University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Communication apprehension among autistic employees

(USC Thesis Other)

Communication apprehension among autistic employees

PDF

Download a page range

Download transcript

Copy asset link

Request this asset

Transcript (if available)

Content

Communication Apprehension Among Autistic Employees
by
Peter Wilson Cardon

Rossier School of Education
University of Southern California
A dissertation submitted to the faculty
in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of
Doctor of Education

August 2022

© Copyright by Peter Wilson Cardon 2022
All Rights Reserved

The Committee for Peter Wilson Cardon certifies the approval of this Dissertation

Alison Keller Muraszewski
Ekaterina Moore
Paula M. Carbone, Committee Chair

Rossier School of Education
University of Southern California
2022

iv
Abstract
Prior research has shown that stress and anxiety are commonly experienced by many autistic
adults in social-communication situations in their personal and professional lives. Yet, little
research exists to demonstrate the extent and nature of communication apprehension in the
workplace among autistic professionals. So, this study first focused on understanding the extent
and nature of communication apprehension among autistic professionals in the workplace. This
study also explored the professional environment in which autistic professionals can experience
less communication apprehension. A survey of 324 autistic professionals and in-depth interviews
with 11 autistic professionals were conducted. The survey showed that autistic professionals
experience high communication apprehension, particularly in comparison to the general
population. As communication situations become less predictable, autistic professionals tended
to disproportionately experience higher communication apprehension. The interviews showed
that a favorable professional environment—composed of support, cadence, and resilience—
fosters growth in communication confidence. Based on the study findings, recommendations for
practice are provided that focus on what managers can do, what educators can do, and what can
be done to build resiliency. This study took a step in establishing the nature and extent of
communication apprehension among autistic professionals. It also provided findings about how
to build a favorable professional environment for autistic professionals.

v
Acknowledgements
Working on this dissertation genuinely changed many of my life perspectives. First and
foremost, I want to thank the hundreds of autistic individuals who participated in this study. I
admire their courage and determination to make this world a better place.
I want to express my deep appreciation to my dissertation committee led by Dr. Paula
Carbone. Paula has consistently been an advocate for this important work to recognize and
support autistic individuals. She has offered many ideas to improve and strengthen this project. I
also thank Dr. Ekaterina Moore and Dr. Alison Keller Muraszewski for serving on the committee
and supporting the project. Each inspired me in the classes I took from them.
The most gratifying part of the doctoral program was spending Saturday mornings for
two and a half years with our cohort of doctoral students. Affectionately called the “Saturday
Breakfast Club,” this group of accomplished individuals has consistently inspired me with the
amazing projects and causes they work on. They listened in and cheered me on for my project for
over two years. I hope we continue to work on many endeavors together.
Finally, my family has supported me throughout the doctoral program. I appreciate and
love each of them.

vi
Table of Contents
Abstract .................................................................................................................................... iv
Acknowledgements .....................................................................................................................v
List of Tables .......................................................................................................................... viii
List of Figures ........................................................................................................................... ix
Chapter One: Overview of the Study ...........................................................................................1
Context and Background of the Problem ..........................................................................1
Purpose of the Project and Research Questions ................................................................2
Importance of the Study ...................................................................................................3
Overview of Theoretical Framework and Methodology ...................................................4
Definitions .......................................................................................................................5
Organization of the Dissertation ......................................................................................7
Chapter Two: Review of the Literature........................................................................................9
Diagnosis of and Prevalence of Autism .......................................................................... 10
The Autism Experience Among Adults .......................................................................... 10
The Professional Journey for Autistic Individuals .......................................................... 14
Conceptual Framework .................................................................................................. 32
Conclusion .................................................................................................................... 35
Chapter Three: Methodology ..................................................................................................... 37
Research Questions ....................................................................................................... 37
Overview of Design ....................................................................................................... 38
The Researcher .............................................................................................................. 47
Validity and Reliability .................................................................................................. 48
Ethics ............................................................................................................................ 48

vii
Chapter Four: Findings.............................................................................................................. 50
Results for Research Question 1 .................................................................................... 50
Results for Research Question 2 .................................................................................... 67
Results for Research Question 3 .................................................................................... 68
Conclusion .................................................................................................................... 88
Chapter Five: Discussion and Recommendations ...................................................................... 89
Discussion of Study Findings......................................................................................... 89
Recommendations for Practice....................................................................................... 97
Limitations and Delimitations ...................................................................................... 105
Recommendations for Future Research ........................................................................ 106
Conclusion .................................................................................................................. 108
References .............................................................................................................................. 110
Appendix A: Survey Questions ............................................................................................... 134
Appendix B: Interview Questions ............................................................................................ 139
Appendix C: Coding and Code Descriptions for Survey Items ................................................. 142
Appendix D: Coding and Code Descriptions for Interviews ..................................................... 155

viii
List of Tables
Table 1: Autism and Comorbidities 12
Table 2: Strengths Frequently Associated with Autistic Professionals 27
Table 3: Background of Survey Participants 40
Table 4: Background of Interview Participants 42
Table 5: Personal Report of Communication Apprehension (PRCA-24)
Survey Items

51
Table 6: PRCA-24 Average Scores 53
Table 7: Coding and Results for Uncomfortable Communication Situations at
Work

56
Table 8: Coding and Results for Comfortable Communication Situations at
Work

62
Table 9: Regressions on Communication Apprehension Levels among
Autistic Professionals

68
Table 10: PRCA-24 Average Scores Among Autistic Professionals and the
General Population

90
Appendix A: Survey Questions 134
Appendix B: Interview Questions 138
Table C1: Coding, Code Descriptions, Examples, and Results for
Uncomfortable Communication Situations at Work

142
Table C2: Coding, Code Descriptions, Examples, and Results for Comfortable
Communication Situations at Work

149
Appendix D: Coding and Code Descriptions for Interviews 155

ix
List of Figures
Figure 1: Conceptual Framework 35
Figure 2: Communication Apprehension Among Autistic Professionals 54
Figure 3: Communication Apprehension: Autistic Professionals Versus National
Averages

91
Figure 4: A Model for Building Communication Confidence Among Autistic
Professionals
96

1

Chapter One: Overview of the Study
The workplace was built and designed for neurotypical employees, those who do not
have autism. As a result, the workplace presents many challenges and obstacles for autistic
professionals (Austin & Pisano, 2017). Despite aspirations for satisfying careers (Anderson et al.,
2021; Ashbaugh, 2017; Baldwin & Costley, 2015), most individuals with autism tend to be
unemployed or underemployed (Black et al., 2019; Burgess & Cimera, 2014; Bury et al., 2020;
Chen et al., 2015). Many researchers suggest the primary barriers to successful employment for
these individuals are social challenges (Black et al., 2019; Bury et al., 2021; Chen et al., 2015;
Hayward et al., 2019; Krzeminska & Hawse, 2020; Lorenz et al., 2017; Morris et al., 2015;
Richards, 2012). Individuals with autism experience a high degree of social isolation, lack of
social support, and social anxiety in the in the workplace (Annabi et al., 2017; Annabi & Locke,
2019; Baldwin et al., 2014; Black et al., 2019; Bury et al., 2021; Johnson & Joshi, 2016; Lindsay
et al., 2021). As a result, many autistic professionals report communication apprehension, the
“fear or anxiety associated with either real or anticipated communication with another person or
persons” (McCroskey, 2001, p. 40), in the workplace (Baldwin et al., 2014; Lindsay et al., 2021).
This study addresses the nature and extent of communication apprehension among autistic
professionals. It also explores the professional environment in which social self-efficacy can
grow.
Context and Background of the Problem
This study focuses on communication apprehension (CA) for several reasons. Research
consistently shows that autistic individuals experience stress and anxiety in communication
situations, including in the workplace (Ekman & Hiltunen, 2015; Kiep et al., 2015; Morris et al.,
2015; Spain et al., 2017). Yet, less is known about the extent of communication apprehension
2

experienced by autistic professionals and the situations that bring the most stress and anxiety.
Further, little is known about sources of social self-efficacy and the professional environment
that may reduce communication apprehension.
This research focuses on autistic professionals without intellectual disabilities in a range
of industries. Some case studies about autistic professionals have specifically focused on
individuals with above-average intelligence and highly technical skills, with an emphasis on
several traits that are considered common among people with autism: pattern recognition, spatial
thinking, and the intense focus of many of these professionals (e.g., Annabi et al., 2017; Annabi
& Locke, 2019; Austin et al., 2017; Austin & Pisano, 2017; Morris et al., 2015; Rizvi et al.,
2021). Yet, other studies indicate that those with autism vary significantly in intellectual abilities,
vary significantly in professional interests, and bring strengths to the workplace in a variety of
settings (Baldwin et al., 2014; Whelpley et al., 2021). Also, most research about autistic
professionals lacks the authentic voice of those professionals (Rosqvist, 2019). This research
highlights the experiences of autistic professionals across many professional interests in many
industries.
Purpose of the Project and Research Questions
The purposes of this study are to (a) understand the level of communication apprehension
experienced by autistic professionals in various professional situations; (b) identify factors
associated with various levels of communication apprehension; and (c) provide more in-depth
understanding of how autistic professionals perceive communication apprehension through a
social self-efficacy framework that is supported by a favorable professional environment. By
understanding the nature of communication apprehension among autistic professionals, the
findings of this research may help autistic and non-autistic professionals work together to create
3

more inclusive work environments for autistic professionals. They may also help autistic
professionals navigate professional life in neurotypical work environments with more
confidence, satisfaction, and empowerment. Leaders and managers may benefit from this
research as they explore how to support autistic employees and oversee neurodiversity programs
and neurodiversity employee resource groups. Specifically, this study poses the following
research questions:
1. To what extent do autistic professionals experience communication apprehension in a
variety of communication situations at work?
2. What factors (i.e., work experience and comorbidities) are associated with various
levels of communication apprehension among autistic professionals?
3. How do autistic professionals perceive the influence of their professional
environment on their communication apprehension and social self-efficacy?
Importance of the Study
Despite growing awareness and knowledge of autism in the workplace, overall
underemployment and underemployment levels for autistic people have not changed
significantly in several decades. Further, unemployment among people with autism remains
higher than all other disability groups (Chen, Leader, et al., 2015; Chen, Sung, et al., 2015). In
the past 5 to 10 years, more companies have created neurodiversity programs to increase access
and inclusion for autistic people. Yet, these important programs remain relatively uncommon and
impact a small percentage of autistic professionals (Austin et al., 2017; Austin & Pisano, 2017;
Morris et al., 2015).
Many scholars suggest the primary obstacles to successful employment and work
satisfaction for autistic professionals are social in nature – managing communication situations
4

and workplace relationships (Black et al., 2019; Bury et al., 2021; Chen, Leader, et al., 2015;
Hayward et al., 2019; Krzeminska & Hawse, 2020; Lorenz et al., 2017; Morris et al., 2015;
Richards, 2012). Yet, little is known about these social challenges from the perspectives of
autistic professionals (Rosqvist, 2019). Many of these social challenges create significant stress
and anxiety for autistic professionals. Hayward et al. (2019) recently conducted among the most
extensive (in terms of sample size) studies of autistic professionals in the workplace. They
suggest that autistic professionals frequently experience stress and isolation in the workplace.
Further, they found that most autistic professionals desire positive social interaction but often
avoid social interaction out of fear it will not go well. So, this study highlights the nature of
communication apprehension among autistic professionals at work and factors associated with
various levels of communication apprehension. It adds to the academic literature on this topic
and provide useful content for neurodiversity training and awareness.
Overview of Theoretical Framework and Methodology
This study addresses how professionals with autism experience communication
apprehension in the workplace. This research aligns with prior work of communication
apprehension that has focused on four types of communication situations in the workplace:
public speaking, group discussions, meetings, and interpersonal interactions (Marcel, 2019;
McCroskey et al., 1985). It also allows participants to provide other workplace scenarios that are
potential drivers of communication apprehension.
To explore factors that are associated with various levels of communication
apprehension, this study relies on a social self-efficacy framework. Building on Bandura’s
(Bandura et al., 1977, 1999) work about self-efficacy theory, Anderson and Betz (2001)
categorized four sources of social self-efficacy expectations: past performance, vicarious
5

learning, emotional arousal, and social persuasion. Past performance involves how successful
people have been in making and keeping friends in the past. It involves perceptions of one’s own
social skills. Vicarious learning involves the degree to which members of one’s social circle
have strong social skills. Emotional arousal involves the comfort or anxiety that people
experience in social situations. Social persuasion relates to what others say about one’s social
skills. Further, this study adopts the premise that social self-efficacy requires a favorable
professional environment to grow (Annabi et al., 2017; Annabi & Locke, 2019; Rizvi et al.,
2021).
This study adopts a mixed methods approach that first involves a survey followed by
interviews. The survey contains an established instrument for communication apprehension (i.e.,
PRCA-24) as well as open-ended qualitative items. It broadly establishes how much
communication apprehension autistic professionals experience in the workplace. The follow-up
qualitative interviews allow a deeper and more nuanced understanding of the perceived sources
of communication apprehension through a social self-efficacy perspective. One goal of the
interviews is to understand the degree to which the professional environment creates favorable
conditions for growth in social self-efficacy. Overall, the study is intended to reside in a
strengths-based view of autism.
Definitions
Autism
Autism, referred to as autism spectrum disorder (ASD) for diagnosis, refers to a
“neurodevelopment disorder that is characterized by difficulties with social communication and
social interaction and restricted and repetitive patterns in behaviors, interests, and activities. By
definition, the symptoms are present early on in development and affect daily functioning. The
6

term ‘spectrum’ is used because of the heterogeneity in the presentation and severity of ASD
symptoms, as well as in the skills and level of functioning of individuals who have ASD.”
(American Psychological Association, n.d.)
The American Psychiatric Association (2013) states ASD is diagnosed with persistent
deficits in three areas of social communication and interaction and at least two of four types of
restricted, repetitive behaviors. The three areas of social communication and interaction are the
following: (a) deficits in social-emotional reciprocity; (b) deficits in nonverbal communicative
behaviors used for social interaction, and (c) deficits in developing, maintaining, and understand
relationships. The types of restricted, repetitive behaviors include the following: (a) stereotyped
or repetitive motor movements, use of objects, or speech; (b) insistence on sameness, inflexible
adherence to routines, or ritualized patterns of verbal or nonverbal behavior; (c) highly restricted,
fixated interests that are abnormal in intensity or focus; and (d) hyper- or hyporeactivity to
sensory input or unusual interest in sensory aspects of the environment.
Throughout this research, the terms autistic and autism are generally used rather than
autism spectrum disorder or ASD. While definitions and diagnoses of autism are officially
referred to as ASD, most autistic individuals prefer the use of other terms (Kenney et al., 2016).
Autistic
Autistic is an adjective to describe those with autism. Terms such as autistic
professionals or autistic individuals are used throughout the dissertation out of respect of the
majority wishes of those with autism. One recent study of practitioners, parents of autistic
people, and autistic people showed that parents and practitioners preferred the term people with
autism, whereas those with autism preferred to be called autistic people (Kenny et al., 2016).

7

Neurodiversity
Neurodiversity refers to natural neurological differences and focuses on people with
autism, dyslexia, dyspraxia, attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, and other neurological
conditions. The primary focus of most neurodiversity efforts in organizations have been on
autism (Austin & Pisano, 2017; Ortiz, 2020).
Neurotypical
Neurotypical refers to people who do not display conditions such as autism, dyslexia,
dyspraxia, and attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (Austin & Pisano, 2017; Ortiz, 2020).
Communication Apprehension
Communication apprehension is the “fear or anxiety associated with either real or
anticipated communication with another person or persons” (McCroskey, 2001, p. 40).
Social Self-efficacy
Social self-efficacy is “confidence in one’s ability to engage in the social interactional
tasks necessary to initiate and maintain interpersonal relationships in social life and career
activities” (Anderson & Betz, 2001, p. 98).
Organization of the Dissertation
This dissertation provides chapters for an introduction, literature review, the
methodology, the findings, and recommendations. Chapter 1 provides a brief introduction and
overview of the study. Chapter 2 is the literature review and presents prior research about autism
in the workplace and provides a theoretical framework for the study. It also includes a brief
history of research about autism outside of the workplace because autistic individuals enter the
workplace with a lifetime of experiences that influence their professional lives. Chapter 3
describes the methodology and provides the rationale for a survey and follow-up interviews.
8

Chapter 4 presents the findings of the study by providing survey and interview results. Finally,
Chapter 5 presents a discussion of findings and recommendations for future research and
applications in professional settings.

9

Chapter Two: Review of the Literature
This chapter reviews research about autistic adults and their experiences in the
workplace. It begins with the diagnosis and prevalence of autism. Next, it describes research
about the experiences of autistic adults, with sections on life satisfaction and comorbidities; and
social goals, experiences, and challenges in personal lives. Then, it discusses research that
directly addresses the employment journey for autistic individuals, with sections on employment
outcomes; professional hopes and aspirations; transition experiences into employment; sources
of stress and anxiety in the professional journey; support for autistic professionals in the
workplace; and the autism advantage versus the deficit view of autism. The chapter concludes
with a theoretical framework for this study. The theoretical framework describes the nature of
communication apprehension and ties it to a broader discussion of social self-efficacy and the
professional environment.
Several key themes emerge from the research about autistic adults that are important to
this study. First, many and perhaps most autistic adults feel socially isolated inside and outside of
the workplace (Annabi et al., 2017; Annabi & Locke, 2019; Baldwin et al., 2014; Black et al.,
2019; Bury et al., 2021; Johnson & Joshi, 2016; Lindsay et al., 2021). Second, many and perhaps
most autistic adults find social interactions challenging and confusing. As a result, they
experience significant stress and anxiety in communication situations (Black et al., 2019; Bury et
al., 2021; Chen et al., 2015; Hayward et al., 2019; Krzeminska & Hawse, 2020; Lorenz et al.,
2017; Morris et al., 2015; Richards, 2012). Third, even though many and perhaps most autistic
adults deeply desire meaningful workplace relationships, they tend to avoid social interaction
and many communication situations because of stress and anxiety (Ekman & Hiltunen, 2015;
Kiep et al., 2015; Morris et al., 2015; Spain et al., 2017). Thus, communication apprehension is
10

likely a significant obstacle to many autistic employees’ development of professional
relationships, access to professional opportunities, and overall work satisfaction.
Diagnosis of and Prevalence of Autism
Autism refers to a “neurodevelopment disorder that is characterized by difficulties with
social communication and social interaction and restricted and repetitive patterns in behaviors,
interests, and activities” (American Psychological Association, n.d., para. 1). The term spectrum
is used because of a wide range in the severity of these symptoms and the level of functioning in
autistic individuals (American Psychological Association, n.d.; Scott et al., 2015). Diagnosis of
autism involves persistent deficits in three areas of social communication and interaction and two
types of restricted, repetitive behaviors as outlined in the Diagnostic and statistical manual of
mental disorders, 5th edition: DSM-5 (American Psychiatric Association, 2013).
Autism is the fastest growing developmental disability (Scott et al., 2015). In the United
States, approximately one in 59 children is diagnosed with autism spectrum disorder (ASD) by
the time they are 8 years old (Baio et al., 2018). Diagnosis is more common among boys than
girls. Roughly one in 42 boys and one in 189 girls are diagnosed with ASD in the United States
(Austin & Pisano, 2017). Increasingly, formal diagnosis of autism occurs for people who are
adults (Johnson & Joshi, 2016). Approximately 100,000 autistic individuals are expected to enter
the workforce each year for the next five years (Nagib & Wilton, 2020).
The Autism Experience Among Adults
Autistic professionals bring their life experience of autism into the workplace. So,
identifying key findings from research about the autism experience among adults informs their
experiences at work. Research about autistic adults has focused on life satisfaction and
11

comorbidities as well as social communication, social interactions, and social lives. A key aspect
of this experience is stress and anxiety, particularly in social and communication contexts.
Life Satisfaction and Comorbidities
In a review of studies of adults with autism, Ayres et al. (2018) found that those on the
spectrum consistently report lower quality of life than non-autistic adults. They found that the
most distinctive domain that those on the spectrum report as lower in life satisfaction is in social
relationships. Mazurek (2014) found that loneliness among autistic individuals is correlated with
depression, anxiety, lower self-esteem, and lower life satisfaction. Those with a close friend
reported much less loneliness (Mazurek, 2014).
Autism frequently occurs with other conditions, including anxiety disorder, depression,
post-traumatic stress, mood disorder, ADHD, obsessive compulsive disorder, psychosis,
seizures, sensory issues, intellectual deficits, and other physical challenges and issues (Adreon &
Durocher, 2007; Anderson & Butt, 2008; Autism Spectrum Australia, 2013; Baldwin & Costley,
2015; Cai & Richdale, 2016; Chen et al., 2015; Hayward et al., 2019; Hendricks, 2010). Table 1
illustrates incidence estimates of comorbidities in various studies. Researchers have most
frequently explored the connections between autism and anxiety, with estimates of anxiety as a
comorbidity in between 57% and 82%. Hayward et al. (2019) collected direct comparisons of
autistic versus non-autistic populations on several of these conditions. They found that 57% of
autistic individuals had anxiety disorder compared to 25% among the non-autistic population;
64% of autistic individuals had depression compared to 34% among the non-autistic population;
39% of autistic individuals report post-traumatic stress compared to 3% among the non-autistic
population. Similarly, Parr et al. (2013) show that autistic individuals are much more likely to
experience anxiety. Relatedly, they often lack stress management skills (Parr et al., 2013).
12

Table 1
Autism and Comorbidities
Condition Percentage of people with autism who have this condition
Anxiety disorder 57% (Hayward et al., 2019)
67% (Anderson & Butt, 2018)
78% report frequent worry and stress (83% among women and
67% among men) (Autism Spectrum Australia, 2013)
82% report frequent worry and stress (Baldwin & Costley, 2015)
50 to 70% experience anxiety and depression (Sizoo & Kuiper
(2017)
Depression 64% (Hayward et al., 2019)
Mental health condition 71% (Autism Spectrum Australia, 2013)
Attention and
concentration issues
58% (Autism Spectrum Australia, 2013)
Learning difficulties 50% (Autism Spectrum Australia, 2013)
Mood disorder 47% (Anderson & Butt, 2018)
Movement and
coordination problems
40% (Autism Spectrum Australia, 2013)
Post-traumatic stress 39% (Hayward et al., 2019)
Obsessive compulsive
disorder
28% (Anderson & Butt, 2018)
59% (Autism Spectrum Australia, 2013)
Chronic illness and
medical conditions
21% (Autism Spectrum Australia, 2013)
Visual or hearing
impairment
20% (Autism Spectrum Australia, 2013)
Seizures 19% (Anderson & Butt, 2018)
Psychosis 8% (Anderson & Butt, 2018)

