Type: issue
              Value: 1
          Titles:
            – TitleFull: Autism: The International Journal of Research and Practice
              Type: main
ResultId 1