Social Communication, Social Interactions, and Social Lives
Autistic adults hold hopes for satisfying social lives and report a strong desire to
contribute to their communities and build friendships (Müller et al., 2008). Yet, most autistic
adults report dissatisfaction with their social lives. Most autistic adults never see friends, never
get called by friends, and never get invited to events by friends (Orsmond et al., 2013). One
study of adolescents and adults who still lived with their parents showed that 8% had a close
friend and 21% had a relationship with another person where they had some shared activities.
13

Roughly 21% socialized on a weekly basis with people from work or school (Orsmond et al.,
2004). In another study, 80% of autistic women said they were unsatisfied with their social lives
(Baldwin et al., 2015). Other research shows that most autistic adults say they lack a sense of
community inclusion and often feel socially isolated (Gray et al., 2014; Howlin et al., 2013;
Mazurek, 2014; Müller et al., 2008). In qualitative research, autistic individuals often use
metaphors to describe their isolation. For example, they suggest they are “at the bottom of a
remote abyss” or “on a different planet” (Müller et al., 2008).
Many autistic individuals explain they are anxious about initiating social interactions
because they often think they possess lower social awareness and social competence (Mazurek,
2014; Müller et al., 2008). Social functioning deficits are “core symptoms of autism spectrum
disorder (ASD)” and lead to many of the challenges autistic adults face in social interactions and
their social lives. These social challenges may be even more problematic for autistic adults
because most adults interact in more complex and subtle ways. Also, adults tend to hold less
tolerance for “deficits” in social functioning (Pallathra et al., 2019). Common communication
challenges include engaging in unstructured dialogue, participating in spontaneous
conversations, engaging in small talk, interpreting implicit messages, interpreting nonverbal
communication, understanding counterparts’ emotions, using tone of voice to convey various
emotions or sarcasm, and improvising in social situations (Müller et al., 2008).
Autistic adults face negative stereotypes and attitudes. Many people perceive autistic
individuals as “socially aloof” and “deliberately self-isolating,” yet many autistic individuals
believe they invest a lot of effort and energy in building social understanding and social
awareness (Müller et al., 2008). Many of these stereotypes emerge from popular media with
characters such as Rain Man or Forest Gump (Solomon, 2020).
14

Many autistic individuals say they need social support to navigate social worlds,
including external supports, communication supports, and self-initiated strategies. External
supports include scripted social activities, activities for shared interests, and activities in pairs or
small groups. Communication supports include alternative ways of communicating, training to
interpret and apply social cues, and more direct and explicit communication. Self-initiated
strategies included coping outlets, exercise, spirituality/religion, alone time. External supports
should often be facilitated to help autistic individuals observe, get feedback, and grow. Many
autistic individuals emphasize the importance of caring and patient support networks. Some
autistic individuals seek out greater social awareness and social opportunities. Some read books
about social skills, join autism support groups, and seek social skills training (Müller et al.,
2008).
Many autistic individuals report they have success in friendships and relationships when
what is considered their atypical behavior becomes normalized – when their friends accept and
appreciate their social idiosyncrasies. When others do not accept the autistic style of interacting
and communicating, autistic individuals generally feel uncomfortable and unsure how to act.
Many autistic individuals without friends often feel uncertain how to tap into social groups
(Sosnowy et al., 2019).
The Professional Journey for Autistic Individuals
In the past decade, research has increasingly explored the professional experiences of
autistic individuals. This research has explored the employment outcomes for autistic individuals
and their professional hopes and aspirations (e.g., Baldwin et al., 2014; Bury et al., 2020; Chen et
al., 2015; Schall et al., 2015). The most attention in this research has been on transition
experiences into employment, with a focus on college experiences, vocational rehabilitation, and
15

job placements programs (e.g., Accardo et al., 2019; Anderson & Butt, 2017; Baker-Ericzén et
al. 2018; Cai & Richdale, 2016; Taylor et al., 2014). Also, a significant amount of research
addresses social barriers and other obstacles to successful employment (Nagib & Wilton, 2020;
Parr et al., 2013; Scott et al., 2015). From a societal perspective, helping autistic individuals gain
satisfying employment is the right thing to do from an inclusiveness perspective. It is also
generally a cost-effective strategy (Jacob et al., 2015).
Employment Outcomes for Autistic Individuals
Autistic individuals face many employment challenges. Most autistic individuals with
autism tend to be unemployed or underemployed (Black et al., 2019; Burgess & Cimera, 2014;
Bury et al., 2020; Chen et al., 2015; Schall et al., 2015). Even though autistic adults are often
considered “efficient, trustworthy, reliable, and cost-effective employees” (Solomon, 2020, p.
4209), under half are able to maintain a job (Scott et al., 2017; Solomon, 2020). Recent studies of
individuals with autism show that only half have held employment by the time they are 25 years
old (Roux et al., 2013; Shattuck, Narendorf, et al., 2012). Of those who gain employment by the
age of 25, the average wage was just $8.10 per hour. Of adults who achieve employment, about
80% are part time with a median monthly salary of about $700 (Roux et al., 2013). Another
study that followed autistic adults showed that two thirds had gained competitive employment
but only 25% had maintained steady employment (Taylor et al., 2015). One estimate of
employment rates for autistic individuals in Western countries is just 34%, compared to 54% for
all individuals with disabilities, and 83% for those without disabilities (Scott et al., 2015). Even
in state-funded VR programs, only about 60% of autistic participants gain employment (CDC,
2018).
16

Challenges with gaining and keeping employment influence the well-being of autistic
individuals (Hurlbutt & Chalmers, 2004; Katz et al., 2015). Full-time employment improves the
lives of autistic individuals in terms of mental and physical well-being (Flower et al., 2019; Katz
et al., 2015). Key outcomes of employment include a sense of purpose, more access to and
enhanced social relationships, financial and personal independence, workplace related outcomes,
awareness (Hedley, Cai, et al., 2017).
Many autistic adults lose their jobs due to poor communication, low social functioning,
and the inability to follow directions (Müller et al., 2002; Scott et al. 2015). A study about
factors for successful employment showed that autistic individuals held far different views than
their employers. Those on the spectrum often did not understand their employers’ expectations
about professionalism, productivity, and workplace support. The researchers concluded that
employers must learn to communicate these expectations better (Scott et al., 2015). Another
study showed the key factors influencing employability for autistic employees are social skills,
communication, and sensory issues (Hurlbutt & Chalmers, 2004). Other research showed that
autistic individuals are less likely to view social interaction and communication problems as
barriers to effective performance than do practitioners (López & Keenan, 2014). Failure to gain
and maintain successful employment often exacerbates the social challenges of autistic adults
because they have fewer opportunities to develop their social skills (Solomon, 2020).
Several studies suggest autistic professionals are stressed in a variety of communication
situations, often avoid communication situations, and are sometimes think they have
communicated effectively only to learn later that their colleagues evaluated their communication
poorly. Morris et al. (2015) found that autistic professionals suggested several aspects of the
professional experience were particular stressful, including meetings, face-to-face conversations,
17

phone calls, email, instant messaging, and job interviews. Some autistic professionals who have
held these roles have reported they sometimes thought they had effectively managed employees
only to find out later that their direct reports felt otherwise (Morris et al., 2015). Hayward et al.
(2019) showed that many autistic individuals choose jobs with minimal interaction because they
lack confidence in their social and communication abilities. Autistic professionals are typically
less likely to hold management or supervisory roles.
Professional Hopes and Aspirations
Autistic individuals strongly aspire to satisfying careers (Anderson et al., 2021;
Ashbaugh, 2017; Baldwin & Costley, 2015). A survey of autistic employees found they reported
the following positive aspects of working: self-actualization (65%); social and collegial factors
(45%); job roles and work content (36%); and pay and benefits (28%). This same group reported
the following negative experiences with working: dissatisfaction with job roles and work content
(49%); working relationships (i.e., misunderstanding, criticism, ill treatment or exclusion by
others; difficulties in communicating with or relating to others) (46%); health and well-being
(35%); performance and development issues (21%); organizational factors (14%); and pay and
other conditions (5%) (Baldwin et al., 2014).
Autistic individuals hold varied professional interests. One study showed that a high
percentage (46%) of male autistic individuals were interested in STEM occupations compared to
a much lower percentage (15%) among female autistic individuals. In addition to STEM fields,
many autistic individuals express interest in social services and helping occupations; art, design,
and entertainment occupations; unskilled labor work; sales and food services; healthcare,
administrative and office work; military and security; and educational and library. Many autistic
individuals report they choose jobs and careers to align with their social, sensory, and executive
18

limitations. In many cases, they report avoiding jobs that require too much social interaction and
communication (Nagib & Wilton, 2020).
Transition Experiences into Employment
Many autistic adults go through several transitional steps to employment, including
college, vocational rehabilitation (VR) services, and/or job placement programs. These
experiences are intended to help autistic individuals prepare for the demands of the workplace.
One measure of the success of these efforts is the degree to which autistic individuals can gain
competitive employment.
Attending college is often among the first transition experiences into adulthood. A variety
of studies have focused on this transition period among those with autism (Accardo et al., 2019;
Anderson & Butt, 2017). Autistic students can access many support services, including academic
coaching, transition programs, tutoring, writing centers, faculty and peer mentors, support
groups, social skills groups, and self-advocacy groups (Accardo et al., 2019). Many autistic
individuals felt there was too much emphasis on academic performance in high school, and that
they needed more preparation in social-communication deficits while in high school (Anderson
& Butt, 2017). Common communication difficulties noted for autistic college adults include
speaking too formally, speaking monotonously, mismatched volume with conversations,
challenges in reciprocal conversations, speaking too much about their own interests, not
providing enough background when sharing a story, difficulties in layered or longer discussions,
interpreting comments of others too literally, challenges in understanding sarcasm and jokes,
inflexibility in conversations, and appearing disinterested based on nonverbal signals (Adreon &
Durocher, 2007).
19

Most autistic individuals report social challenges in college settings. One study showed
that 27% of autistic college students reported their social needs were met (Cai & Richdale,
2016). Another study found that 42% of autistic individuals reported the worst part of their
college experience were the social aspects. They reported many examples of being socially
excluded, even teased or bullied; having few if any friends; and feeling lonely and socially
isolated (Autism Spectrum Australia, 2013). When autistic students feel socially connected, they
report much higher subjective well-being. Many students said they had to make a tradeoff
between academic performance and forming relationships. Social support was critical, especially
from family members (Bailey et al., 2019). Social planning interventions for college students
with autism can increase social integration (Ashbaugh et al., 2017).
Vocational rehabilitation (VR) services are provided to tens of thousands of autistic
individuals in the United States and are perhaps the best documented interventions to support
them. Many scholars have explored the National Longitudinal Transition Study-2 (NLTS-2),
which is a database that tracks outcomes of students with disabilities once they entered adulthood
(e.g., Alverson & Yamamoto, 2017, 2018; Schall et al., 2015). Autistic individuals gain
competitive employment at lower rates than individuals with other disabilities (Schall et al.,
2015). Autistic individuals tend to gain higher rates of competitive employment under the
following conditions: higher-income and higher-educated parents (Schall et al., 2015); higher
social skills (Schall et al., 2015); no intellectual disability (Schall et al., 2015); receiving career
counseling in high school (Schall et al., 2015); no co-existing anxiety and depression (Sung et
al., 2015); and receiving job placement services (Lawer et al., 2009; Schaller and Yang, 2005).
Yet, even with VR services, autistic adults continue to be underemployed and unemployed at
20

high rates (Burgess & Cimera, 2014). Further, additional vocational services for individuals with
autism showed only marginal improvement in vocational independence (Taylor et al., 2014).
A variety of programs show that training and job placement programs can help adults
with autism improve employability prospects. For example, after a six-month training program
focused on executive functioning and social skills, participants increased in cognitive executive
functioning and social cognitive (i.e., social thinking and social skills) functioning. Additionally,
there was an increase of 22% employment to 56% employment (Baker-Ericzén et al. 2018).
Another study showed that autistic individuals who participated in a 24 to 32-week temporary
job that included vocational and social skills training helped these individuals secure full-time
positions and modestly improved employment outcomes five years later (Peijen & Bos, 2021).
Another program involved an intensive internship program. Project SEARCH involved three 10-
to-12 week internships for a total of 720 hours. The program also provided VR training and job
coaching. Results showed autistic individuals were more likely to gain and retain competitive
employment.
Sources of Stress and Anxiety in the Professional Journey
Autistic individuals experience stress and anxiety in a variety of work situations (Baldwin
et al., 2014; Black et al., 2019; Bury et al., 2021; Johnson & Joshi, 2016; Lindsay et al., 2021).
Research has documented this most extensively in the job search and job interview process. It
has also showed that stress and anxiety emerge in a variety of social and sensory situations.
Autistic individuals often view jobs as inaccessible based on the text of job listings. Job
descriptions often involve specific language about required work experience and other demands.
Autistic individuals tend to interpret the job descriptions quite literally and often avoid applying
if they do not meet any single item in the listing (Nagib & Wilton, 2020). Also, autistic
21

individuals tend to be less socially connected. Since social connections factor into securing
employment approximately half the time, this places autistic individuals at a disadvantage
(Nagib & Wilton, 2020). Many workplace selection procedures and everyday management
exclude autistic professionals (Richards, 2012).
Many researchers have identified the interview process as a primary barrier for autistic
individuals (Nagib & Wilton, 2020; Scott et al., 2015; Solomon, 2020). Interviews are essentially
a “social test” and require a high degree of “social competency” (Solomon, 2020). Many autistic
individuals talk about job interviews negatively and express frustration, anger, and even self-
blame at their inability to perform well in job interviews. Some even consider job interviews as
discriminatory against autistic individuals. Others hold a sense of futility, assuming the job
interview is a test they cannot pass (Nagib & Wilton, 2020). Autistic individuals may engage in a
variety of non-normative nonverbal behaviors from the perspectives of neurotypical
interviewers. These behaviors may include less recognition of facial expressions, less eye
contact, repetitive actions, and variation in attire (Solomon, 2020).
Sources of stress in the workplace include an “increasingly more dynamic, uncertain, and
team-based” environment. This type of environment may become even more stressful as the
workplace stresses this type of environment (Parr et al., 2013). Autistic employees report that
they are more confident in structured work environments (Scott et al., 2015). Autistic employees
often report challenges with sensory issues. Common challenges for many autistic professionals
are noisy, bright, and sensory distracting environments. Many report that open office plans are
distracting and uncomfortable (Morris et al., 2015).
Another source of stress and anxiety involves stereotypes and stigmas. Autistic
individuals often feel misunderstood and even stigmatized (Soeker, 2020). They are often
22

perceived as wanting to be alone or not caring if anyone else is around (Hagner & Cooney,
2005). Yet, in some workplaces, autistic employees are viewed as social and interactive (Hagner
& Cooney, 2005). Many employers worry about supervisions cost and loss in productivity,
which are often inaccurate biases (Solomon, 2020).
Several studies have focused on helping autistic adults reduce social anxiety and
avoidance behaviors (Pallathra et al., 2019). Some research has suggested that cognitive
behavioral therapy helps individuals with autism experience less depression, stress, and anxiety
(Ekman & Hiltunen, 2015; McGillivray & Evert, 2014; Spain et al., 2017). Other scholars have
found similar results with mindfulness-based therapy (Kiep et al., 2015; Spek et al., 2013). Yet
another study showed both approaches are promising (Sizoo & Kuiper, 2017).
Overall, the stress and anxiety experienced from social interactions is well documented.
Individuals with autism experience a high degree of social isolation, lack of social support, and
social anxiety in the in the workplace (Baldwin et al., 2014; Black et al., 2019; Bury et al., 2021;
Johnson & Joshi, 2016; Lindsay et al., 2021). Autistic professionals often report that their social
and communication challenges with colleagues limit their ability to cope with the workplace due
to stress and anxiety (Soeker, 2020). Autistic employees often feel stressed because they do not
know which topics topics in conversations are appropriate, and they are also confused about who
to ask for help (Parr et al., 2013). Hayward et al. (2019) recently conducted among the most
extensive (in terms of sample size) study of autistic professionals in the workplace. They found
that autistic professionals frequently experience stress, anxiety, and isolation in the workplace.
Further, they found that most autistic professionals desire positive social interaction but often
avoid social interaction out of fear it will not go well.

23

Support for Autistic Professionals in the Workplace
Over the past decade and a half, research has increasingly documented the types of
support that are provided to employees with autism. Much of this research focuses on social
support, while some focuses on the physical environment and other work factors. Some research
addresses how leaders and supervisors can make autistic employees more motivated and
effective at their work. Some scholars now suggest that autistic forms of communications and
sociality should be normalized as a matter of support and inclusion.
Many research studies suggest that key drivers of employment success for autistic
employees are social support, understanding, and relationships. For example, a three-year study
of a small group of autistics showed that several interventions were critical to successful and
satisfying employment: organizational support, advice and help from colleagues, supportive
leadership, environmental allowances, and job coaches or consultants (Hedley, Cai, et al., 2017).
A variety of studies demonstrate the importance of colleagues’ social support of autistic
employees and understanding of autism (Dreaver et al., 2019; Hayward et al., 2019; Johnson &
Joshi, 2016; Khalifa et al., 2020). One study showed the main enabler of positive workplace
experiences for autistic employees was their workplace relationships (Hayward et al., 2019).
Another study showed that autistic professionals say they the need an effective support network
inside and outside of the workplace to thrive in their jobs (Soeker, 2020). Some scholars have
developed frameworks for employers to work more effectively with autistic employees. For
example, the Integrated Employment Success Tool (IEST) is a resource guide for employers that
increases awareness of autistic employees’ needs and provides recommendations for creating a
more comfortable and inclusive workplace. Yet, such guides have not been shown to increase
employers’ self-efficacy to create an autistic-friendly work environment (Scott et al., 2018).
24

Some forms of leadership and management better support autistic employees, and autistic
employees may hold different preferences for leadership styles than non-autistic professionals.
For example, inspirational motivation as espoused in the transformational leadership orientation
is often a source of stress for autistic employees. Autistic employees suggest that individualized
consideration from leaders gives them less stress (Parr et al., 2013). Important supervisory
behaviors for autistic employees include providing structure and consistency in schedules,
routines, and job responsibilities; the use of organizers; and reducing unstructured time (Hagner
& Cooney, 2005). Another study emphasizes the importance of providing reminders, giving
assurances, and communicating with directness (Hagner & Cooney, 2005). Khalifa et al. (2020)
suggest the main management actions to support autistic employees include job training,
workplace culture training, task simplification, and regular check ins. Employers must train
supervisors and colleagues to support their neurodiverse colleagues. Support measures include
giving written directions, showing more understanding for “bad days,” being more direct with
feedback, and using job coaches.
A growing set of scholars suggest to truly understand autistic individuals and
accommodate their needs, neurotypical employees need to understand the unique communication
styles of autistic individuals. Rosqvist (2019) reports that autistics and non-autistics engage in a
different type of sociality. Often autistic individuals do not understand or even see the value in
politeness rituals. In the autistic social setting, phrases such as “how are you?” should be
reserved when there is a genuine interest in another person. Hurlbutt and Chalmers (2004) report
that the autistic tendency for bluntness and candidness is often viewed as rude by others. Some
professionals even think their bluntness has been the cause of losing jobs. Soeker (2020) reported
that autistic individuals often say that interacting with other autistic individuals helps them
25

manage their work better. There is empowerment in building a knowledge network with other
autistic individuals.
Several studies asked autistic professionals to identify the accommodations they need.
One study reported the following desired accommodations: no shared rooms for business travel;
audio recorded meetings; key expectations in written form; private weekly meetings with
managers to correct misunderstandings; managers being more specific; exercise from home; and
work from home sometimes to avoid excessive meetings (Morris et al., 2015). Another study
showed that the most commonly desired accommodations include alternative forms of job
interviews, flexible schedules (with the option of working from home), sensory distractions
minimized in the work environment, support with communication and social skills, and training
about autism for their colleagues (Lindsey et al., 2021).
A variety of case studies of organizations provide approaches to inclusion for autistic
professionals, including accommodating individuals with autism with more direct and precise
communication styles (Hagner et al., 2005; Donovan, 2008); avoiding sarcasm (Donovan, 2008);
careful onboarding processes with extra attention to details such as dress codes and the use of
electronics (Austin, 2018); exercise programs (Austin, 2018); highly structured and organized
work tasks (Hagner et al., 2005); less sensory distracting environments (Wareham & Sonne,
2008); coaching to deal with frustration and stress (Austin, 2018); soft skills training (Pisano &
Austin, 2016b); support circles, including affinity groups, for their work and personal lives
(Loiacono & Ren, 2018; Pisano & Austin, 2016b); and frequent support from assigned coaches
or mentors (Pisano & Austin, 2016b).

26

The Autism Advantage (Difference View) Versus the Deficit View of Autism
Competing schools of thought have emerged about whether autism should be viewed as a
difference or a deficit (Kapp et al., 2013; Sumner & Brown, 2015). In the difference view,
individuals with autism should be viewed as “differently abled.” Autism is viewed as a unique
collection of abilities that includes pattern recognition, adherence to logic, and candidness
(Austin & Pisano, 2017). Many of the strengths often associated with autism are displayed in
Table 2. Several major assumptions of this view include the following: (a) the workplace was not
properly designed to bring out the strengths of autistic individuals; (b) when the workplace is
properly designed, these individuals are as productive or more so than neurotypical employees
and contribute to diverse perspectives in workplace teams; and (c) corporate neurodiversity
programs return a profit on investment (Austin & Pisano, 2017; Loiacono & Ren, 2018). In the
deficit view, autism is viewed as a disability. In this view, more focus is on awkward and even
impaired social skills. Proponents of this view believe it is a more realistic assessment of autism
that guides the development of appropriate accommodations, training, and related workplace
programs. In the deficit view, cost-benefit analyses tend to compare costs to society in the form
of government support when individuals with autism do not work. For example, one study
showed that supported employment for autistic individuals is more cost effective than standard
daily care (Mavranezouli et al., 2014). These competing views fall into a larger debate about
whether and how disability is social constructed (Kapp, 2019; McDermott, & Varenne, 1995;
Strindlund et al., 2019; Van Herwegen et al., 2019).

27

Table 2
Strengths Frequently Associated with Autistic Professionals
Strength Select citations
Cognitive skills and functioning

Pattern recognition Austin, 2018; Austin et al., 2017; Austin & Pisano,
2017; Morris et al., 2015
Visualizing information Morris et al., 2015
Concentration and Focus Austin, 2018; Austin et al., 2017; Dreaver et al., 2019;
Krzeminksa & Hawse, 2020; Morris et al., 2015;
Solomon, 2020
Attention to detail Austin, 2018; Austin et al., 2017; Dreaver et al., 2019;
Krzeminksa & Hawse, 2020
Enhanced memory Krzeminksa & Hawse, 2020
Intellectual functions Dreaver et al., 2019; Howlwerda et al., 2012
Mathematics/logic Austin & Pisano, 2017
Persistence in repetitive tasks Bury et al., 2020; Dreaver et al., 2019; Solomon, 2020
Technical abilities Dreaver et al., 2019; Krzeminksa & Hawse, 2020
Problem solving, thinking out of the
box
Morris et al., 2015
Independence of thought Krzeminksa & Hawse, 2020
Character traits

Honesty Austin, 2018
Loyalty Dreaver et al., 2019
Passion Dreaver et al., 2019
Work ethic Black et al., 2019; Bury et al., 2020
Reliability and dependability Black et al., 2019; Krzeminksa & Hawse, 2020;
Solomon, 2020
Communication and social
interactions

Candidness and directness Austin, 2018
Issue-central conversations Rosqvist, 2019

Several groups of scholars have started to quantify the frequency that strengths are
associated with professionals with autism. One study of 20 supervisors of autistic employees
found that the following strengths were mentioned most often: attention to detail (40%); goal-
directed behavior (40%); passion (40%); task focus (40%), intellectual functions (35%); loyalty
28

(35%); trustworthiness and dependability (35%); ability to adhere to routine (35%); expertise in
a certain area (30%); good memory (30%); ability to tolerate monotonous tasks (30%); honesty
(30%); and technical abilities (e.g. computer skills and knowledge) (25%) (Dreaver et al., 2019).
Black et al. (2019) in a study of stakeholders found that common strengths included persistence,
agreeableness, reliability, and loyalty. Some scholars note that the strengths associated with
autism align with stronger scientific skills (Baron-Cohen et al., 2001).
A few studies have attempted to make comparisons between employees with and without
autism (Bury et al., 2020; Lorenz & Hinitz, 2014). Lorenz and Heinitz (2014) conducted the first
known study that makes direct comparisons between the strength profiles of neurodiverse (they
specifically focused on those with Aspergers) and neurotypical professionals. Overall,
neurodiverse individuals reported lower general and occupational self-efficacy than neurotypical
individuals. Neurodiverse individuals were comparatively more interested in investigative and
conventional work but less interested in social and enterprising work. Participants were given a
list of 26 strengths and identified their top five. Neurodiverse individuals most frequently
mentioned the following strengths: attention to detail (73%), logical reasoning (60%), reliability
(49%), focus (48%), and systemizing (47%). They least frequently identified the following
strengths: flexibility (4%), social skills (4%), multitasking (1%), empathy (1%), and teamwork
(0%). Of the list of skills, the following skills were identified just as frequently for neurodiverse
as neurotypical professionals: reliability, creative solutions, organizing ability, apprehension,
stamina, proactiveness, fine motor skills, concentration, emotional control, and physical work.
While the work of Lorenz and Heinitz shows that autistic employees do not view teamwork as
one of their strengths, many managers report that having an autistic employee in a working group
makes the team better (Whelpley et al., 2021). Bury et al. (2020) identified the following key
29

strengths of autistic employees: attention to detail, tolerance for repetitive tasks,
special/circumscribed interests, and work ethic. They found that employees with autism were six
times as likely to be rated above the standard work ethic than those without autism (70.6% of
autistic employees were rated above average on this dimension compared to non-autistic
employees). Yet, autistic employees were rated as much less flexible. About 27.5% of those on
the autism spectrum were rated below standard compared to 8.3 % of those without autism.
Far more frequently, academic research tends to highlight the deficits of autism.
Krzeminksa and Hawse (2020) summarized the limitations of autistic professionals as described
by scholars. Their list included the following: difficulties in social interaction; interacting with
colleagues, managers, and clients; engaging in conversation; understanding abstract concepts,
metaphors, or sarcasm; interpreting and using non-verbal communication; working with
distractions; decision making and problem-solving; difficulties receiving feedback and criticism;
maintaining concentration and motivation on some tasks; working in unfamiliar environments;
time management and organization; and changes to work routines, tasks, or workplace
arrangements. One indicator that a deficit view is predominant is that most research about
interventions tends to focus on the weaknesses of those with autism. Scott et al. (2019) reviewed
36 intervention studies. Generally, they found that interventions were developed to address the
weaknesses of autistic individuals. They found that overall the interventions have limited long-
term impact on employability. They suggest a strengths-based approach is necessary to help
autistic individuals “bring to the workplace such as their talents, skills and abilities and
highlights areas of competence” (p. 894).
On the whole, most supervisors rate their autistic employees above average (Parr et al.,
2013). In practice, many people hold a more nuanced view of autism as a mix of strengths and
30

weaknesses. While many researchers note the intellectual abilities that many people with autism
possess, they also generally suggest social abilities are genuine deficits and rarely mention
dispositional strengths. For example, research tends to suggest that supervisors and colleagues
more often than not recognize social communication as a deficit among most autistic employees
(Bury et al., 2021). Some scholars also wonder whether promoting a strengths-based view of
autistic employees may place some autistic individuals at a disadvantage when they don’t live up
to stereotypes such as being above average at pattern recognition or not possessing the ability to
tolerate repetitive work (Bury et al., 2019). The reality is that most autistic individuals are “often
associated with deficits in an individual’s ability to communicate and interact with others at
work” by employers and colleagues. Many autistic individuals expect their social and
communication abilities to get in the way of work performance and sometimes purposely seek
out roles with low social demands (Johnson & Joshi, 2016).
The deficit versus difference schools of thought is reflected in the terms used to describe
autistic people. Officially, autism is referred to as autism spectrum disorder by the American
Psychiatric Association. In practice, dozens of terms are used. One recent study of autistic
individuals, friends and families of autistic individuals, and professionals illustrated the
preferences among these groups. “Autistic” is the most preferred term among autistic adults
(61%), friends of autistic individuals (52%), and parents (51%). Yet, just 38% of professionals
prefer this term. Professionals tend to prefer a term such as “person with autism” (49%), which is
preferred far less often by autistic individuals (28%). Professionals tend to view terms such as
“person with autism” as a people-first approach that de-emphasizes the perceived disability.
There are several reasons that autistic individuals prefer the term “autistic.” It better captures the
notion that autism is intrinsic to who they are as a person. Autistic adults hold mixed views of
31

whether autism is a disability. Many say it has created many challenges and barriers for them and
don’t want these challenges minimized. Others say that autism simply created a different way of
seeing the world and that society itself socially constructs autism as a disability. Among autistic
individuals, the least preferred terms are autism spectrum disorder (ASD), autism spectrum
condition (ASC), and high-functioning autism (Kenney et al., 2016). Another study showed that
many autistic employees prefer “autistic spectrum condition” to “autism spectrum disorder”
(Morris et al., 2015). The characterization of autism as a “disorder” and “disability” can lead to
low self-esteem, stress, low self-efficacy, and even social isolation (Hofvander et al., 2009;
Lorenze & Heinitz, 2014; Taylor & Hodapp, 2012).
Some experts suggest autistic individuals should seek jobs and careers that are aligned
with their strengths, emphasizing roles that are more technical and detail oriented and less reliant
on social interaction (Chappel & Somers, 2010; Dipeolu et al., 2015; Grandin & Duffy, 2008).
Other scholars suggest, however, that autistic individuals should focus more on what motivates
them as opposed to their special interests or strengths (Goldfarb et al., 2019). Similarly, other
scholars note that focusing on the strengths of autism may contribute to stereotypes. Bury et al.
explain:
However, we are concerned that, by highlighting certain stereotypes (e.g. the ‘talented
nerd lacking social graces’), the heterogeneity of autism may be overlooked and support
needs downplayed. Furthermore, not appreciating individual differences might result in a
misalignment between work-profile and employment, pressure to outperform peers
without autism and a failure to appreciate the diverse interests of people with autism. We
argue that an individual differences approach will prove more sustainable for improving
long-term employment outcomes. (p. 1607)
32

Increasingly, organizations are developing formal neurodiversity programs to support
autistic employees and job applicants. The term neurodiversity is intended to reside in the
strengths-based view of autistic individuals. Prominent examples of companies with
neurodiversity programs include Hewlett Packard (Pisano & Austin, 2016a; Austin et al., 2017),
SAP SE (Pisano & Austin, 2016b), Hart Schaffner Marx (Austin, 2018), and Specialisterne
(Donovan, 2008; Wareham & Sonne, 2008). Generally, these neurodiversity programs focus on
how to help those with autism gain employment. Because autistic individuals often get screened
out in the traditional job interview process, these programs create unique approaches to
evaluating talent among those with autism. Additional scholarly work suggests that senior-level
leadership support is necessary to make neurodiversity programs thrive in organizational settings
(Rao & Polepeddi, 2019). While various corporate neurodiversity programs have been quite
successful, they are still fairly limited in their reach. They tend to focus on specific areas of
expertise such as information technology (Krzeminska et al., 2019; Loiacono & Ren, 2018) and
on autistic individuals who possess above-average intelligence (R. Austin, personal
communication, April 28, 2020; Baldwin et al., 2001 Krzeminska et al., 2019; Loiacono & Ren,
2018).
Conceptual Framework
Communication apprehension is defined as a “fear or anxiety associated with either real
or anticipated communication with another person or persons” (McCroskey, 2001, p. 40).
Research suggests communication apprehension (CA) is common autistic adults. Yet, there isn’t
much research that helps understand the extent to which autistic professionals experience CA in
various professional situations. CA has been studied extensively over the past few decades.
McCroskey (1977, 1978, 1984) and his colleagues (McCroskey & Richmond, 1982; McCroskey
33

et al., 1985, 1989) have pioneered work in this area. McCroskey and colleagues focused on CA
in four primary work situations: public speaking, interpersonal interactions (primarily dyadic
interactions), groups, and meetings. People can be classified in terms of trait CA and state CA.
High trait CA implies that a person has a generalized anxiety across many communication
situations. High state CA implies that a person has anxiety that is triggered in certain situations,
such as in work meetings.
Communication apprehension can create a variety of barriers to career success. CA
predicts oral communication competence in a variety of professional situations (Ayres, 1998;
Blume et al., 2010; Rubin et al., 2009). Oral communication skills are typically considered
essential to career success. In fact, oral communication generally rates as one of the top one, two,
or three skills, according to recruiters (Conrad & Newberry, 2012; Maes et al., 1997; Raymond
et al., 1993; Ulinski & O’Callaghan, 2002). Among professionals with autism, communication
apprehension may lead to fewer opportunities to develop communication skills and workplace
relationships.
This study focuses on communication apprehension (CA) for several reasons. Research
consistently shows that autistic individuals experience stress and anxiety in communication
situations, including in the workplace (Ekman & Hiltunen, 2015; Kiep et al., 2015; Morris et al.,
2015; Spain et al., 2017). Yet, less is known about the extent of communication apprehension
experienced by autistic professionals and the situations that bring the most stress and anxiety.
Further, little is known about sources of social self-efficacy that may reduce communication
apprehension.
This study adopts social self-efficacy as a theoretical framework because it addresses a
critical need for autistic professionals and provides avenues for inquiry about communication
34

apprehension among autistic professionals. Most barriers faced by autistic professionals tend to
be social in nature (Black et al., 2019; Bury et al., 2021; Chen et al., 2015; Hayward et al., 2019;
Krzeminska & Hawse, 2020; Lorenz et al., 2017; Morris et al., 2015; Richards, 2012).
Individuals with autism experience a high degree of social isolation, lack of social support, and
social anxiety in the in the workplace (Baldwin et al., 2014; Black et al., 2019; Bury et al., 2021;
Johnson & Joshi, 2016; Lindsay et al., 2021). Social self-efficacy as a theoretical framework will
help to understand the sources of communication apprehension in various workplace situations.
Social self-efficacy is grounded in Bandura’s (1977, 1997) self-efficacy theory. Anderson
and Betz (2001) defined social self-efficacy as the “confidence in one’s ability to engage in the
social interactional tasks necessary to initiate and maintain interpersonal relationships in social
life and career activities” (p. 98). They identify four sources of social self-efficacy: emotional
arousal, social persuasion, vicarious learning, and past performance. Emotional arousal involves
the level of unease, nervousness, and/or confusion in social interactions. Social persuasion
involves feedback given about one’s social skills. Vicarious learning involves the degree to
which close family members, friends, and other associates exhibit strong social skills. Past
performance relates to an individual’s past experiences in making friends and other social
experiences.
This research explores the sources from which autistic professionals gain or lose social
self-efficacy in the workplace in a variety of communication situations, including public
speaking, dyadic interactions, group discussions, and meetings. Sources of social self-efficacy
include those identified by Anderson and Betz (2001). The entire study will aim for a strengths-
based view of autistic professionals. In the interviews, I will seek to identify perceived strengths
and how the deployment of those strengths influences communication apprehension.
35

Figure 1
Conceptual Framework

This study emerges from the premise that a favorable professional environment is needed
to increase social self-efficacy and overcome communication apprehension. Multiple studies
have found supportive work environments and supportive managers help autistic professionals
perform better and have more satisfying work experiences (Dreaver et al., 2019; Hayward et al.,
2019; Hedley, Cai, et al., 2017; Johnson & Joshi, 2016; Khalifa et al., 2020; Scott et al., 2018;
Soeker, 2020). Yet, research about these supportive environments has not addressed the degree
to which autistic professionals increase social self-efficacy and lower communication
apprehension. Figure 1 depicts the conceptual framework and nature of inquiry for this study.
Conclusion
This chapter has provided a literature review and conceptual framework for this study.
The literature review focused on the experiences of autistic adults in terms of life satisfaction and
comorbidities; social goals, experiences, and challenges in personal lives; and professional
experiences and journeys. The literature review demonstrated that stress and anxiety are
commonly experienced by many autistic adults in social-communication situations in their
personal and professional lives. Yet, little research exists to understand the extent of and nature
Professional Environment
Social Self-Efficacy
Level of Communication Apprehension
36

of communication apprehension in the workplace. The conceptual framework demonstrates the
path of inquiry to understand communication apprehension from a social self-efficacy
framework. It assumes that the right professional environment is necessary for increasing social
self-efficacy and reducing communication apprehension.

37

Chapter Three: Methodology
To explore the nature of communication apprehension among autistic professionals, this
study employed a mixed methods approach with a survey followed by interviews. The purposes
of the survey were to (a) understand the level of communication apprehension experienced by
autistic professionals in various professional situations; and (b) correlate several factors (i.e.,
work experience, comordities) associated with various levels of communication apprehension.
The follow-up interviews focused on gaining a more in-depth understanding of how autistic
professionals perceive communication apprehension through a social self-efficacy framework
with a focus on the professional environment that fosters social self-efficacy. This chapter
presents the research questions, an overview of the research design, the relevant background of
the research, the validity and reliability of the research instruments, and a statement of ethics.
Research Questions
This study poses the following research questions:
1. To what extent do autistic professionals experience communication apprehension in a
variety of communication situations at work? (This research question is addressed
through a survey based on the PRCA-24 instrument and the open-ended comments.)
2. What factors (i.e., work experience and comorbidities) are associated with various
levels of communication apprehension among autistic professionals? (This research
question is addressed through the survey based on the PRCA-24 instrument.)
3. How do autistic professionals perceive the influence of their professional
environment on their communication apprehension and social self-efficacy? (This
research question is addressed through the follow-up qualitative interviews.)

38

Overview of Design
This study adopted a mixed methods approach that first involved a survey followed by
interviews. The survey was intended to broadly establish how much communication
apprehension autistic professionals experience in the workplace. The follow-up interviews were
intended to provide a deeper and more nuanced understanding of the perceived sources of
communication apprehension through a social self-efficacy framework. A goal of the interviews
was to identify professional environments that support growth in social self-efficacy. The
surveys and interviews occurred online with autistic professionals located throughout the United
States.
Research Site and Participants
Site
The surveys and interviews were conducted online. Conducting the research online was
ideal for several reasons: with the pandemic, many professionals are currently remote; it gives
respondents more privacy; and it is more convenient for most participants. Also, since
participants were located throughout the United States, it allowed much broader representation.
Participants
The target population for the surveys and interviews was working autistic adults without
intellectual disabilities (average and above average IQ). Much of the current research about
professionals on the spectrum focuses on above-intelligence individuals with highly technical
skills (e.g., Austin & Pisano, 2017; Austin & Pisano, 2017; Morris et al., 2015). Yet, other
studies indicate that those with autism vary significantly in intellectual abilities, vary
significantly in professional interests, and bring strengths to the workplace in a variety of settings
(Baldwin et al., 2014; Whelpley et al., 2021). Also, most existing research focuses heavily on
39

early-career autistic individuals (Nagib & Wilton, 2020). This study focused on autistic
professionals from a variety of industries, professional backgrounds, and career stages to
understand communication apprehension among a broader set of autistic professionals than is
typical of most research.
The survey was conducted via an online survey panel (SurveyMonkey Audience) in
February 2022. This panel draws from over 10 million Americans to achieve representative and
random samples. The first question was used to screen for individuals with autism. This item
asked participants to check all items that applied to them from this list: ADHD, anxiety, autism,
depression, none of these, and prefer not to say. Altogether, 8,153 individuals started the survey.
Only those participants who self-identified as autistic were able advance in the survey (other
individuals were sent to a survey complete page). There were 377 working adults who self-
identified as autistic. Of these participants, 324 completed all items in the survey and are used in
this analysis.
Table 3 contains the background information for survey participants. Overall, it is a
diverse set of participants, with strong representation by gender, age, race/ethnicity, region,
educational background, income level, and other factors. Among scholarly studies about autistic
adults, this is among the most diverse. In particular, this study has the broadest known
representation in terms of age, work experience, and managerial status.
I recruited interview participants by working through several autism societies,
neurodiversity employee resources groups, online autism support groups, and references through
colleagues and friends. I contacted approximately 20 leaders of these groups. Six of these leaders
shared study information with their groups. Several of my close professional contacts reached
out to me and connected me with autistic individuals in their organizations.
40

Table 3
Background of Survey Participants
Background variable # %
Gender

Male 171 52.8
Female 149 46
Other 1 0.3
Prefer not to say 3 0.9
Age

18 to 20 27 8.3
21 to 25 57 17.6
26 to 30 52 16
31 to 35 44 13.6
36 to 40 35 10.8
41 to 45 29 9.0
46 to 50 36 11.1
51 to 55 22 6.8
56 to 60 12 3.7
61 to 65 7 2.2
66+ 3 0.9
Race/Ethnicity

Asian or Pacific Islander 54 16.7
Black or African American 31 9.6
Hispanic or Latino 50 15.4
Native American or Alaskan Native 13 4.0
White or Caucasian 151 46.6
Multiracial or Biracial 11 3.4
A race/ethnicity not listed here 3 0.9
Prefer not to say 11 3.4
Household Income

$0-$9,999 46 14.2
$10,000–$24,999 29 9.0
$25,000–$49,999 60 18.5
$50,000–$74,999 64 19.8
$75,000–$99,999 47 14.5
$100,000–$124,999 16 4.9
$125,000–$149,999 12 3.7
$150,000–$174,999 5 1.5
$175,000–$199,999 2 0.6
$200,000+ 11 3.4
41

Background variable # %
Prefer not to answer 32 9.9
Region

Midwest 69 21.3
Northeast 64 19.8
South 113 34.9
West 74 22.8
No response 4 1.2
Education

Some high school 20 6.2
Completed high school 54 16.7
Completed vocational program 21 6.5
Completed some college 78 24.1
Completed associate degree 33 10.2
Competed bachelor's degree 74 22.8
Completed graduate degree 44 13.6
Neurodiversity and Mental Health
Autism 324 100.0
ADHD 197 60.8
Anxiety 227 70.1
Depression 205 63.3
None of these 7 2.2
Prefer not to say 1 0.3
Employment Status

Full-time 206 63.6
Part-time 118 36.4
Current role

Non-managerial 130 40.1
Supervisor or manager 75 23.1
Mid-level manager 69 21.3
Executive/Senior-level leader 24 7.4
Not applicable 26 8.0
Work experience

Less than 1 year 7 2.2
1 to 2 years 59 18.2
3 to 5 years 77 23.8
6 to 10 years 67 20.7
11 to 15 years 31 9.6
16 to 20 years 22 6.8
Over 20 years 61 18.8
Total 324 100
42

Table 4
Background of Interview Participants
Participant Length Pseudonym Gender Industry Role Work
experience
1 27 Olivia W Real estate Office assistant 5
2 30 Emma W Real estate Office assistant 7
3 25 Ava W Retail Customer
service
3
4 58 Charlotte W Technology Training
manager
26
5 26 Sophia W Education Library
assistant
3
6 34 Liam M Hospitality Server 5
7 27 Amelia W Healthcare Receptionist 6
8 34 Noah M Hospitality Cashier 5
9 21 Isabella W Healthcare Daycare
worker
2
10 35 Oliver M Healthcare Receptionist 5
11 34 Mia W Construction Billing 8

Note. Length of interview is in minutes. W = woman; M = man.

Ultimately, 15 people signed up for interviews. Between 2 and 3 days before the
interviews, I distributed the interview questions and an informed consent form to participants.
Four of the participants canceled their interviews, so I ended out with 11 total interviews.
Interviews were conducted in March and April 2022. Table 4 contains the background
information of the participants.
Instrumentation and Data Collection
The survey was based on the PRCA-24 measure of communication apprehension and was
administered in February 2022. The semi-structured interviews occurred in March and April
2022, following the administration of the survey. Participants were given informed consent
43

information and forms before participating in the surveys and the interviews. All participants
were informed that they could discontinue participation at any time if they were uncomfortable.
Surveys
The survey to evaluate communication apprehension used an instrument called the
Personal Report of Communication Apprehension-24 (PRCA-24) (McCroskey et al., 1985,
2015). The PRCA-24 is widely identified as a valid measure of communication apprehension
(Croucher et al., 2019) and is highly predictive of behavior in social interactions (Murphy &
Weber, 2019). It contains 24 items that measure four types of communication situations: group
discussions, meetings, interpersonal (dyadic) interactions, and public speaking and presentations.
These items are on a 1 to 5 Likert scale. The survey was designed with some reverse-coded items
to increase validity
In addition to the PRCA-24 items, the survey included two open-ended items that
allowed participants to add details about communication situations at work that make them (a)
nervous or anxious and b) confident or comfortable. The survey also included demographic items
for gender and age, professional background items for current employment and experience, and
comorbidities (e.g., ADHD, Anxiety, and Depression). The survey addressed Research Questions
1 and 2. Appendix A contains all survey items.
Interviews
The interviews were semi-structured in nature and focused on gaining a deeper
understanding of how autistic professionals experience communication apprehension. The
interviews allowed participants to describe the sources of their communication apprehension (or
lack thereof) through a social self-efficacy framework. A semi-structured approach allowed the
interview conversations to focus on experiences and perspectives that are most salient to the
44

participants (Creswell & Creswell, 2018). The participants received the questions two to three
days ahead of their interviews so they could begin thinking about their responses. This is
particularly important for autistic individuals, who appreciate structure and predictability. The
questions and related concepts are provided in Appendix B.
Interviews ranged in length from roughly 25 minutes to 1 hour, with an average of 32
minutes. Some participants provided concise responses with little interest in elaborating. Other
participants elaborated extensively and even repetitively on issues of interest to them. These
patterns of communication are common among autistic individuals (e.g., Accardo et al., 2019;
Flower et al., 2019). Interviews were conducted via Zoom. All interviews were recorded and
transcribed with the permission of participants.
Data Analysis
Surveys
The PRCA-24 has been used in dozens of studies over the past three decades and
contains a standard approach to calculating and interpreting the results. Studies that included
approximately 43,000 participants were used to refine scoring and benchmarks. PRCA-24 scores
are calculated in the following ways: group discussions: 18 – (scores for items 2, 4, & 6) +
(scores for items 1, 3, & 5); meetings: 18 – (scores for items 8, 9, & 12) + (scores for items 7, 10,
& 11); interpersonal: 18 – (scores for items 14, 16, & 17) + (scores for items 13, 15, & 18);
presentations: 18 – (scores for items 19, 21, & 23) + (scores for items 20, 22, &24). Each of the
PRCA subscales result in scores from six to 24. The PRCA-24 total score for communication
apprehension is a sum of the four subscales. It ranges from 24 to 120. Scores between 83 and 120
are considered high communication apprehension (McCroskey et al., 2015).
45

For each subscale and the overall instrument, benchmarks are established to identify low,
moderate, and high communication apprehension. Group conversations benchmarks are the
following: under 11, low; 11 to 20, moderate; 20 and above, high. Meetings benchmarks are the
following: under 13, low; 13 to 20, moderate; 20 and above, high. Interpersonal conversations
benchmarks are the following: under 11, low; 11 to 20, moderate; 20 and above, high.
Presentations benchmarks are the following: under 11, low; 11 to 18, moderate; 18 and above,
high. Overall communication apprehension benchmarks: under 51, low; 51 to 80, moderate; 80
and above, high. Each of the apprehension benchmarks is based on being more than a standard
deviation from the mean. So, in national samples, roughly 16% of people are considered low in
CA, 68% are considered moderate in CA, and 16% are considered high in CA (McCroskey et al.,
2015).
The second research question addressed how various factors (e.g., work experience,
comorbidities) influence various levels of communication apprehension. Prior research suggests
CA may be lower with more work experience or with more managerial experience (Marcel,
2019). Similarly, depression and anxiety, common comorbidities with autism, have been linked
to many work challenges, including managing communication situations effectively (Segrin &
Abramson, 1994). To address the second research question, regression analysis was used to
identify which factors, when controlling for the others, influenced the level of CA. Regression
analyses were run with the PRCA-24 score and all subscales as dependent variables. The
independent variables were the following: work experience, managerial experience, depression,
anxiety, ADHD, mentoring at work, age, education, and gender.
In addition to the PRCA-24, there were two open-ended survey items to provide
additional understanding and nuance of communication apprehension among autistic
46

professionals. The following two questions were asked to survey participants: (a) Generally,
what types of communication situations at work make you the most nervous or anxious? Please
share just a few thoughts. (b) Generally, what types of communication situations at work make
you most comfortable or confident? Please share just a few thoughts. These open-ended items
were optional for survey respondents. Of 324 respondents who completed the full PRCA-24
survey, 242 (74.5%) completed the first open-ended question and 237 (72.9%) completed the
second open-ended question. The coding for the open-ended items in the survey were data-
driven. I engaged in three rounds of coding in which the codes and categories were continually
refined. In the first round, I identified codes. In the second round, I developed categories that
emerged from the codes. In the third round, I reviewed all codes and categories and made minor
adjustments.
Interviews
The semi-structured interviews were analyzed in several rounds and involved both
theory-driven (for social self-efficacy) and data-driven (for favorable professional environment)
approaches. Immediately after each interview, I took notes and began mapping potential codes.
The interview questions were designed with a social self-efficacy framework to overcoming
communication apprehension. An assumption of the research is that autistic professionals would
increase social self-efficacy when they were in a favorable professional environment. Thus, a
priori categories were established for social self-efficacy: emotional arousal, social persuasion,
vicarious learning, and past performance (Anderson & Betz, 2001). Participants rarely mentioned
vicarious learning. As a result, it was removed as a category. The first round of coding revealed
that many factors related to the professional environment contributed to confidence in
communication situations. Thus, codes and categories were developed to explain the professional
47

environment that fostered (or reduced) confidence in communication situations at work.
Ultimately, after three rounds of coding, the codes were refined and interpreted in the context of
larger categories and themes (Creswell & Creswell, 2018; Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). The coding
process was both data-driven and theory-driven (DeCuir-Gunby et al., 2011). It was primarily
theory-driven for the social self-efficacy categories and primarily data-driven for the professional
environment categories. Throughout the coding process, ATLAS.ti was used.
The Researcher
I am interested in research about autism in the workplace because I have several close
friends and family members who are on the spectrum. The world is a really challenging place for
people with autism. I believe my awareness of challenges faced by those on the spectrum
morally obligates me to help autistic and non-autistic professionals build more inclusive work
environments for those on the spectrum. Yet, this can also create several biases and filters. I
designed the study based on my extensive experiences with just a handful of autistic individuals
as well as my reading of many academic and popular press works about autism in the workplace.
As I read the open-ended responses in the survey and engaged in the interviews, I remained open
to the wide variation of autistic experiences. I listened carefully to autistic participants talk about
their experiences and attempted to not impose my norms and standards on their life experiences.
I constantly reflected on the interviews by taking notes and reviewing transcripts to check where
I might let neurotypical (non-autistic) biases creep in. As will be apparent in Chapters 4 and 5,
this approach helped me extend the paradigms and frameworks that I used to design the study.
Still, I have learned that there is much to learn about the wide variation of neurodiverse
experiences in the workplace.
48

I worry about my research contributing to inaccurate stereotypes about those on the
spectrum. I will continue to conduct research that I think will contribute to more inclusive work
environments for neurodiverse professionals and hope to promote a strengths-based approach
grounded in reality as perceived by my participants (Lorenz et al., 2017).
Validity and Reliability
For the survey, the PRCA-24 survey is widely demonstrated as valid and reliable across
many populations and across many decades (Croucher et al., 2019; McCroskey et al., 1985;
Murphy & Weber, 2019). At the time of this study, no known research had explored autistic
individuals with this instrument. With this study’s sample of autistic working adults, the PRCA-
24 subscales exhibited high reliability: group conversations (α = .86), meetings (α = .86),
interpersonal conversations (α = .83), and presentations and public speeches (α = .87). All survey
items can be seen in Table 5 in Chapter 4.
For the semi-structured qualitative interviews, I ensured that there were enough
participants (11) to develop useful themes that emerged from the experiences of these
participants. I also provide extensive and rich quotations in the Chapter 4 to demonstrate the
nature of the coding and to allow readers to make their own interpretations. The many quotations
also allow the research to represent the true voices of the participants to speak for themselves
(Creswell & Creswell, 2018; Merriam & Tisdell, 2016).
Ethics
I protected the identities of all participants, attempted to make the research a positive
experience for them, and ensured that there was informed consent at all stages of data collection.
All survey participants completed an informed consent form at the start of the survey. All survey
data is anonymous. The only piece of identifiable information I had was the IP address of each
49

survey participant. I removed these IP addresses from the dataset immediately. For the semi-
structured interviews, I recorded all interviews. I will keep all participants’ identities completely
confidential. The recordings were only kept on my computer (not the cloud). I eliminated any
directly identifiable information from the recordings or transcripts. When I complete the study, I
will destroy the recordings. All interview participants received the informed consent form 2 to 3
days before our meeting so they could carefully evaluate whether they wanted to participate. I
offered to let all participants see the summary results of the study if they were interested. I
believe the study results will feel empowering to many study participants.
50

Chapter Four: Findings
This chapter summarizes the findings to the three research questions. The first two
questions address the extent to which autistic professionals experience communication
apprehension and factors associated with various levels of communication apprehension. A
survey was administered to address these two research questions. The third research question
addresses how the professional environment influences how autistic professionals gain (or lose)
confidence in communication situations. Participants are sometimes referred to as autistic
professionals to highlight common results among the hundreds of individuals who participated in
this study.
Results for Research Question 1
To address the extent to which autistic professionals experience communication at work,
the survey contained the PRCA-24 instrument as well as two open-ended items. The PRCA-24
instrument provides standardized measures of communication apprehension. The open-ended
items provide additional insight into areas of communication apprehension not captured by the
PRCA-24.
Communication Apprehension as Measured by PRCA-24 Results
The PRCA-24 contains 24 items with four subscales. Table 5 displays the descriptive
statistics for each of the survey items as well as the averages for subscales. Some items are
reverse coded. Those who tend to agree with the various items (agreement signals higher
communication apprehension) range from just over 40% to just over 60%. As far as means for
the subscales (higher means indicate higher apprehension), communication apprehension from
highest to lowest is as follows: presentations (M = 3.51), meetings (M = 3.41), interpersonal
conversations (M = 3.26), and group discussions (M = 3.25).
51

Table 5
Personal Report of Communication Apprehension (PRCA-24) Survey Items
Survey item M SD %
agree
Group discussions

I dislike participating in group discussions. 3.26 1.25 47.2
Generally, I am comfortable while participating in group
discussions.*
3.23 1.13 44.7
I am tense and nervous while participating in group discussions. 3.52 1.14 56.8
I like to get involved in group discussions.* 3.19 1.19 41.9
Engaging in a group discussion with new people makes me
tense and nervous.
3.68 1.19 61.4
I am calm and relaxed while participating in group
discussions.*
3.45 1.20 52.1
Group discussions average 3.25 .78

Meetings

Generally, I am nervous when I have to participate in a meeting. 3.32 1.21 49.1
Usually, I am comfortable when I have to participate in a
meeting.*
3.25 1.16 45.4
I am very calm and relaxed when I am called upon to express an
opinion at a meeting.*
3.40 1.24 51.5
I am afraid to express myself at meetings. 3.33 1.18 48.8
Communicating at meetings usually makes me uncomfortable. 3.47 1.14 56.2
I am very relaxed when answering questions at a meeting.* 3.30 1.19 47.8
Meetings average 3.35 .91

Interpersonal (dyadic) conversations

While participating in a conversation with a new acquaintance, I
feel very nervous.
3.23 1.23 45.1
I have no fear of speaking up in conversations.* 3.15 1.22 42.6
Ordinarily I am very tense and nervous in conversations. 3.34 1.10 45.9
Ordinarily I am very calm and relaxed in conversations.* 3.20 1.13 42.6
While conversing with a new acquaintance, I feel very relaxed.* 3.26 1.18 45.6
I’m afraid to speak up in conversations. 3.38 1.20 51.5
Interpersonal average 3.26 .86

Presentations and Public Speaking Items

I have no fear of giving a presentation or speech.* 3.67 1.24 61.4
Certain parts of my body feel very tense and rigid while giving
a presentation or speech.
3.63 1.16 62.4
I feel relaxed while giving a presentation or speech.* 3.48 1.25 51.9
My thoughts become confused and jumbled when I am giving a
presentation or speech.
3.47 1.18 54.6
I face the prospect of giving a presentation or speech with
confidence.*
3.33 1.21 47.0
52

Survey item M SD %
agree
While giving a presentation or speech, I get so nervous I forget
facts I really know.
3.48 1.19 53.3
Presentations average 3.51 .94

Note. N = 324. % agree refers to the percentage of participants who selected “agree” or “strongly
agree” on the survey. To some extent, this indicates the percentage of participants who reported
apprehension for the item.
* reverse-coded item

Overall, autistic professionals reported high communication apprehension. Table 6
displays the average scores for PRCA-24 subcomponents as well as the total PRCA-24 score.
Based on benchmarks established from several decades of PRCA-24 research (McCroskey et al.,
1985, 2015), roughly 52% of autistic professionals in this sample were considered high in overall
communication apprehension. On the various subscales, autistic professionals range from 34%
being considered high in communication apprehension for presentations and public speaking up
to 68% being considered high in communication apprehension for interpersonal interactions.
Figure 2 displays the percentage of participants who are considered low, moderate, and high in
CA in the various subscales as well as overall CA. The “Discussion of Study Findings” section
in Chapter 5 provides comparisons from this study with those of the general population in prior
studies to help illustrate the much higher likelihood of experiencing moderate and high
communication apprehension among autistic individuals.

53

Table 6
PRCA-24 Average Scores

Autistic professionals
(n = 324)

M SD % high apprehension
Group score 20.3 5.4 53.7
Meetings score 20.1 5.5 53.7
Interpersonal score 19.6 5.2 68.0
Presentations score 21.1 5.7 33.8
PRCA-24 score 81.0 18.7 52.4

Note. Scores for autistic employees are from this survey. National statistics are from multiple
studies (McCroskey et al., 2015) and are intended to serve as comparison points with autistic
employees. PRCA-24 scores are calculated in the following ways: group discussions: 18 –
(scores for items 2, 4, & 6) + (scores for items 1,3, & 5); meetings: 18 – (scores for items 8, 9, &
12) + (scores for items 7, 10, & 11); interpersonal: 18 – (scores for items 14, 16, & 17) + (scores
for items 13, 15, & 18); presentations: 18 – (scores for items 19, 21, & 23) + (scores for items
20, 22, &24). Each of the PRCA subscales result in scores from six to 24. The PRCA–24 total
score for communication apprehension is a sum of the four subscales. It ranges from 24 to 120.
Scores between 83 and 120 are considered high communication apprehension (McCroskey et al.,
2015).

54

Figure 2
Communication Apprehension Among Autistic Professionals

Note. Multiple national studies with over 43,000 participants have established the benchmarks
for low, moderate, and high communication apprehension. Group conversations benchmarks:
under 11, low; 11 to 20, moderate; 20 and above, high. Meetings benchmarks: under 13, low; 13
to 20, moderate; 20 and above, high. Interpersonal conversations benchmarks: under 11, low; 11
to 20, moderate; 20 and above, high. Presentations benchmarks: under 11, low; 11 to 18,
moderate; 18 and above, high. Overall communication apprehension benchmarks: under 51, low;
51 to 80, moderate; 80 and above, high (McCroskey et al., 2015).

Communication Apprehension Based on Open Survey Responses
The findings of the two open-ended items in the survey add additional nuance to the
PRCA-24 results. Participants shared comments about communication situations that made them
feel (a) “nervous or anxious” and (b) “comfortable or confident.” These items were coded from a
data-driven approach. The most common responses for nerve-racking or anxiety-producing
communication situations were classified as unpredictable work-related situations, unpredictable
5
11
5
11
4
42
55
27
36
43
52
34
68
54
54
Overall Communication Apprehension
Presentations
Interpersonal Conversations
Meetings
Group Conversations
Communication Apprehension Among Autistic Professionals
Low Moderate High
Percentage of Survey Participants
55

social situations at work, interactions with bosses or superiors, group conversations or meetings,
and presentations. The most common responses for comfortable or confident communication
situations were classified as predictable work-related situations, predictable and positive social
situations at work, interactions with colleagues or peers, and one-to-one communication.
Tables 7 and 8 summarize the results for communication situations at work that are
associated with (a) nervousness or anxiousness and (b) comfort or confidence (detailed coding
descriptions, examples, and counts are provided in Appendix C). Because the level of
predictability factored prominently into perceptions of nervousness versus comfort, this section
highlights quotes from participants for these categories (it includes quotations when at least eight
people made the comment). Quotes are followed with a reference to participant numbers (i.e.,
P13 refers to Participant 13). This section briefly mentions comparisons in terms of the nature of
relationships and types of communication situations.

56

Table 7
Coding and Results for Uncomfortable Communication Situations at Work
Category Code
Code
count (%)
Category
count (%)
Unpredictable work-
related situations
74 (30.6%)
Put on the spot 44 (18.2%)
Disagreement or confrontation 29 (12.0%)
Unstructured work interactions 10 (4.1%)
Unpredictable social
situations at work
62 (25.6%)
Working with new people 34 (14.0%)
Feeling singled out or judged 24 (9.9%)

Small talk or uncomfortable topics of
conversation
10 (4.1%)
Nature of
relationships
39 (16.1%)
With a boss or superior 35 (14.5%)
With colleagues or peers 4 (1.7%)
With subordinates 0 (0.0%)
With customers 2 (0.8%)
Types of
communication
situations

116
(47.9%)
One-on-one communication 8 (3.3%)
Group conversations or meetings 53 (21.9%)
Large groups 23 (9.5%)
Presentations 54 (22.3%)
Face-to-face communication 5 (2.1%)
Phone conversations 10 (4.1%)
Online meetings 1 (0.4%)
Email or texting 4 (1.7%)
25 (10.3%)
Overall All communication situations 20 (8.3%)
No communication situations 5 (2.1%)

Note. Of 324 respondents who completed the full PRCA-24 survey, 242 (74.5%) completed the
following optional open-ended item: Generally, what types of communication situations at work
make you the most nervous or anxious? Please share just a few thoughts. The percentages in the
57

table are based on dividing the count by 242 (the number of people who responded to this survey
item). The code counts do not necessarily equal the sum of related subcodes.

Unpredictable Work-Related Situations
Unpredictable work-related situations are situations in which people do not have time to
adequately formulate their work-related content and ideas. These types of challenges were
reported by 74 (31%) participants. Common types of unpredictable work-related situations
included being put on the spot, facing disagreement or confrontation, and unstructured work
interactions.
Being put on the spot involves situations in which people must spontaneously explain
their views or solve a problem without enough time to prepare content and/or their ideas. This
challenge was reported by 44 (18%) participants. For example, in response to the question about
communication situations that cause anxiety or nervousness, one participant commented, “When
I am not given a couple hours to prepare and collect my thoughts before speaking to people”
(P180). Some participants described their reasoning for avoiding being put on the spot. A
participant explained, “Meetings or presentations that don’t involve preparing my subject matter
ahead of time. When I ad lib I tend to say things that aren’t polite and/or socially appropriate”
(P103). Other participants contrasted their feelings for communication situations that were
planned versus unplanned. For example, a participant explained the difference between
impromptu versus planned presentations: “Talking in front of a crowd spontaneously [causes
anxiety or nervousness]. If I can prepare a speech, I’m still nervous but not just speaking out an
opinion” (P307).
58

Facing disagreement or confrontation involved situations in which people must navigate
differences of views and sensitive work topics. This challenge was reported by 29 (12%)
participants. For example, in response to the question about communication situations that led to
nervousness or anxiety, one participant stated, “If there’s anything that requires either
confrontation or calling someone out, I get very nervous” (P156). Another participant simply
mentioned, “Confrontations with coworkers” (P83).
Unstructured work situations involved communication contexts, such as meetings, that
lack clear agendas, structure, focus, or norms for turn-taking. This challenge was reported by 10
(4%) participants. For example, in response to the question about communication situations that
led to nervousness or anxiety, one participant stated, “I guess having to do interactions where I
don’t know how to navigate the interaction” (P305). Another participant mentioned, “Informal
group setting when I don’t know if it’s my turn to talk” (P67).
Sometimes, participants mentioned how additional factors, such as interactions with the
boss or working in large groups, accentuated anxiety or nervousness associated with
unpredictable work-related situations. For example, one participant explained, “Being suddenly
called to a formal meeting with just my supervisor” (P115). Another participant added, “Large
meetings where I am called upon unexpectedly to speak on something I don’t know about”
(P112).
Unpredictable Social Situations at Work
Unpredictable social situations at work involved situations in which the social nature of
the conversation influences communication dynamics. These types of challenges were reported
by 62 (26%) participants. These situations at work included interacting with new people, feeling
singled out or judged, and engaging in small talk or other uncomfortable topics in conversations.
59

Working with new people involved situations in which people interact with others
without knowing them well. This challenge was reported by 34 (14%) participants. For example,
when asked about communication situations that led to nervousness or anxiety, one participant
mentioned, “Meeting new people” (P102). Another participant explained, “Anything to do with
new people or those I don’t speak to often” (P141). Yet another participant said, “Talking to new
people, it becomes better when I get to know them but otherwise it makes me really nervous”
(P147).
Feeling singled out or judged involved situations where people feel they draw unwanted
attention or feel negatively judged by others. This challenge was reported by 24 (10%)
participants, often in emotional terms. Many participants expressed skepticism they would be
viewed favorably by their peers. For example, one participant explained, “Speaking up, all eyes
on me type situations where supposedly there is no wrong answer but secretly are judged by
peers for expressing opinion” (P130). Another participant echoed this sentiment: “Facing a group
that is supposed to be supportive, but turn on me” (P259). One other participant stated:
Any activity that requires thinking up and clearing something on the spot that will be
judged by others less intelligent than I am. I don’t like saying that but that is how I feel. I
don’t judge others as being less than intelligent. I fear they MIGHT be and therefore
scoring me is not an actual reflection of the work I and those I chose to be on my team.
(P299)
Small talk or uncomfortable topics of conversations involve situations in which people
are expected to engage in small talk or conversations about private or non-work matters. This
challenge was reported by 10 (4%) participants. For example, when asked about communication
situations that led to nervousness or anxiety, a participant mentioned, “General conversations
60

about people’s lives and families” (P46). Another participant said, “I don’t do well with small
talk” (P187).
These concerns about social situations were often amplified in certain situations. For
example, when not knowing people or working with those with higher authority, it can
exacerbate the anxiety. For example, a participant said that “one on one meetings with higher ups
I’ve never met suck,” yet “a one on one with coworkers I know ahead of the meeting” cause
comfort or confidence (P126).
Predictable and Positive Social Situations at Work
When asked about communication situations at work in which they feel comfortable or
confident, predictability and positivity of social interactions frequently factored into participants’
responses (see Table 8). These types of situations were reported by 87 (37%) of participants.
Types of predictable and positive social situations at work included working with close and well-
known colleagues, supportive communication, casual conversation, shared and equal group
efforts, when helping others, and independent work.
Working with close and well-known colleagues involved interactions with colleagues and
others who are close, well known, and friendly. These types of situations were reported by 41
(17%) participants when asked about communication situations that make them confident or
comfortable. For example, a participant responded, “Speaking in front of my site’s staff” (P309).
Another participant mentioned, “Talking in front of small groups of people I know” (P39).
Another participant stated, “People I know really well and have social camaraderie” (P102).
Some participants explained a timeline for when they would feel comfortable. For example, a
participant mentioned, “Only after a couple of months of small talk and banter do I feel calm”
(P100). Some participants emphasized the contrasts between unknown versus known people in
61

their responses to the two questions. For example, a participant responded about to the question
about nervousness in this way: “I get claustrophobic being in groups, especially in small rooms
and especially if I don’t know the people.” He responded to the question about comfortable
situations in this way: “I am less stressed if I know the people. Speaking one on one with co-
workers with whom I’m familiar” (P258).
Supportive communication involved situations in which people feel others offer support,
appreciation, and encourage them to speak up. These types of situations were reported by 19
(8%) participants when asked about communication situations that made them comfortable or
confident. For example, a participant mentioned, “Friendly conversations” (P115). Another
participant explained the importance of being understood or supported in her unique approach to
work. She said, “Trying to explain to my boss how I feel or how I learn in my own way. Why I
do things that are a bit different from his way. Being able to explain my way of learning and
executing the company’s expectations, without being made to feel less than I am. Being made to
feel I am being difficult” (P301). Also, some participants commented on how close colleagues
could provide supportive communication in challenging moments. For example, a participant
said, “When I know what I’m talking about and I have somebody else with me who knows what
they are talking about who can help if I get overwhelmed” (P279).
Casual conversations involved interactions that are characterized by casual, relaxed, or
informal communication. Casual conversations were reported by 11 (5%) of participants when
asked about communication situations that made them comfortable or confident. For example, in
response to the question about communication situations lead to comfort or confidence, a
participant mentioned, “If it’s a light hearted group discussion about things I know about it’s
much easier” (P289). Another participant said, “Informal meetings” (P195).
62

Table 8
Coding and Results for Comfortable Communication Situations at Work
Category Code
Code
count (%)
Category
count (%)
Predictable and
positive social
situations at work
87 (36.7%)
Close and well-known colleagues 41 (17.3%)
Supportive communication 19 (8.0%)
Casual conversation 11 (4.6%)
Shared and equal group efforts 11 (4.6%)
Helping others 6 (2.5%)
Independent work 6 (2.5%)
Predictable work-
related situations
47 (19.8%)
Adequate preparation and expertise 39 (16.5%)

Focus on facts and objective
information
9 (3.8%)
Structured work interactions 2 (.8%)
Nature of
relationships
56 (23.6%)
With a boss or superior 1 (.4%)
With colleagues or peers 52 (21.9%)
With subordinates 2 (.8%)
With customers 2 (.8%)
Types of
communication
situations

104
(43.9%)
One-on-one communication 54 (22.8%)
Group conversations or meetings 15 (6.3%)
Small groups 10 (4.2%)
Presentations 11 (4.6%)
Face-to-face communication 3 (1.3%)
Phone conversations 0 (0.0%)
Online meetings 2 (.8%)
Email or texting 21 (8.9%)
Overall 27 (11.4%)
All communication situations 2 (.8%)
No communication situations 25 (10.5%)

Note. Of 324 respondents who completed the full PRCA-24 survey, 237 (72.9%) completed the
following optional open-ended item: Generally, what types of communication situations at work
63

make you most comfortable or confident? Please share just a few thoughts. The percentages in
the table are based on dividing the count by 237 (the number of people who responded to this
survey item). The code counts do not necessarily equal the sum of related subcodes.

Shared and equal group efforts involved communication that is characterized by everyone
in the group equally sharing efforts. This type of situation was reported by 11 (5%) participants
when asked about communication situations that made them comfortable or confident. For
example, a participant, mentioned, “[When it’s a] group effort, all pitch in and no one is isolated”
(P130). Another participant said, “I’m comfortable in positive group discussions that are about
sharing new ideas” (P156).
Predictable Work-Related Situations
When participants described communication situations that could be approached with
confidence and comfort, they often described predictable work-related situations. These are
situations in which people have time to formulate their work-related ideas or develop work-
related content for interactions. These situations were reported by 47 (20%) participants.
Common types of predictable work-related situations included having adequate time to formulate
their work-related ideas and a focus on facts and objective information.
Adequate preparation and time involved situations in which people are given enough time
to prepare their content and ideas or have the expertise to address an issue immediately. This
type of situation was reported by 39 (17%) participants. Participants mentioned many situations
in which they valued being prepared. For example, a participant mentioned, “Presenting a subject
I know intimately that I can prepare a speech ahead of time” (P103). Some participants noted the
importance of the time to practice or rehearse. For example, a participant said, “Practice the
64

things I need to say and imagine that I’m alone” (P106). Other participants mentioned the issue
of control. For example, a participant explained, “Meetings in which I feel I am in control and I
know the material and info” (P196).
Some participants emphasized the importance of knowing the topic extremely well. For
example, a participant explained, “When I am asked to give a presentation on something that I
feel like I have not had the time to research. Even if I have researched it. I would need to be
100% knowledgeable in the subject” (P279). Other participants emphasized that being able to
prepare content ahead of time helped them overcome nervousness and anxiety. For example, a
participant mentioned:
New people and large groups are the worst. However, if it is I that is giving a
presentation I can use notes and stay on topic. If I am making the presentation then it is I
that has the information needed. (P310)
Other participants explained the central role of expertise. For example, a participant said,
“Probably times where whatever the subject is I feel knowledgeable about it or whatever I’m
more comfortable” (P305).
A focus on facts and objective information involved situations in which decision-making
and conversations are driven by facts and objective information. This type of situation was
reported by nine (4%) participants. For example, a participant explained, “Informal discussion
with groups that are focused on facts, identifying, discussing and resolving issues. If something
happened that needs to be fixed, the focus is on the problem instead of the people involved or
assigning fault” (P69). Another participant mentioned, “Business conversations that are solidly
focused on a topic” (P18).

65

Nature of Relationships Involved in Communication Situations
When responding to both open-ended questions, participants often mentioned the nature
of the relationship involved. For communication situations that led to nervousness or anxiety, 35
participants (15%) mentioned when working with a boss or superior, four (2%) participants
mentioned a peer or colleagues, no participants mentioned working with subordinates, and two
(1%) participants mentioned with customers. By contrast, for communication situations
involving that led to comfort and confidence, one participant (.4%) mentioned with a boss or
superior, 52 (22%) mentioned with colleagues or peers, two (1%) mentioned with subordinates,
and two (1%) mentioned with customers. The contrast in these reactions is illustrated by one
participant who simply mentioned her “supervisor” when referring to communication situations
that led to nervousness, whereas she replied “my coworker besties” when referring to
communication situations that led to confidence (P50).
Types of Communication Situations
Participants often referred to the type of situation (i.e., one-to-one communication, group
conversations) as leading to nervousness or comfort. When asked about communication
situations that led to nervousness or anxiety, the communication situations mentioned in order
were the following: presentations (54 participants; 22%), group conversations (53 participants;
22%), large groups (23 participants; 10%), phone conversations (10 participants; 4%), one-to-
one communication (eight participants, 3%), face-to-face communication (five participants; 2%),
email or texting (four participants; 2%), and online meetings (one participant; .4%). When asked
about communication situations that led to comfort or confidence, the communication situations
mentioned in order were the following: one-to-one communication (54 participants; 23%), email
or texting (21 participants; 9%), presentations (11 participants, 5%), face-to-face communication
66

(three participants; 1%), and online meetings (two participants; 1%). One frequent contrast was
the presence of small versus large groups. For example, one participant mentioned that “Getting
in front of a large group of unfamiliar people” led to nervousness or anxiety, whereas “talking in
front of small groups of people I know” led to comfort or confidence (P39).
Whether communication situations were characterized as anxiety inducing or comfortable
appeared largely due to the context they imagined. For example, email was avoided or embraced
for different reasons. For example, one participant mentioned the anxiety of email when it came
from unknown people:
Email is by far the worst as I communicate with strangers. If I have put off responding to
an email, I feel bad and don’t want to face the consequences of not responding.
Sometimes I never respond … I have come to stress when I hear the Outlook email
notification. (P214)
Yet, other participants preferred email for other reasons. One participant commented, “Speaking
with or in front of people I do not know [leads to anxiety]. I fear they’re laughing at me.” Yet
this same participant responded to the question about comfortable communication situations in
this way: “Email! I don’t have to see people’s faces” (P318). Other participants emphasized the
control associated with email. For example, one participant said, “When I can present the info on
my terms such as through email” (P239).
Rather than identifying specific communication situations that make them anxious or
confident, some participants simply stated that all situations affected them in a certain way.
When asked which situations led to nervousness or anxiety, 20 participants (8%) said all
situations and five (2%) said no situations. Participants who mentioned all situations made
comments such as the following: “Everything. I am a ball of anxiety” (P45); “All forms make me
67

stressed out. I dislike talking to people and avoid it when possible” (P65); and “Pretty well any
communication or social interaction makes me extremely nervous and uncomfortable” (P203).
When asked which situations led to comfort or confidence, two participants (1%) mentioned all
situations and 25 participants (11%) mentioned no situations.
Results for Research Question 2
In prior research about communication apprehension in the workplace, several
relationships hold for working adults in the general population. First, working adults with more
work experience and more managerial experience tend to experience less communication
apprehension (Marcel, 2019). Also, women tend to experience higher communication
apprehension than men (Boyer et al., 2017; Loureiro et al., 2020; Yan et al., 2022). Although
depression and anxiety have not been directly correlated with results from the PRCA-24, some
research suggests those with anxiety display more hesitance in social interactions at work
(Bertilsson et al., 2013). It was expected these relationships would likewise hold for autistic
professionals.
To explore the impact of various factors on communication apprehension, a regression
analysis was conducted. Each of the PRCA-24 subscales (groups, meetings, interpersonal,
presentations) and overall scores were used as dependent variables. A regression analysis helps
identify which independent variables are significant when controlling for the other independent
variables. As displayed in Table 9, women with autism reported significantly higher
communication apprehension than men with autism in the following situations: meetings,
presentations, and overall.

68

Table 9
Regressions on Communication Apprehension Levels among Autistic Professionals

Model 1:
Groups
Model 2:
Meetings
Model 3:
Interpersonal
Model 4:
Presentations
Model 5:
Overall
β p β p β p β p β p
ADHD .02 .75 -.02 .66 -.07 .19 .02 .66 -.02 .71
Anxiety .01 .92 .08 .15 .08 .17 .09 .13 .06 .34
Depression .09 .11 .09 .10 .05 .37 .04 .44 .09 .14
Management
status .03 .60 -.01 .86 .03 .59 -.07 .14 -.02 .70
Work
experience .12 .06 .12 .06 .01 .91 .03 .58 .03 .62
Mentoring at
work -.13 .01** -.02 .76 .07 .17 -.02 .67 -.05 .32
Age -.04 .53 -.03 .58 .01 .94 .01 .92 .02 .75
Education .04 .49 -.02 .68 .02 .75 .00 .97 -.01 .89
Gender
(female) .08 .12 .12 .02* .03 .55 .12 .01** .10 .05*

Note. Model 1 R
2
= .05*; Model 2 R
2
= .05*; Model 3 R
2
= .02; Model 4 R
2
= .04*; Model 5 R
2
=
18.49*.
* p < .05, ** p < .01

Autistic professionals who had mentors reported significantly less communication
apprehension than autistic professionals who did not have mentors. Surprisingly, none of the
other independent variables were significant predictors of communication apprehension. These
results are addressed further in the discussion of findings in Chapter 5.
Results for Research Question 3
The survey results established autistic professionals experience significant
communication apprehension in the workplace in a variety of situations. Yet, the survey results
revealed less about the in-depth perceptions of how autistic professionals gain (or lose)
69

confidence in communication situations at work. Semi-structured interviews showed how the
professional environment is the foundation from which various elements of social self-efficacy
can thrive or diminish.
Professional Environment as a Foundation for Social Self-Efficacy
All participants discussed how the professional environment contributed to their
confidence in communication situations. This environment influences the ways in which autistic
professionals interact with colleagues, customers, and others. This professional environment—
composed of support, cadence, and resilience—was the foundation from which social self-
efficacy emerged.
Support
All participants discussed the support that has sustained them in their work and led to
higher confidence in communication situations. This support was displayed in the following
ways: managerial support, a sense of belonging and emotional support from trusted colleagues,
receiving favorable social interventions by others, and tapping into the neurodiverse community.
Managerial Advocacy. Managerial advocacy involves the degree to which managers
support autistic employees and create environments that foster their success. Ten participants
talked about how managerial advocacy had strengthened their confidence in communication
situations. This was often framed in terms of understanding and accommodating the unique
needs of participants. It also involved managers advocating to neurotypical employees on behalf
of neurodiverse employees. For example, Ava explained, “She [my boss] is so friendly to me
right now, because we’ve known each other for a long time. Right now I’m very confident
because I’ve been working and the boss is very patient with me and makes sure the other
employees help me.” Participants thought that with managerial advocacy, they could perform
70

much better in social situations. For example, Isabella mentioned how managers could support
autistic employees: “Autistic employees are able to collaborate as long as you help them. You
have to understand them and recognize that we all have weaknesses and we also have strengths
too. Just try to support them [the autistic employees] and make them feel comfortable to
collaborate with the other workers.”
Some participants emphasized that without managerial advocacy, autistic professionals
face unique challenges. For example, Charlotte explained:
But there are a lot of them [autistic employees] are going to be set up to fail and, at the
very minimum, the best case, we can hope for is they’re not going to be able to fulfill
their full potential. They’re just not because they’re going to spend most of their energy
every day navigating this environment that is hostile to them and you’re not going to get
to them and you’re not going to get the person you could have had because they’re
masking and they’re using all of their daily executive functions to deal with the social
politics. … Most autistic people are going to fail if you don’t train managers.
Charlotte questioned autism hiring programs that focus on getting autistic professionals “in the
door” but don’t have the managerial advocacy and other support mechanisms to help autistic
professionals succeed in social situations.
Belonging and Emotional Support. Six participants attributed confidence in
communication situations to a sense of belonging and knowing they had emotional support. They
described the safety of knowing they were an important member of a team or group of
employees. For example, Oliver described this sense of belonging:
I have a good support system from my colleagues. … I find, like my colleagues are on
my side. The three of us they make me feel like I have you know, like you belong
71

somewhere. They’re always on my side so I really feel like that it’s sort of a support
system. … They are like a family. They understand me on a personal level. … My
colleagues are perfect and then my work I just love it.
Participants sometimes attributed this sense of belonging to small groups of colleagues who they
had worked with for years. Olivia had been with just a few colleagues for several years without
turnover in staff. She explained,
They are people who I find I can work with very collaboratively and it’s been great being
here for a while as part of the team. It’s a good thing I’m in smaller meetings with just
my team, so I don’t get that pressure from my bosses. So I feel I am able to interact with
people just easy you know. It takes a lot of pressure off me. … I just love working in
small groups, because they I don’t get pressure.
Participants valued knowing they could reach out to trusted colleagues when they needed
emotional support. For example, Liam said, “I have a colleague who I worked with him very
closely, and he was the one who I could go and tell things.” Emma also emphasized the benefits
of someone to share emotional support:
My mentor really consoles me. I tell him about my workplace stress. I stress about a lot
of things in my head that I can’t handle or explain it. He assures me I’m not alone and
then I do feel I like it helps and [feel] supported. … Sometimes I’m feeling maybe
disadvantaged. That’s the time I go to him. It creates an environment that accommodates
autistic people and people who are not autistic. It just gives them a good environment that
they can perform to the best of their ability as long as they’re given good working
conditions.
72

Feeling understood was highly valued by autistic professionals. Amelia mentioned, “I really love
my job because it’s a good place I work … and it’s a place that the employees understand my
situation and is conducive for me to understand how to work with others.”
Social Interventions. Ten participants described the degree to which they received
helpful interventions by managers and colleagues in challenging social interactions. These
interventions typically involved providing a safe environment for participants to speak up or
involved mediating or managing conflict. For example, Oliver mentioned, “When patients are
rude to me, my coworkers will always help me out. Sometimes they will take over and work with
the patients.” Liam shared a similar experience:
He [my supervisor] understands me really well because, like, for instance, when we are
dealing with customers and then sometimes there can be some customers who are
bothering me. He just takes me out of the place I’m working. Maybe if I was serving the
food, he takes me to maybe the cashier.
Sometimes, these interventions came in advance of social interactions. For example,
Emma explained how her manager prepared her to speak up in meetings:
I feel more confident when I’m given a chance to do something. I feel less confident
when I’m not given a chance, like denied maybe some opportunities like leadership
opportunities. But, my managers, in my office, they are aware of my condition. They
always give me a chance to speak. Let’s say maybe at a meeting they tell me ahead what
questions they will ask. They help me get involved … sometimes, they fail to recognize I
wanna talk. Sometimes, they recognize me and give me a chance and that gives me the
courage to talk to people in other groups.
73

Neurodiverse Community. Eight participants explained how they relied on formal and
informal support groups with other autistic individuals to discuss challenges at work and develop
coping strategies. As Olivia said, “With them [autism support group] the fact that we can share
stories. We can talk regarding our day-to-day challenges and also have something have someone
to stand by you.” Mia emphasized the emotional support provided by autistic peers:
With autistic people, it can help when others, maybe you find people who are autistic like
get to know people who also identify as you know autistic and venture out together and
can interact together and like share like ideas together, to give you, each other hope and
embrace each other.
Some participants explained that they bonded not only over current challenges but also
childhood experiences. Sophia described this process:
We [autistic peers] talk about for example in terms of the challenges that we encounter
from day to day how we are able to like able to be not be in conflict with others. We talk
about what happens when we have those depressive moods and thoughts. We share
experiences from our childhood.
Some participants were active organizers for these groups within their companies. For
example, Charlotte explained her efforts:
I recently started a neurodivergent Slack channel at my company … what we do in that
channel is we share experiences and memes and other stuff. We let each other know like
“Hey I’m really struggling with this time change like anybody else struggling?” or “What
are you guys doing with the trainings sessions?” or “Is anybody free for me to jump on a
call right and I have a presentation to prepare?” We don’t talk to each other, we just sit on
a Zoom call and work, you know, but we use that as an accountability. … From our lived
74

experience and so you’re able to kind of cut to the chase with help and advice, whereas
before you have to weed out the kind of stuff that [neurotypical] people are going to offer
you because they don’t know.
Cadence
All participants described the cadence—the predictability and rhythmic-based nature of
work—that supported more confidence in communication situations. Common elements
described by participants as contributing to a comfortable cadence included familiarity with
others, scheduling aligned with preferences, and avoiding excessive work demands.
Familiarity with Others. Eight participants talked about the importance of working with
colleagues, customers, or others who they know well. Noah explained, “I prefer interacting with
people that I have known from the past or people that we have some history together. When it
comes to interacting with new people it’s a bit stressful.”
Sometimes, participants described the importance of working with people who
understand them and their autism. For example, Emma mentioned:
I don’t really like it when there are new people in my office or [when I] encounter new
people that come in and fail to recognize my situation and fail to understand me. They
may not be comfortable with me. I just prefer to be with my employees that I’m used to
and I’m so social with them. They understand my situation. They know how to talk with
me, and I know how to handle them.
Other participants explained how in the early stages of work relationships, they had a
hard time getting along with others. Only after getting to know the other person (and vice versa)
did their communication become easier. For example, Amelia explained her early interactions
with her supervisor:
75

The initial interactions were not that good. Sometimes there was arguing. But after a
while, I was just doing my job and we understood each other and now he is a person who
I look up to. … The newly employed, we sometimes disagree about stuff.
In the “Belonging and Emotional Support” section, Oliver described how his team felt like
“family” and was the “support system” he needed. He explained that it took “about six months
for us to bond.”
Scheduling. Six participants emphasized the importance of scheduling work at times that
aligned with their preferences. For example, Charlotte said, “So, like I am useless pretty much
after 4 [p.m.]. I’ve been perky at work pretty much all day. I’m done at 4 [p.m.], so I try not to
schedule meetings after that you know I work more you know better earlier in the day.” Isabella
shared a similar view: “For me it’s just keeping time when I’m required to be at work by 7 or 8
[a.m.], I think it’s quite a challenge for me.” Noah explained, “By 10 [a.m.], I feel ready. That’s
when I feel best.
I will have had good enough sleep.” Not only did participants mention that they worked best at
certain times, they explained how supervisors should be understanding of time management
challenges. For example, Sophia said:
The most frustrating thing is being able to like get to my job. At 7:30 a.m. I’m not a
morning person … he [my boss] makes me feel comfortable at my workplace when I’m
late. He does not, like, make me feel bad or he does not get that annoyed. He just
understands me.
Work Demands. Six participants described how too much pressure contributes to less
confidence in communication situations. As Olivia stated, “I feel much better when I don’t get
pressure from my bosses.” Mia said, “[Managers should give autistic employees] a supportive
76

environment that does not give them a lot of pressure in workplace.” Often the pressure emerged
from tight deadlines or overlapping assignments. Other times it involved perceived competition
with others. Emma described these issues:
I feel far less confident when I have a lot of people to compete with, especially people
who don’t have my condition. … I can’t concentrate on other things like when I maybe I
need to perform better in the deadline and maybe the deadlines become so tight so I
always feel so uncomfortable until I perform what I have to.
Resilience
All participants described the importance of resilience, the degree to which one persists in
the face of challenges at work. Autistic professionals described two key features of resilience:
self-advocating and determination.
Self-Advocating. Seven participants discussed the importance of self-advocating, which
involves speaking up for one’s own or other neurodiverse employees’ needs in the workplace.
Sometimes self-advocating occurred slowly as participants learned to disclose their autism to
others. For example, Mia said:
At first I didn’t want anyone to know that I’m autistic. I really tried to be normal. I didn’t
want anyone like knowing that I’m autistic. If I found that it was leaked that I was
autistic, I really felt so bad. Maybe a friend told another person that I’m autistic, I used to
like get mad at that person … I was like not doing any good for myself or my situation. I
had to develop self-acceptance. I had like to share it to the close people in my life so they
can understand how they should treat me, how they could react to me, how they could
talk to me, and it was only by sharing.
77

Other participants mentioned how important it was to take initiative and self-advocate for
opportunities in the workplace. For example, Sophia explained:
I would also want them [autistic employees] to be able to express themselves when you
feel like their rights are being violated. Please don’t keep quiet. Communicate. Because,
at times, we autistic people tend to be misjudged, tend to be ignored, tend to be sidelined.
Which is not good, because it can make you feel depressed. So, try as much as possible to
communicate.
Other participants felt they should advocate on a larger platform for neurodiverse people.
For example, Charlotte explained what she does to raise awareness of the needs of autistic
professionals:
I do trainings in front of thousands of people a year. So, and I know that I am not the
thing that most people picture when they think of autistic. So, if I can announce in these
trainings, “Hey, by the way, I’m autistic and ADHD so there might be some things that I
mentioned that kind of relate to that you have any questions, let me know.” So,
sometimes it’s as simple as that just up in front and put it with my introduction. You
know I’m a proud member of the neurodivergent community. And it’s also kind of the
beacon, then for people to reach out to me and say, “Hey you know this is me too, so
because my company doesn’t have any official neurodiversity programming or support,
I’d love to connect.”
Determination. Nine participants spoke about the importance of determination, which
involves persisting in the face of negative views and stereotypes of others. Sophia put it simply
this way: “It’s not that easy. You have to be psychologically prepared at times.” Participants
often discussed how they faced the negative views of others. For example, Amelia said:
78

Despite my autism, I’ve always tried to work because I need to earn a living. I want to
prove people wrong. Otherwise, they’ll always think maybe being autistic when a person
is autistic, you’re unable to work. So, it’s again because I want to disprove a lot of
people.
Some participants emphasized that determination involved in seeing oneself as “normal”
and viewing one’s challenges in a “positive” manner. For example, Mia said:
You must practice self-acceptance and not look at your situation as an obstacle to do
other things. Look at your situation as just a normal situation and you are just a normal
human being so that if given the chance, just do your things normally [and take] the
chance to face life positively and, like interact with everyone positively.
Sources of Social Self-Efficacy
All participants discussed various aspects of social self-efficacy, which is “confidence in
one’s ability to engage in the social interactional tasks necessary to initiate and maintain
interpersonal relationships in social life and career activities” (Anderson & Betz, 2001, p. 98). In
particular, three aspects of social self-efficacy were most salient: emotional arousal, past
performance, and social persuasion. These elements of social self-efficacy operated in the
context of the professional environment.
Emotional Arousal
All participants discussed how emotional arousal impacted their social self-efficacy.
Emotional arousal involves the level of unease, nervousness, and/or confusion in social
interactions. Key types of emotional arousal raised in interviews of autistic professionals were
agitation, feeling judged, and feeling out of control. Participants tended to focus on negative
emotions as obstacles to confidence in communication situations.
79

Agitation. Eight participants spoke of the agitation they feel in various social
interactions. Often this occurred in situations involving disagreement or conflict. For example,
Olivia said, “I just get so worked up when others disagree with me. I don’t say anything. I just
am so worked up inside.” Participants often wanted to avoid such feelings or hope for them to go
away. Liam explained:
I get upset when I don’t know what to say with a certain person. I feel that I don’t want to
work in in that place. It can last like maybe if I was working maybe until that day ends.
Maybe after sleeping I come back the next day, I just feel a bit better.
Similarly, Noah reported:
I get such a feeling of agitation sometimes. And now I guess I’ve learned to let go and
avoid it [the conflict]. I just learned to let it go, let it be I just go and take some time off. I
don’t like confronting someone.
Some participants described how having colleagues who understand their level of
agitation helped them. For example, Amelia explained, “What stresses me about meetings is
when people disagree. That’s really stresses me out. It doesn’t happen often now because my
colleagues understand I don’t like disagreement, so they avoid it in meetings.”
Judged. All participants reported feeling judged. Participants described how others
perceived them as incompetent or unable to work effectively in social contexts at work. For
example, Emma explained:
At first they [my colleagues] were shocked that I’m able to maybe do a lot of work
activities and am going to deliver the best. They just stereotype what autistic people can
do and just think they can’t do anything. They assume I can’t work with customers. They
think I should work on other things [not with people].
80

Other participants described the misperceptions of customers. For example, Oliver said, “There
are some patients that will come and think that I’m slow. They keep misunderstanding me.
People perceive us as slow. That we do things slowly.” Isabella, referring to the members of an
autistic support group she is in, said, “A lot of autistic people say there’s mistreatment at some of
their jobs. Other people don’t like you. People don’t want to associate with you.”
Some participants even thought they were heavily disliked because of their autism. For
example, Noah explained:
People they tend to think of you in a certain way. They just hate you. With no good
reason. You’ve never wronged them. Even if I never talk to them. I can’t interact with a
lot of people, so people may have their own perspectives about me. You can just see their
hatred for you. It is my biggest challenge.
Yet, Noah was positive about his work. He explained, “My boss really understands me.” He felt
his closest colleagues “really love me.” He said, “I want to thank you for this study. Maybe it
will help a lot of autistic people. It is important to find people who understand our strengths
[and] who really love us. There can be more understanding people.”
Out of Control. Seven participants described how they lost control of their emotions in
stressful or challenging social interactions. In some cases, it involves losing one’s temper. For
example, Ava explained,
I think some of the biggest challenges are getting to have people understand me because,
at times, I’ll lose my cool, especially when I get agitated. I might lash out at my co-
worker. I’m just trying to be honest. A lot of co-workers get upset.
Other times it involved the display of negative emotions, such as crying. For example,
Charlotte said:
81

When somebody is critical of an idea that I have [I get frustrated], and I think it’s because
I don’t know that I’m upset. Sometimes until it’s pointed out to me or I literally cry. You
know, and so, people will say, “Oh, you need to recognize and manage your emotions.”
It’s like but I don’t. I don’t get it like when people say I am not still entirely sure what
happy feels like I just don’t know like I don’t know what that feels like in in your body or
in your mind you know, and so, when people say recognize your emotions like well,
Good luck, you know, and then, so I know that in those situations my face gets red and I
definitely show my frustration, because I’ve been told that I show my frustration and so
it’s just hard for me to re-set once the train is off the tracks.
Similarly, Mia mentioned:
If someone says something offensive, I overreact where it gets all emotional. To the point
that I can’t control myself. I can end up maybe like crying or there’s something weird or
like may be shouting. At some point, I can’t control myself, especially when something
triggers it like someone shouting at me or someone like telling me something that’s
offensive.
Past Performance
All participants mentioned how past failures or successes impacted their confidence in
communication situations. Past performance relates to an individual’s past experiences in making
friends and other social experiences. Participants talked about failures and successes in social
interactions. They also discussed failures and successes in terms of tasks that had direct bearing
on their social interactions.
Failure. Nine participants described how past failures influenced their current level of
confidence in communication situations. These past failures typically involved social interactions
82

that did not end successfully due to participants’ perceived inability to manage the situation
effectively. In some cases, this involves failure at tasks that were not completed successfully
because there are direct implications for confidence in communication situations.
Some participants mentioned they did not recognize their mistakes in social interactions
in the moment. Only later did they realize what they may have done wrong. For example, Emma
said:
Okay, if it’s me that that was in the wrong, I want to really look for the colleague later
and maybe we had a conflict to tell him that I’m sorry because maybe I did something
that I didn’t understand. I ended up doing something wrong. I’m always sorry. The guilt
really eats me up. I always try to explain to them, and I will not always feel comfortable
until I tried to explain, like, I address an issue that happened.
Some participants recognized that they continued to make the same mistakes over and
over. This often resulted in doubt about whether they could alter their behavior. For example,
Charlotte mentioned:
So, I did that for four or five years [failing at managing people]. Then, I realized what
was happening was a recurring pattern right. I became really great at what I did. I was a
stellar individual contributor. I got promoted to management and the wheels fell off
because I just could not relate. … A lot of the things I don’t figure out until people stop
inviting me to lunch, like the group. The lunch group that I used to be a part of now goes
to lunch without me and I don’t go anymore. Or the projects that I should get because of
my ability go to somebody who has less experience and less skilled but is probably more
pleasant and easier to work with so. Then, I kind of have to backtrack and go okay,
“Where did this go wrong?” You know and try to figure that out, or like the little girl who
83

used to walk with me to school now walk a block and a half, ahead of me, and like
pretends like she doesn’t hear me, you know so that is it’s kind of like a forensics
examination sometimes.
These experiences caused some participants to question their own abilities to make and
maintain relationships at work. Sophia said, “I don’t know to make friends at work. I barely have
any friends. So that’s something I’ll work on. It makes me kind of wanna give up. Sometimes it
makes me feel like I am thoughtless and I’ll just make messes [if I try to build a relationship].”
Charlotte said, “So. It was quite a while, then before you know I thought okay just management
is not for me, you know, but I didn’t know why.” Charlotte explained that more than a decade
and a series of three failures in management roles caused her to constantly wonder whether she
could be a successful manager.
Success. Ten participants mentioned how success in social interactions helped them build
confidence in communication situations. These successes typically involved the participants’
ability to manage social situations effectively. In some cases, it involved success at tasks that
were completed successfully but that had direct implications for confidence in communication
situations. Some participants mentioned highly predictable situations. For example, Olivia said,
“I feel like I’m able to communicate very well when it is planned. I enjoy making presentations.”
Others mentioned making the most of opportunities. For example, Emma explained:
I was given a chance to lead a team. We were tackling a very hard problem. My team did
it, like no other team could do it. Through my leadership, because of my passion, I gave it
to them, and the project was a huge a success.
Similarly, others mentioned how they had succeeded in helping their organizations. Isabella said,
“I’ve become more courageous. To be patient with other people. No one is perfect. In the
84

achievement of the business or the goals of the organization, I’m able to collaborate. I’ve gotten
much better at collaborating.” Likewise, Ava explained:
Some customers who are not willing to like buy items during their first visit [to the store].
I tend to follow up and call some clients and remind them about the items. So, I keep the
customers updated and that’s what I’ve learned on the job. I don’t wait for customers to
come. I call them, for example in the evening to remind them that certain order has come
for you kind of come. Please come and check it out.
Often the successes were attributed to being placed in a favorable environment by others.
For example, Ava thought her ability to interact effectively with customers was in part due to her
boss ensuring she worked with just one customer at a time and was available to help her out:
I think it’s [working with customers] easy because, when you’re dealing with customers
in the cosmetic shop, they have to pass through me, and that is one by one, so don’t have
to worry that at a certain time there’ll be more than five customers. That allows me to
maintain concentration and I’m able to work on my communication skills, give the
necessary directions, ask for clarification from the boss, or seek clarification from the
customer themselves.
Similarly, Charlotte discussed how she picked up certain skills because of operating in a family
business:
And I had always worked also for both my parents on their own business. My dad’s a
CPA and a tax attorney, so I had always worked for him part time also so I felt pretty
comfortable in an admin role. And, then eventually that company asked me to move into
a recruiting spot, which was really fortuitous for me because I was able to learn how to
85

interview. I learned what people expected of you on interviews and all of these things that
I probably never would have picked up on my own.
Social Persuasion
All participants mentioned social persuasion as influencing their confidence in
communication situations. Social persuasion involves feedback given about one’s social skills.
Participants described both formal and informal feedback. One participant pushed back against
feedback because it did not validate the autistic approach to communication.
Four participants mentioned that they received formal feedback about their
communication skills. Some received this feedback through performance reviews. For example,
Sophia explained, “I do receive a performance appraisal and am told how to better manage the
students when they come to the library, how to be fair and everything. I also get training about
how to treat customers.” Others reported receiving training. For example, Ava mentioned,
“When I started, I got customer service training. With the customer and how to conduct myself
in front of customers. How to overcome complaints and how to remain patient.”
Ten participants described how they received informal feedback about their social
interactions with colleagues, customers, and others. Some of the participants described this in
customer-facing roles. For example, Liam said:
Sometimes he [my boss] told me just try to understand the customers better. Sometimes
he told me some of my remarks could upset the customers. He approached some of the
customers to tell them about my situation. To tell them to understand those who have
autism and tell them people with autism don’t always say things nicely.
Other participants emphasized the importance of how the feedback was delivered. Olivia
reported:
86

Especially when it comes to targets and performance, she’s [my boss] there to motivate
us. She doesn’t bash someone who makes a mistake. She gives an opportunity for
growth, and tells us when standards change from time to time. If I say something wrong,
she has a gentle way to correct me.
Some participants explained that without the informal feedback, they would not know
how others reacted to them. For example, Charlotte said:
And again, I ran into the same problem when I was just talking to my boss, one on one
she thought I was doing an amazing job and everything was great. Everything was
wonderful and loved me and everything I did, and then my team brought some concerns
to her that I didn’t know that they had and challenges I didn’t know that they had, and
then it became okay how else might we find something for you to do? And at the same
time, I was going through another situation with a therapist of mine who had said, “Hey I
know that last email you sent I didn’t take it as being mean because I know you.” I
looked at this email and thought it wasn’t mean or rude. But because she knew me and I
never would have thought that this was potentially bad like sometimes you know, like oh
this situation got away from me a little bit that one.
Most participants appeared to accept the feedback about how to interact social with
others. One participant, Charlotte, pushed back against the neurotypical framing of social
persuasion. Among all participants, Charlotte was the most experienced and had worked in the
most corporate-type roles (whereas many participants worked in smaller businesses). She offered
a defense of the autistic approach to sociality, in defiance of neurotypical norms that are
recommended to autistic professionals. Charlotte challenged current norms of professionalism:
87

60 years ago, a bunch of old white men got in a room and decided what a professional
person looks like, sounds like, and x like. So for me, the biggest thing, the biggest hurdle,
we [autistic people] have is getting people past the societal expectations of how people
should communicate, how should they sound, how should they look. And, eye contact is
a great example. You know that’s something that is always said that is being a
professional characteristic. And, in interviews it’s really important. Why? Unless my job
as an ophthalmologist hinges on being able to look at people’s eyes, I do not understand
why that is necessary. Truly what is this necessary for the success of the job? … You
know EQ is like is one of the worst things we’ve ever taught. Because what we’ve done
is we’ve taught generations of managers and employees here is how you show you care
and employees expect to be managed that way. That their manager is going to know how
they’re feeling without them having to say anything, you know, and all this. So, if their
manager doesn’t do those things, and they feel like they’re not cared about because those
other things that we do that our actions are interpreted as not caring, then we’re [autistic
people] are viewed as aloof or uncaring or whatever.
Charlotte believed that these neurotypical norms of politeness are what drove perceptions of her
as “rude.” She explained that applying this standard to her and expecting her to change wasn’t
fair:
So, it’s like there is no way that even if people tell me, “These things are rude,” there’s
nothing I can do to change it. There really isn’t because I’ve already tried for 25 years to
learn to be professional. I’ve read books. I’ve taken every training. … I have attained a
lot of success and I have a job that a lot of people want. … One colleague told me I’m
rude. I said, “I am autistic and I understand you think I’m rude, but I’m just being direct.”
88

And she says you got to show them you’re willing to meet them halfway. If I haven’t
done it [become polite by neurotypical norms] by now, it isn’t gonna happen. Autism is a
recognized disability. And would you ask somebody in a wheelchair to get up and walk
halfway across the room, so they could show you that they’re willing to meet you
halfway?
Charlotte further explained she felt she was among the most caring employees in her office. She
felt she showed her caring through actions more so than her words.
Conclusion
This chapter presented the findings of a survey of 324 autistic professionals and in-depth
interviews with 11 autistic professionals. It showed that autistic professionals experience high
communication apprehension, particularly in comparison to the general population. As
communication situations become more unpredictable, autistic professionals tend to
disproportionately experience higher communication apprehension. The right professional
environment—composed of support, cadence, and resilience—fosters growth in communication
confidence.

89

Chapter Five: Discussion and Recommendations
This chapter concludes the study by providing a discussion of findings and
recommendations for future practice and research. It begins by discussing the implications of the
survey and interview findings. The discussion includes overall contributions of the study. Next, it
outlines recommendations for practice based on study results. Then, it describes the limitations
and delimitations of the study. It concludes with recommendations for future research.
Discussion of Study Findings
The survey revealed that autistic professionals exhibited high communication
apprehension in a range of situations. It also revealed that autistic professionals likely exhibit
patterns of communication apprehension that differ from other working adults. Survey and
interview results seem to indicate that the predictability of communication situations likely
factors into many of the distinctive aspects of communication apprehension among autistic
professionals.
When comparing the overall profiles of communication apprehension, autistic employees
showed a distinct pattern compared to the general population (see Table 10 and Figure 3).
Previous research shows that members of the general population show much more apprehension
in situations involving public speaking and presentations. They show decreasing amounts of
apprehension in meetings and group discussions. They tend to show the least communication
apprehension in interpersonal (dyadic) interactions (Croucher et al., 2019; McCroskey et al.,
1985; McCroskey, 2015). Autistic employees, on the other hand, showed little differences among
the four communication situations. Whereas mean differences vary by 5.1 among the general
population in prior research, mean differences varied by 1.5 in this study of autistic
professionals.
90

Table 10
PRCA-24 Average Scores Among Autistic Professionals and the General Population

Autistic professionals
(n = 324)
National averages (based
on other studies)

M SD
% high
apprehension M SD
Group score 20.3 5.4 53.4 15.4 4.8
Meetings score 20.1 5.5 53.4 16.4 4.2
Interpersonal score 19.6 5.2 67.9 14.2 3.9
Presentations score 21.1 5.7 34.0 19.3 5.1
PRCA-24 score 81.0 18.7 52.2 65.6 15.3

Note. Scores for autistic employees are from this survey. National statistics are from multiple
studies (McCroskey et al., 2015) and are intended to serve as comparison points with autistic
employees. PRCA scores are calculated in the following ways: group discussions: 18 – (scores
for items 2, 4, & 6) + (scores for items 1,3, & 5); meetings: 18 – (scores for items 8, 9, & 12) +
(scores for items 7, 10, & 11); interpersonal: 18 – (scores for items 14, 16, & 17) + (scores for
items 13, 15, & 18); presentations: 18 – (scores for items 19, 21, & 23) + (scores for items 20,
22, &24). The PRCA-24 total score for communication apprehension is a sum of the four
subscales. It ranges from 24 to 120. Scores between 83 and 120 are considered high
communication apprehension.

91

Figure 3
Communication Apprehension: Autistic Working Adults Versus National Averages

Autistic professionals also seem to show distinctive patterns of CA based on work
experience, managerial status, and possibly mental illness (i.e., depression and anxiety). Recent
research has shown that professionals with more work experience and more managerial
experience tend to experience lower CA (Marcel, 2019). This pattern did not appear to hold for
autistic professionals in this study. Autistic professionals in this study who had more work
experience and held managerial roles did not report lower communication apprehension. It
appears that comorbidities of depression and anxiety do not contribute to higher CA among
autistic professionals. While no known research among the general population provides
correlations between CA based on the PRCA-24 and depression and anxiety, research suggests
that depression and anxiety lead to less willingness to initiate interactions at work (Segrin &
Abramson, 1994).
19.3
16.4
15.4
14.2
21.1
20.1
20.3
19.6
Presentations
Meetings
Group
Interpersonal
Working Adults with Autism National Averages
HIGH
Communication
Apprehension
LOW
Communication
Apprehension
92

Gender patterns appear to be the same among autistic professionals and the population at
large. Women with autism reported higher communication apprehension in terms of meetings,
presentations, and overall CA. This is consistent with research about the larger population
(Loureiro et al., 2020). It also is consistent with research about gender among autistic
individuals. Autistic women appear to experience higher perceived social isolation and are more
likely to attempt to mask their social and communication challenges compared to autistic men
(Baldwin & Costley, 2016; Gould & Ashton-Smith, 2011; Lai et al., 2017; Schuck et al., 2019).
Predictability of communication situations appears to be a key explanation for various
levels of communication apprehension. The PRCA-24 results showed that autistic professionals
are comparatively (to the general population) more likely to experience CA in less predictable
communication situations. Public speaking and presentations tend to have more predictability
because people can prepare their content or scripts ahead of time. Autistic professionals were 1.8
times as likely to experience high communication apprehension in presentation situations.
Meetings are less predictable than presentations, but many meetings tend to have some structure
because of agendas. Autistic professionals were 3.7 times as likely to experience high
communication apprehension in meetings. The least predictable situations are interpersonal and
group discussions. Autistic professionals were 4.9 times as likely to experience high
communication apprehension in group discussions, and 5.4 times as likely to experience high
communication apprehension in interpersonal interactions.
The open-ended comments in the survey further supported the notion that predictability
of communication situations influences CA. Among the most common contexts that participants
mentioned as communication situations that made them nervous or anxious were the following
unpredictable situations: being put on the spot in a meeting or conversation, facing disagreement
93

or confrontation, working with new people, feeling singled out or judged, and generally
interacting in groups conversations and meetings. On the other hand, among the most common
contexts that participants mentioned as communication situations that made them confident or
comfortable were more predictable and positive situations: having enough time to prepare their
content for a meetings or conversation, working with close and well-known colleagues, and
holding one-to-one conversations as opposed to group conversations. Overall, the desire for
predictability aligns with prior research about autistic individuals that indicates preferences for
routine and structure (American Psychiatric Association, 2013; Black et al., 2019; Hagner &
Cooney, 2005; Krzeminksa & Hawse, 2020).
While the survey results demonstrated high CA overall and in a variety of situations, they
did not reveal the in-depth perceptions of autistic professionals about how they experience CA,
what they view as the sources of CA, or what they view as the professional environments that
supports more confidence in communication situations. As a result, the second portion of the
study involved semi-structured interviews to gain a better understanding of how autistic
professionals perceive these issues.
The interview participants described a professional environment that is composed of
support, a comfortable cadence, and resilience. This environment fosters the ability for autistic
professionals to build confidence in communication situations. At the heart of this environment
is support, which is provided in the forms of managerial advocacy, belonging and emotional
support from colleagues, social interventions to help with uncomfortable interactions, and
knowledge and coping mechanisms from the neurodiverse community. This support enabled
participants to overcome fears of speaking up in some situations and created the environment in
which they could build communication skills.
94

The need for a comfortable cadence at work was described by participants as an essential
foundation for confidence in social interactions. The right cadence involved working with
familiar colleagues, scheduling that aligned with preferred times, and avoiding excessive work
demands. This cadence aligns with prior work that suggests structure and routine are important
for autistic professionals (Black et al., 2019; Hagner & Cooney, 2005; Krzeminksa & Hawse,
2020; Scott et al., 2015). This study, however, accentuated the importance of working with
colleagues who are familiar, well known, and trusted. This theme emerged strongly in the survey
open-ended items as well as the interviews. Many autistic professionals reported feeling much
more confident in communication situations when they know their counterparts well, know how
to interact with them, and trust that their counterparts understand them. Within this comfortable
work rhythm, participants reported being at their best in communication situations and less prone
to losing control of their emotions.
Participants also reported the importance of resilience—the ability to persist in the face of
challenges at work. This involved self-advocating and determination. Like many studies (Hagner
& Cooney, 2005; Müller et al., 2008; Soeker, 2020; Solomon, 2020), this study showed autistic
professionals face the negative views and stereotypes of others. While some research has
addressed disclosing one’s autism to colleagues and others at work (Johnson & Joshi, 2016), this
study highlighted the importance of autistic professionals taking charge of their professional
environments, communicating their needs, and persisting in the face of negative views and
stereotypes. All interviewees worked in what they considered stable and supportive work
environments. It is likely that autistic professionals are most likely to build this resilience when
they know they have support.
95

Participants mentioned various sources of social self-efficacy, including emotional
arousal, past performance, and social persuasion. They most often mentioned negative emotions
that stood as obstacles to confidence in communication situations. These emotions included
feeling agitated, judged, and out of control. These emotions were most often triggered in
unpredictable situations, such as in conflict or in the beginning of relationships. Past
performance—successes or failures—often influenced how autistic professionals faced current
communication situations. Past failures often led to avoidance of social interactions, and past
successes led to a higher likelihood of engaging with others, even in challenging communication
situations. These professionals also reported receiving a variety of informal and formal feedback
about their social and communication skills. Most did not resist the feedback, which appeared
largely due to their trust in supportive managers. One autistic professional, however, countered
the dominant narrative that neurodiverse employees should adapt to the norms of neurotypical
employees.
Overall, this research provided a roadmap for helping autistic professionals reduce
communication apprehension and building confidence in communication situations at work. As
depicted in Figure 4, a professional environment with support, cadence, and resilience is the
foundation for building social self-efficacy. The combination of support, cadence, and resiliency
appear to constitute a favorable professional environment in which autistic professionals can
thrive in communication situations.

96

Figure 4
A Model for Building Communication Confidence among Autistic Professionals

This professional environment fosters the safety and acceptance necessary to overcome
fears about communicating with others and allows for growth in communication skills. It also
seems to be the environment in which autistic professionals can cope with social challenges more
easily. When challenging communication situations occurred, autistic professionals in this study
were able access the support of supervisors, peers, and members of the neurodiverse community.
When the cadence of work was disrupted, they relied on colleagues to help them manage the
situation and used their own resiliency to articulate their needs and manage their emotions.
Within an environment of support, cadence, and resiliency, autistic professionals were better
positioned to build social self-efficacy. Social self-efficacy likely contributes to lower levels of
communication in a variety of communication situations at work, including interpersonal and
group interactions, meetings, and presentations and public speaking.
Professional Environment
Support
Cadence
Resilience
Social Self-Efficacy
Emotional Arousal
Social Persuasion
Past Performance
Level of Communication Apprehension
Interpersonal and Group Interactions
Meetings
Presentations and Public Speaking
97

The study has several contributions. It demonstrated the high communication
apprehension that autistic professionals experience in a variety of situations. It also illustrated the
distinctive patterns of communication apprehension among autistic professionals. These
distinctive patterns of communication apprehension suggest autistic professionals experience
comparatively higher apprehension as the level of predictability decreases (e.g., interpersonal
and group interactions). This aligns with prior work that suggests predictability and structure are
important to autistic individuals (American Psychiatric Association, 2013; Black et al., 2019;
Hagner & Cooney, 2005; Krzeminksa & Hawse, 2020). The findings are strengthened and more
broadly applicable due to a large and diverse sample of autistic professionals.
Another contribution of this study is the description of a professional environment that
helps autistic professionals overcome communication apprehension and build social self-
efficacy. The importance of a support network and a supportive work environment for autistic
professionals has been discussed in prior work (Dreaver et al., 2019; Hayward et al., 2019;
Johnson & Joshi, 2016; Khalifa et al., 2020; Lindsey et al., 2021; Müller et al., 2008; Soeker,
2020). In addition to prior work, this study highlighted the crucial roles of managers and
colleagues in actively providing emotional support to autistic colleagues and initiating
opportunities for success. This research also accentuated the value of tapping into the
neurodiverse community. In addition, the importance of developing the right cadence and
building resilience as key drivers of social and communication success are not included in other
models of supportive work environments.
Recommendations for Practice
Because a major conclusion of the study is that establishing a favorable professional
environments for autistic professionals helps them overcome communication apprehension, most
98

of the recommendations for practice center on building these types of environments. By focusing
first on what managers can do, this section emphasizes practices that can be put into place within
organizations. By addressing on what educators can do, this section focuses on sharing best
practices widely. These recommendations are tailored to the university setting generally and the
business schools specifically. These are settings in which future managers are often trained and
norms for management practice emerge. The final recommendation focuses on building
resiliency among autistic professionals.
Recommendation 1: Train Managers
This study showed that managers play a crucial role in building the right professional
environment for autistic professionals. The results of this study suggest a variety of practices can
help autistic professionals build more confidence in communication situations. As a result,
managers should be trained to adopt the following strategies.
Recognize the level of communication apprehension and the distinctive patterns to
communication apprehension among autistic professionals. The results of this study can help
managers recognize that high CA is common for most autistic professionals. Importantly, it is
comparatively much higher in less predictable situations such as interpersonal interactions, group
discussions, and meetings. Working with less familiar colleagues creates more apprehension.
Managers should also recognize, based on the open-ended comments from the survey, that
working with supervisors and authority figures is anxiety producing for many autistic
professionals. Awareness of the high levels and distinctive patterns of CA is the first step for
managers (Austin et al., 2017; Austin & Pisano, 2017; Dreaver et al., 2019; Hayward et al.,
2019; Johnson & Joshi, 2016; Khalifa et al., 2020).
99

Focus on building robust support systems for autistic professionals. Many studies have
shown that the lack of social support is a key barrier to many autistic professionals’ professional
opportunities (Annabi et al., 2017; Annabi & Locke, 2019; Baldwin et al., 2014; Black et al.,
2019; Bury et al., 2021; Johnson & Joshi, 2016; Lindsay et al., 2021). Other studies show the
importance of colleagues’ social support of autistic employees and understanding of autism in
creating an environment for autistic professional to grow (Dreaver et al., 2019; Hayward et al.,
2019; Johnson & Joshi, 2016; Khalifa et al., 2020). This study provided more depth about the
support system that is needed according to autistic professionals, which participants said includes
managerial advocacy, peer and emotional support, social interventions in challenging situations,
and help from the neurodiversity community. This begins with managerial advocacy—managers
who understand unique needs, show patience, create opportunities, and ensure other employees
treat autistic professionals well. Managers should also recognize the importance of stable,
known, and trusted colleagues for autistic professionals to work with most of the time. Nearly all
autistic professionals in this study emphasized the value of their neurodiverse formal and
informal support groups. Managers might encourage their neurodiverse employees to tap into
these support groups. Some organizations already have formal neurodiversity employee resource
groups (Austin et al., 2017; Austin & Pisano, 2017; Morris et al., 2015). For organizations that
do not, managers can encourage the formal creation of these groups. Generally, managers should
be attentive to the many ways in which support systems play a key role in autistic professionals
overcoming communication apprehension.
Recognize ways to make communication situations more predictable and appropriately
intervene. Many studies have shown that autistic professionals experience stress and anxiety in
the workplace in communication situations (Ekman & Hiltunen, 2015; Kiep et al., 2015; Morris
100

et al., 2015; Spain et al., 2017). Autistic professionals in the survey and interview portions of this
study reported they experience higher communication apprehension in less predictable situations.
Interview participants emphasized the many ways they appreciate more predictability in
communication situations. Managers can support autistic professionals (and likely many non-
autistic professionals) by planning and designing interactions more effectively. Some practices
that are particularly beneficial to autistic professionals include the following: ensuring agendas
are sent out far in advance; providing key questions and issues that will be addressed prior to
meetings; giving resources and tips to help employees prepare for interactions; informing people
ahead of time what questions they will be asked in front of others; and one-to-one consultations
to help others prepare mentally and emotionally for upcoming interactions in the workplace.
Many autistic professionals in this study noted their appreciation for managers and peers who
intervened in challenging social interactions. Managers should consider ways they can ensure
autistic professionals have social support in challenging interactions (e.g., working with an irate
client). Savvy managers will anticipate these scenarios and discuss with all employees (including
autistic employees) how to get the social support if needed.
Strategize with autistic professionals how to establish a comfortable cadence. Research
has clearly established that many autistic individuals desire routine and structure (American
Psychiatric Association, 2013; Black et al., 2019; Hagner & Cooney, 2005; Krzeminksa &
Hawse, 2020). This study extended this research by revealing that many autistic professionals in
this study expressed the desire for cycles of routine and structure. The time-based nature of these
routines is what allows for a comfortable cadence. Managers should discuss with autistic
professionals how best to manage work in ways that foster effective relationships and
productivity. In these conversations, managers should identify the times at which employees are
101

most comfortable in meetings, the extent to which multiple deadlines influence comfort levels,
and the nature of interactions with people who are well known and not well known. These
conversations should involve protocol for getting needed breaks and independent time to
recharge. Then, managers should be flexible enough to work out the cadence that aligns with
employees’ needs. In the entire process, managers should recognize that many autistic employees
require more time to feel comfortable with other people and to adjust to new routines.
As part of developing a comfortable cadence, managers should work individually with
autistic professionals to learn about their preferences and how to align those preferences with
their teams. A major stress for many autistic professionals is the “increasingly more dynamic,
uncertain, and team-based” workplace (Parr et al., 2013). Managers will often need to advocate
for team cadence that aligns with an autistic professional’s individual cadence.
Provide frequent informal and positive feedback. Participants in this study shared that
they were appreciative of feedback, especially when it was done in an encouraging and forward-
looking manner. Prior research has highlighted the importance of giving autistic professionals
frequent and specific task-based advice (Hagner & Cooney, 2005; Parr et al., 2013). This
research aligns with prior research but emphasizes more so the importance of feedback that
focuses on the social and communication elements of work.
Validate neurodiverse approaches to communication. In various ways, autistic
professionals in this study directly and indirectly stated the importance of neurodiverse
approaches to communication. One participant directly challenged neurotypical politeness norms
in the workplace. Nearly all interview participants identified the importance of interacting with
autistic peers to discuss coping mechanisms for a neurotypical workplace. Managers should
recognize the functional aspects of common forms of neurodiverse communication behaviors
102

(e.g., directness, precision) (Hurlbutt & Chalmers, 2004; Rosqvist, 2019; Soeker, 2020).
Similarly, managers should identify those neurotypical communication behaviors that are not
essential for productive professional communication (e.g., maintaining direct eye contact) that
may lead to negative perceptions of neurodiverse employees.
Recommendation 2: Train Educators
The university setting is one of the most important places to prepare future managers—
autistic and non-autistic—to support the needs of autistic professionals. Most university settings
increasingly emphasize diversity and inclusion content (Bell et al., 2009). This content often
leads to what is eventually prioritized in workplace settings (Avery & Thomas, 2004; Byrd &
Sparkman, 2022; Day & Glick, 2000). Providing up-to-date, research-based content about
neurodiverse employees has a place in this content (Austin, 2018; Austin & Pisano, 2017; Pisano
& Austin, 2016a, 2016b). Further, many classes focus on skill-building for managers in areas
such as leadership and communication. These courses provide unique opportunities to help
future managers understand the needs of neurotypical professionals (Ortiz, 2020). In particular,
business schools focus on developing future managers and establishing norms for management
practice. Educators can integrate content about neurodiverse individuals into university curricula
in the following ways:
Ensure that neurodiversity is an element of diversity and inclusion curricula. While
awareness of autism has grown dramatically over the past decade, neurodiversity has less often
been integrated into core diversity content in university in curricula (Ortiz, 2020). Providing
information about the nature of communication apprehension among autistic professionals can
be an important element in this content. Also, an important element of this content should
address negative stereotypes of autistic individuals (Müller et al., 2008; Solomon, 2020; Soeker,
103

2020). This study can supplement this conversation by showing the psychological and social
challenges that autistic professionals face due to negative views and stereotypes of others.
Participants reported feeling singled out and judged (in the open-ended survey responses) and
explained they resilience they needed to overcome negative views of others (in the interviews).
Include content about neurodiversity and communication in management classes. Many
resources, including cases and practitioner articles, are now available for management classes
(Austin, 2018; Austin et al., 2017; Austin & Pisano, 2017; Donovan, 2008; Pisano & Austin,
2016a; Pisano & Austin, 2016b; Wareham & Sonne, 2008). These resources are a good resource
yet tend to focus on highly technical and early-career neurodiverse employees. This study
supplement and expands upon existing resources by providing information from a wider range of
autistic employees in terms of work experience and industries. Also, this research provides a
road map for effective management practices that lead to a professional environment with
support, a comfortable cadence, and resiliency.
Focus on overcoming communication apprehension and unpredictable communication
situations in communication courses. Nearly all university students take required and elective
communication courses in college. These courses tend to prioritize written and spoken forms of
communication that are more predictable. Writing courses by nature are more predictable as
writers can develop content and craft ideas carefully on their own time. Most speech and
business communication courses are primarily centered on public speaking and presentations.
The forms of communication that neurodiverse individuals appear to be most disadvantaged (in
terms of communication apprehension) are those areas of communication that are least
prioritized in university communication courses. By providing more content (e.g., interpersonal
conversations, group conversations) about succeeding in interpersonal communication and group
104

conversation, these communication courses could potentially benefit neurodiverse students in the
areas they need the most development.
Encourage autistic professionals to develop curricular content. Much of the current
content in neurodiversity research and content (including this study) is written by neurotypical
individuals who consider themselves neurodiversity advocates. By involving autistic
professionals as contributors to the content, the content may be more accurate, more relatable to
autistic individuals, and less likely to place neurotypical communication as the sole standard of
functional professional communication.
Recommendation 3: Aim for Resiliency
All autistic professionals in the interview research described facing negative views and
stereotypes. Also, all these individuals described ways in which they needed to adapt to the
norms of a neurotypical workplace. In the face of these challenges and within a generally
supportive professional environment, these individuals learned to self-advocate and show
determination to communicate more confidently in the workplace.
Establish opportunities for and promote self-advocacy. Many of the autistic professionals
in this study revealed how they struggled to disclose their autism to supervisors and colleagues.
After disclosing, however, they found that others understood them better. Within their privacy
preferences, autistic professionals should learn strategies for effectively disclosing their autism
preferences. Even if they don’t choose to explicitly state they are autistic, they may choose to
describe and assert their communication preferences. Managers should destigmatize and create
an environment in which employees feel comfortable sharing their needs with their colleagues.
Build stretch assignments to grow determination. All participants explained how they
built determination by facing adversity. So, there is value to autistic individuals facing
105

unpredictable challenges. Managers and autistic professionals should work together to plan
reasonable growth paths. These conversations will likely require discussing how to expand what
feels like a comfortable cadence for many autistic professionals. Within a trusting relationship
between managers and employees, this be accomplished with clear ways to opt out of
excessively stressful situations.
Limitations and Delimitations
This study has several limitations. The survey sample is the most diverse known sample
of autistic professionals in terms work experience, age, and gender. This sample involved people
who participated in a SurveyMonkey Audience online panel. It is not clear how representative
this sample is of all autistic professionals. Also, the PRCA-24 may not capture the complexities
of communication apprehension, especially as perceived by autistic professionals. While the
PRCA-24 instrument showed high reliability among autistic professionals, the open-ended
responses showed that the PRCA-24 instrument did not account for a variety of contextual
factors—often involving the predictability of the situation. The sample of interview participants
came from a variety of industries. With one exception, the participants were primarily early-
career professionals with under ten years of work experience and operated in small
organizations. Also, with just 11 participants, these interviews cannot be considered
generalizable.
As far as delimitations, the study focused on working autistic individuals. It did not cover
autistic individuals who are unemployed. Since autistic individuals face higher unemployment
and underemployment rates than other disability groups (Black et al., 2019; Burgess & Cimera,
2014; Bury et al., 2020; Chen et al., 2015), this research likely does not address many autistic
individuals who want to be employed but can’t find opportunities. It’s possible these individuals
106

face even more significant communication challenges and may experience even higher
communication apprehension (Solomon, 2020). Also, data collection occurred exclusively
through online formats, it was likely limited to autistic professionals with digital skills and
digital access.
Recommendations for Future Research
This research raised many questions that require future research. Specifically, the
following research studies seem most pressing.
The generalizable influences of various elements of the professional environment. The
interviews revealed that autistic participants attributed much of their communication confidence
and professional success to the right professional environment (i.e., support, cadence, and
resilience). Future research should be designed to make generalizable findings about the degree
to which these various elements contribute to lower communication apprehension and more
professional success.
Interventions that have long-lasting impact on lower communication apprehension. One
of the most concerning findings from the PRCA-24 results was that autistic individuals with
more work experience did not experience less communication apprehension than those with less
work experience. Longitudinal research would help identify factors and interventions that lead to
less communication apprehension over time.
The impact of power dynamics. Many autistic professionals expressed discomfort
working with those who are supervisors, bosses, or others of higher authority (especially in the
open-ended comments from the survey). Power dynamics are inherently unpredictable, and that
in of itself likely leads to unease among many autistic professionals. Yet, since the interview
participants were largely in supportive environments, this study did not explore in depth the
107

potential causes of discomfort with those in positions of power. It’s possible that part of the fear
of managers and those in positions of power is that they have so much influence over employees’
professional opportunities. More research is needed about how autistic professionals can gain
more confidence in situations working with organizational gatekeepers and higher ups.
Career selection and career paths. Given the high amount of communication
apprehension reported by autistic professionals in this study, it raises questions about career
decisions and career opportunities. Research should identify which types of professional and
career opportunities autistic professionals avoid as a result of communication apprehension.
Further, research should explore which career opportunities are less often extended to autistic
professionals because recruiters, managers, and others in decision-making roles misperceive
autistic professionals’ competencies.
Autistic communication styles in the workplace. One major challenge for autistic
professionals is that their social and communication skills are judged by neurotypical norms
(Black et al., 2019; Bury et al., 2021; Chen et al., 2015; Hayward et al., 2019; Krzeminska &
Hawse, 2020; Lorenz et al., 2017; Morris et al., 2015; Richards, 2012; Rosqvist, 2019). In
various ways, autistic professionals in this study expressed unique aspects of their
communication styles and preferences. A strengths-based view of autism should focus on forms
of autistic sociality and communication that are functional in the workplace. Traditionally,
strengths-based views of autism tend to focus on skills such as pattern recognition, spatial
thinking, and attention to detail (e.g., Annabi et al., 2017; Annabi & Locke, 2019; Austin et al.,
2017; Austin & Pisano, 2017; Morris et al., 2015; Rizvi et al., 2021). By also focusing on
strengths of autistic communication (Donovan, 2008; Hagner et al., 2005) and integrating these
108

forms of communication into workplace norms, it could potentially create a more comfortable
workplace environment for autistic professionals that creates less apprehension and anxiety.
Conclusion
This study about communication apprehension among autistic professionals demonstrates
the importance of creating favorable work environments that allow autistic professionals to build
more confidence in communication situations, succeed at work more often, enjoy their
professional lives more, and establish more rewarding workplace relationships. The study
showed that autistic professionals frequently experienced communication apprehension,
especially in unstructured situations. The good news was that autistic professionals in the
interviews identified many ways that leaders and managers can promote more favorable work
environments. Further, the research has many implications for educators to raise awareness of
the needs of autistic professionals.
Putting the study recommendations into practice is urgent. With roughly 100,000 autistic
individuals entering the workforce each year in the United States (Nagib & Wilson, 2020) and
autism diagnosis increasingly occurring among working adults (Johnson & Joshi, 2016), leaders
and managers at all organizations should become aware of the communication challenges
(including communication apprehension) faced by their autistic employees and take initiative to
create more favorable work environments and career paths for these employees. One test of a
strengths-based approach to neurodiversity is the value attached to neurodiverse forms of
communication (e.g., candor, literalness). The results of this study suggested preferences among
autistic professionals for more predictable and structured forms of communication in the
workplace. One participant strongly advocated for acknowledging the functional aspects of
autistic communication. Not only should leaders and managers aim to support autistic
109

employees, they should also seek to learn from these employees and validate autistic approaches
to communication.
Finally, in an era focused on equity, this study suggests it is a moral imperative for
leaders and managers to support their autistic employees. In workplaces built on neurotypical
norms and values, autistic professionals are at distinct disadvantages at all stages of their careers.
While creating favorable work environments for autistic professionals in most cases creates
financial benefits for organizations (Jacob et al., 2015), leaders and managers should create
equitable environments for neurotypical and neurodiverse employees as a matter of principle.

110

References
Accardo, A. L., Kuder, S. J., & Woodruff, J. (2019). Accommodations and support services
preferred by college students with autism spectrum disorder. Autism, 23(3), 574–583.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1362361318760490
Adreon, D., & Durocher, J. S. (2007). Evaluating the college transition needs of individuals with
high-functioning autism spectrum disorders. Intervention in School and Clinic, 42(5),
271–279. https://doi.org/10.1177/10534512070420050201
Alessandri, G., Filosa, L., Eisenberg, N., & Caprara, G. V. (2021). Within-individual relations,
social, and work self-efficacy beliefs to organizational citizenship behaviors. Journal of
Research in Personality, 91, 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrp.2021.104073
Alverson, C. Y., & Yamamoto, S. H. (2017). Employment outcomes of vocational rehabilitation
clients with autism spectrum disorder. Career Development and Transition for
Exceptional Individuals, 40(3), 144–155. https://doi.org/10.1177/2165143416629366
Alverson, C. Y., & Yamamoto, S. H. (2018). VR employment outcomes of individuals with
autism spectrum disorders: A decade in the making. Journal of Autism and
Developmental Disorders, 48, 151–162. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10803-017-3308-9
American Psychological Association. (n.d.). Autism spectrum disorder.
https://www.apa.org/topics/autism-spectrum-disorder
American Psychiatric Association. (2013). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental
disorders, 5th edition: DSM-5. Publisher.
Anderson, S. L., & Betz, N. E. (2001). Sources of social-efficacy expectations: Their
measurement and relation to career development. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 58,
98–117. https://doi.org/10.1006/jvbe.2000.1753
111

Anderson, C., & Butt, C. (2017). Young adults on the autism spectrum at college: Successes and
stumbling blocks. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 47(10), 3029–3039.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10803-017-3218-x
Anderson, C., & Butt, C. (2018). Young adults on the autism spectrum: The struggle for
appropriate services. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 48(11), 3912–
3925. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10803-018-3673-z
Anderson, C., Butt, C., & Sarsony, C. (2021). Young adults on the autism spectrum and early
employment-related experiences: Aspirations and obstacles. Journal of Autism and
Developmental Disorders, 51, 88–105. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10803-020-04513-4
Annabi, H., & Locke, J. (2019). A theoretical framework for investigating the context for
creating employment success in information technology for individuals with autism.
Journal of Management & Organization, 25(4), 499–515.
https://doi.org/10.1017/jmo.2018.79
Annabi, H., Sundaresan, K., & Zolyomi, A. (2017). It’s not just about attention to details:
Redefining the talents autistic software developers bring to software development.
Proceedings of the 50th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences.
https://doi.org/10.24251/HICSS.2017.665
Ashbaugh, K., Koegel, R. L., & Koegel, L. K. (2017). Increasing social integration for college
students with autism spectrum disorder. Behavioral Development Bulletin, 22(1), 183–
196. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/bdb0000057
Austin, R. D. (2018). Hart Schaffner Marx: Neurodiversity at a class American suit maker. Ivey
Publishing.
112

Austin, R. D., Fieldhouse, M., Mohan, A., & Quinn, P. (2017, December 7). Why the Australian
defence organization is recruiting cyber analysts on the autism spectrum. Harvard
Business Review. https://hbr.org/2017/12/why-the-australian-defence-organization-is-
recruiting-cyber-analysts-on-the-autism-spectrum
Austin, R. D., & Pisano, G. P. (2017, May-June). Neurodiversity as a competitive advantage.
Harvard Business Review, 96–103.
Autism Spectrum Australia. (2013). We belong: The experiences, aspirations and needs of adults
with Asperger’s disorder and high functioning autism. Author.
Avery, D. R., & Thomas, K. M. (2004). Blending content and contact: The roles of diversity
curriculum and campus heterogeneity in fostering diversity management competency.
Academy of Management Learning & Education, 3(4),
https://doi.org/10.5465/amle.2004.15112544
Ayres, J., Keereetaweep, T., Chen, P.-E., & Edwards, P. A. (1998). Communication
apprehension and employment interviews. Communication Education, 47(1), 1–17.
https://doi.org/10.1080/03634529809379106
Ayres, M., Parr, J. R., Rodgers, J., Mason, D., Avery, L., & Flynn, D. (2017). A systematic
review of quality of life of adults on the autism spectrum. Autism, 22(7), 774–783.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1362361317714988
Bailey, K., Frost, K. M., Casagrande, K., & Ingersoll, B. (2019). The relationship between social
experience and subjective well-being in autistic college students: A mixed methods study.
Autism, 24(5), 1081–1092. https://doi.org/10.1177/1362361319892457
Baio, J., Wiggins, L., Christensen, D. L., Maenner, M. J., Daniels, J., Warren, Z., Kurzius-
Spencer, M., Zahorodny, W., Robinson Rosenberg, C., White, T., Durkin, M. S., Imm, P.,
113

Nikolaou, L., Yeargin-Allsopp, M., Lee, L. C., Harrington, R., Lopez, M., Fitzgerald, R.
T., Hewitt, A., Pettygrove, S., Constantino, J. N., Vehorn, A., Shenouda, J., Hall-Lande,
J., Braun, K. V. N., & Dowling, N. F. (2018). Prevalence of autism spectrum disorder
among children aged 8 years - Autism and Developmental Disabilities Monitoring
Network, 11 Sites, United States, 2014. Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report—
Surveillance Summaries, 67(6), 1–23. https://doi.org/10.15585/mmwr.ss6706a1
Baker-Ericzén, M. J., Fitch, M. A., Kinnear, M., Jenkins, M. M., Twamley, E. W., Smith, L.,
Montano, G., Feder, J., Crooke, P. J., Winner, M. G., & Leon, J. (2018). Development of
the supported employment, comprehensive cognitive enhancement, and social skills
program for adults on the autism spectrum: Results of initial study. Autism, 22(1), 6–19.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1362361317724294
Baldwin, S., & Costley, D. (2015). The experiences and needs of female adults with high-
functioning autism spectrum disorder. Autism, 20(4), 483–495.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1362361315590805
Baldwin, S, Costley, D, & Warren, A. (2014). Employment activities and experiences of adults
with high-functioning autism and Asperger’s disorder. Journal of Autism and
Developmental Disorders, 44(10), 2440–2449. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10803-014-2112-
z
Bandura, A., Adams, N. E., & Beyer, J. (1977). Cognitive processes mediating behavioral
change. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 35, 125–139.
https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.35.3.125
114

Bandura, A., Pastorelli, C., Barbaranelli, C., & Caprara, G. U. (1999). Self-efficacy pathways in
depression. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 76, 258–269.
https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.76.2.258
Baron-Cohen, S, Wheelwright, S, & Skinner, R. (2001). The autism-spectrum quotient (AQ):
Evidence from Asperger syndrome/high-functioning autism, males and females, scientists
and mathematicians. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 31(1), 5–17.
https://doi.org/ 10.1023/a:1005653411471
Bertilsson, M., Petersson, E.-L., Ostlund, G., Waern, M., & Hensing, G. (2013). Capacity to
work while depressed and anxious – a phenomenological study. Disability and
Rehabilitation, 35(2), 1705–1711. https://doi.org/10.3109/09638288.2012.751135
Black, M. H., Mahdi, S. Milbourn, B., Thompson, C., D'Angelo, A., Ström, E., Falkmer, M.,
Falkmer, T., Lerner, M., Halladay, A., Gerber, A., Esposito, C., Girdler, S., & Bölte, S.
(2019). Perspectives of key stakeholders on employment of autistic adults across the
United States, Australia, and Sweden. Autism Research, 12(11), 1648–1662.
https://doi.org/10.1002/aur.2167
Blume, B. D., Baldwin, T. T., & Ryan, K. C. (2013). Communication apprehension: A barrier to
students’ leadership, adaptability, and multicultural appreciation. Academy of
Management Learning & Education, 12(2), 158–172.
https://doi.org/10.5465/amle.2011.0127
Blume, B. D., Dreher, G. F., & Baldwin, T. T. (2010). Examining the effects of communication
apprehension within assessment centres. Journal of Occupational and Organizational
Psychology, 83(3), 663–671. https://doi.org/10.1348/096317909X463652
115

Boyer, L., Carden, L., Johnson, L., & Boyd, R. (2017). Establishing an interview anxiety
baseline: Assessing applicants’ readiness. Business and Professional Communication
Quarterly, 80(2), 365-378. https://doi.org/10.1177/2329490616686567
Burgess, S., & Cimera, R. E. (2014). Employment outcomes of transition-aged adults with
autism spectrum disorders: A state of the states report. American Journal on Intellectual
and Developmental Disabilities, 119, 64–83. doi:10.1352/1944-7558-119.1.64
Bury, S. M., Hedley, D., Uljarević, M., & Gal, E. (2020). The autism advantage at work: A
critical and systematic review of current evidence. Research in Developmental
Disabilities, 105, 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ridd.2020.103750
Bury, S. M., Flower, R. L., Zulla, R., Nicholas, D. B., & Hedley, D. (2021). Workplace social
challenges experienced by employees on the autism spectrum: An international
exploratory study examining employee and supervisor perspectives. Journal of Autism
and Developmental Disorders, 51, 1614–1627. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10803-020-
04662-6
Bell, M. P., Connerley, M. L., & Cocchiara, F. K. (2009). The Case for Mandatory Diversity
Education. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 8(4), 597–609.
https://doi.org/10.5465/amle.8.4.zqr597
Byrd, M. Y., & Sparkman, T. E. (2022). Reconciling the business case and the social justice case
for diversity: A model of human relations. Human Resource Development Review, 21(1),
75–100. https://doi.org/10.1177/15344843211072356
Cai, R. Y., & Richdale, A. L. (2016). Educational experiences and needs of higher education
students with autism spectrum disorder. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders,
46(1), 31–41. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10803-015-2535-1
116

Chappel, S. L., & Somers, B. C. (2010). Employing persons with autism spectrum disorders: A
collaborative effort. Journal of Vocational Rehabilitation, 32(2), 117–124.
https://doi.org/10.3233/JVR-2010-0501
Chen, J. L., Leader, G., Sung, C., & Leahy, M. (2015). Trends in employment for individuals
with autism spectrum disorder: A review of the research literature. Review Journal of
Autism and Developmental Disorders, 2, 115–127. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40489-014-
0041-6
Chen, J. L., Sung, C., & Pi, S. (2015). Vocational rehabilitation service patterns and outcomes
for individuals with autism of different ages. Journal of Autism and Developmental
Disorders, 45, 3015–3029. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10803-015-2465-y
Conrad, D., & Newberry, R. (2012). Identification and instruction of important business
communication skills for graduate business education. Journal of Education for Business,
87(2), 112–120. https://doi.org/10.1080/08832323.2011.576280
Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, J. D. (2018). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed
methods approaches (5
th
ed.). Sage.
Croucher, S. M., Kelly, S., Rahmani, D., Jackson, K., Galy-Badenas, F. Lando, A., Chibita, M.,
Nyiranasbimana, V., Turdubaeva, E., Eskicorapci, N., Condon, S. M., Stanalieva, G., &
Orunbekov, B. (2019). A multi-national validity analysis of the Personal Report of
Communication Apprehension (PRCA-24). Annals of the International Communication
Association, 43(3), 193–209. https://doi.org/10.1080/23808985.2019.1602783
Day, N. E., & Glick, B. J. (2000). Teaching diversity: A study of organizational needs and
diversity curriculum in higher education. Journal of Management Education, 24(3), 338–
352. https://doi.org/10.1177/105256290002400305
117

DeCuir-Gunby, J., Marshall, P. L., & McCulloch, A. W. (2011). Developing and using a
codebook for the analysis of interview data: An example from a professional
development research project. Field Methods, 23(2), 136–155.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1525822X10388468
Dipeolu, A. O., Storlie, C., & Johnson, C. (2015). College students with high‐functioning autism
spectrum disorder: Best practices for successful transition to the world of work. Journal
of College Counseling, 18(2), 175–190. https://doi.org/10.1002/jocc.12013
Donovan, S. (2008, September). Entrepreneur Thorkil Sonne on what you can learn from
employees with autism. Harvard Business Review. https://hbr.org/2008/09/entrepreneur-
thorkil-sonne-on-what-you-can-learn-from-employees-with-autism
Dreaver, J., Thompson, C., Girdler, S., Adolfsson, M., Black, M. H., & Falkmer, M. (2019).
Success factors enabling employment for adults on the autism spectrum from employers’
perspective. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 50, 1657–1667.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10803-019-03923-3
Ekman, E., & Hiltunen, A. J. (2015). Modified CBT using visualization for autism spectrum
disorder (ASD), anxiety and avoidance behavior – a quasi-experimental open pilot study.
Scandinavian Journal of Psychology, 56(6), 641–648. https://doi.org/10.1111/sjop.12255
Flammer, A. (2001). Self-efficacy. In N. J. Smelser & P. B. Baltes (Eds.), International
Encyclopedia of the Social & Behavioral Sciences (pp. 5042–5048). Pergamon.
Flower, R. L., Hedley, D., Spoor, J. R., & Dissanayake, C. (2019). An alternative pathway to
employment for autistic job-seekers: A case study of a training and assessment program
targeted to autistic job candidates. Journal of Vocational Education and Training, 71(7),
1–22. https://doi.org/10.1080/13636820.2019.1636846
118

Giarelli, E., Ruttenberg, J., & Segal, A. (2013). Bridges and barriers to successful transitioning
as perceived by adolescents and young adults with Asperger syndrome. Journal of
Pediatric Nursing, 28(6), 563–574. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pedn.2012.12.010
Goldfarb, Y., Gal, E., & Golan, O. (2019). A conflict of interests: A motivational perspective on
special interests and employment success of adults with ASD. Journal of Autism and
Developmental Disorders, 49, 3915–3923. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10803-019-04098-7
Gould, J., & Ashton-Smith, J. (2011). Missed diagnosis or misdiagnosis? Girls and women on
the autism spectrum. Good Autism Practice, 12(1), 34–41.
Grandin, T., & Barron, S. (2016). Unwritten rules of social relationships: Decoding social
mysteries through autism’s unique perspectives. Future Horizons.
Grandin, T., & Duffy, K. (2008). Developing talents: Careers for individuals with Asperger
Syndrome and high-functioning autism. Autism Asperger Publishing.
Grandin, T., & Panek, R. (2013). The autistic brain: Helping different kinds of minds succeed.
Houghton Mifflin Harcourt.
Gray, K. M., Keating, C. M., & Taffe, J. R. (2014). Adult outcomes in autism: Community
inclusion and living skills. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 44(12),
3006–3015. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10803-014-2159-x
Hagner, D., & Cooney, B. F. (2005). ‘I do that for everybody’: Supervising employees with
autism. Focus on Autism and Other Developmental Disabilities, 20, 91–97.
https://doi.org/10.1177/10883576050200020501
Hayward, S. M., McVilly, K. R., & Stokes, M. A. (2019). Autism and employment: What works.
Research in Autism Spectrum Disorders, 60, 48–58.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rasd.2019.01.006
119

Hedley, D., Cai, R., Uljarević, M., Wilmot, M., Spoor, J. R., Richdale, A., & Dissanayake, C.
(2017). Transition to work: Perspectives from the autism spectrum. Autism, 22(5), 528–
541. https://doi.org/10.1177/1362361316687697
Hedley, D., Uljarević, M., & Cameron, L. (2017). Employment programmes and interventions
targeting adults with autism spectrum disorder: A systematic review of the literature.
Autism, 21(8), 929–941. https://doi.org/10.1177/1362361316661855.
Hendricks, D. (2010). Employment and adults with autism spectrum disorders: Challenges and
strategies for success. Journal of Vocational Rehabilitation, 32(2), 125–134.
https://doi.org/10.3233/JVR-2010-0502
Hendricks, D., & Wehman, P. (2009). Transition from school to adulthood for youth with autism
spectrum disorders: Review and recommendations. Focus on Autism and Other
Developmental Disabilities, 24, 77–88.
Hofvander, B, Delorme, R., Chaste, P., Nydén, A., Wentz, E., Ståhlberg, O., Herbrecht, E.,
Stopin, A., Anckarsäter, H., Gillberg, C., Råstam, M., & Leboyer, M. (2009). Psychiatric
and psychosocial problems in adults with normal-intelligence autism spectrum disorders.
BMC Psychiatry, 9, article 35. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-244X-9-35
Holwerda A., van der Klink J. J., Groothoff J. W., & Brouwer, S. (2012). Predictors for work
participation in individuals with an autism spectrum disorder: A systematic review.
Journal of Occupational Rehabilitation 22, 333–352. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10926-
011-9347-8
Howlin, P., Moss, P., & Savage, S. (2013). Social outcomes in mid- to later adulthood among
individuals diagnosed with autism and average nonverbal IQ as children. Journal of the
120

American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, 52(6), 572–581.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaac.2013.02.017
Hurlbutt, K., Chalmers, L. (2004). Employment and adults with Asperger syndrome. Focus on
Autism and Other Developmental Disabilities, 19, 215–222.
https://doi.org/10.1177/10883576040190040301
Jacob, A., Scott, M., Falkmer, M., & Falkmer, T. (2015). The costs and benefits of employing an
adult with autism spectrum disorder: A systematic review. PLoS One, 10(10), 1–15.
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0139896
Johnson, T. D., & Joshi, A. (2016). Dark clouds or silver linings? A stigma threat perspective on
the implications of an autism diagnosis for workplace well-being. Journal of Applied
Psychology, 101(3), 430–449. https://doi.org/10.1037/apl0000058
Kapp, S. K. (2019). How social deficit models exacerbate the medical model: Autism as case in
point. Autism Policy & Practice, 2(1), 3–28.
Kapp, S. K., Gillespie-Lynch, K., Sherman, L. E., & Hutman, T. (2013). Deficit, difference, or
both? Autism and neurodiversity. Developmental Psychology, 49(1), 59–71.
https://doi.org/10.1037/a0028353
Katz, N., Dejak, I., & Gal, E. (2015). Work performance evaluation and QoL of adults with high
functioning autism spectrum disorders (HFASD). Work, 51, 887–892.
https://doi.org/10.3233/WOR-152001
Kenny, L., Hattersley, C., Molins, B., Buckely, C., Povey, C., & Pellicano, E. (2016). Which
terms should be used to describe autism? Perspectives from the UK autism community.
Autism, 20(4), 442– 462. https://doi.org/10.1177/1362361315588200
121

Khalifa, G., Sharif, Z., Sultan, M., & Di Rezze, B. (2020). Workplace accommodations for adults
with autism spectrum disorder: A scoping review. Disability and Rehabilitation, 42(9),
1316–1331. https://doi.org/10.1080/09638288.2018.1527952
Kiep, M., Spek, A. A., & Hoeben, L. (2015). Mindfulness-based therapy in adults with an autism
spectrum disorder: Do treatment effects last? Mindfulness 6, 637–644 (2015).
https://doi.org/10.1007/s12671-014-0299-x
Krzeminska, A., Austin, R. D., Bruyère, S. M., & Hedley, D. (2019). The advantages and
challenges of neurodiversity employment in organizations. Journal of Management &
Organization, 25, 453–463. https://doi.org/10.1017/jmo.2019.58
Krzeminska, A., & Hawse, S. (2020). Mainstreaming neurodiversity for an inclusive and
sustainable future workforce: Autism-spectrum employees. In L. Wood, L. P. Tan, Y. A.
Bryer, & S. Hawse (Eds)., Industry and higher education: Case studies for sustainable
futures (pp. 229–264). Springer.
Lai, M.-C., Lombardo, M. V., Ruigrok, A. N., Chakrabarti, B., Auyeung, B., Szatmari, P.,
Happé, F., Baron-Cohen, S., & MRC AIMS Consortium. (2017). Quantifying and
exploring camouflaging in men and women with autism. Autism, 21(6), 690–702.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1362361316671012
Lawer, L., Brusilovskiy, E., Salzer, M. S., & Mandell, D. S. (2009). Use of vocational
rehabilitative services for adults with autism. Journal of Autism and Developmental
Disorders, 39, 487–494. doi:10.1007/s10803-008-0649-4
Lindsay, S., Osten, V., Rezai, M., & Bui, S. (2021). Disclosure and workplace accommodations
for people with autism: A systematic review. Disability and Rehabilitation, 43(5), 597–
610. https://doi.org/10.1080/09638288.2019.1635658
122

Loiacono, E. T., & Ren, H. (2018). Building a neurodiverse high-tech workforce. MIS Quarterly
Executive, 17(4), 263–279. https://aisel.aisnet.org/misqe/vol17/iss4/5
López, B., Keenan., L. (2014). Barriers to employment in autism: Future challenges to
implementing the Adult Autism Strategy. Autism Research Network.
Lorenz, T., & Heinitz, K. (2014). Aspergers – different, not less: Occupational strengths and job
interests of individuals with Asperger’s Syndrome. Plos One, 9(6), 1–8.
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0100358
Lorenz, R., Reznik, N., & Heinitz, K. (2017). A different point of view: The neurodiversity
approach to autism and work. In M. Fitzgerald & J. Yip (Eds.), Autism: Paradigms,
recent research and clinical applications (IntechOpen). https://doi.org/10.5772/65409
Loureiro, M., Loureiro, N., & Silva, R. (2020). Differences of gender in oral and written
communication apprehension of university students. Education Sciences, 10(12), article
379. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci10120379
Marcel, M. (2019). Communication apprehension across the career span. International Journal
of Business Communication. https://doi.org/10.1177/2329488419856803
Maes, J. D., Weldy, T. G., & Icenogle, M. L. (1997). A managerial perspective: Oral
communication competency is most important for business students in the workplace.
Journal of Business Communication, 34(1), 67–80.
Mavranezouli, I., Megnin-Viggars, O., Cheema, N., Howlin, P., Baron-Cohen, S., & Pilling, S.
(2014). The cost-effectiveness of supported employment for adults with autism in the
United Kingdom. Autism, 18(8), 975–984. https://doi.org/10.1177/1362361313505720
Mazurek, M. O. (2014). Loneliness, friendship, and well-being in adults with autism spectrum
disorders. Autism, 18(3), 223–232. https://doi.org/10.1177/1362361312474121
123

McCroskey, J. C. (1977). Classroom consequences of communication apprehension.
Communication Education, 26(1), 27–33. https://doi.org/10.1080/03634527709378196
McCroskey, J. C. (1978). Validity of the PRCA as an index of oral communication
apprehension. Communication Monographs, 45(3), 192–203.
https://doi.org/10.1080/03637757809375965
McCroskey, J. C. (1984). Oral communication apprehension: A reconceptualization. Annals of
the International Communication Association, 6(1), 136–170.
https://doi.org/10.1080/23808985.1982.11678497
McCroskey, J. C. (2001). An introduction to rhetorical communication. Allyn & Bacon.
McCroskey, J. C. (2015). An introduction to rhetorical communication: A Western rhetorical
perspective (9
th
ed.). Rougledge.
McCroskey, J. C., Beatty, M. J., Kearney, P., & Plax, T. G. (1985). The content validity of the
PRCA-24 as a measure of communication apprehension across communication contexts.
Communication Quarterly, 33(3), 165–173. https://doi.org/10.1080/01463378509369595
McCroskey- J. C., Booth-Butterfield, S., & Payne, S. K. (1989). The impact of communication
apprehension on college student retention and success. Communication Quarterly, 37(2),
100–107. https://doi.org/10.1080/01463378909385531
McCroskey, J. C., & Richmond, V. P. (1982). The quiet ones: Communication apprehension and
shyness (2nd ed.). Gorsuch Scarisbrick.
McDermott, R., & Varenne, H. (1995). Culture as disability. Anthropology & Education
Quarterly, 26(3), 324–348. https://doi.org/10.1525/aeq.1995.26.3.05x0936z
McGillivray, J. A., & Evert, H. T. (2014). Group cognitive behavioural therapy program shows
potential in reducing symptoms of depression and stress among young people with ASD.
124

Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 44(8), 2041–2051.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10803-014-2087-9
Merriam, S. B., & Tisdell, E. J. (2016). Qualitative research: A guide to design and
implementation (4th ed.). Jossey Bass.
Morris, M. R., Begel, A., & Wiedermann, B. (2015). Understanding the challenges faced by
neurodiverse software engineering employees: Towards a more inclusive and productive
technical workforce. ASSETS '15: Proceedings of the 17th International ACM
SIGACCESS Conference on Computers & Accessibility, 173–184.
https://doi.org/10.1145/2700648.2809841
Müller, E., Schuler, A., & Burton, B. A. (2002). Meeting the vocational support needs of
individuals with Asperger syndrome and other autism spectrum disabilities. Journal of
Vocational Rehabilitation, 18(3), 163–175.
Müller, E. Schuler, A., & Yates, G. B. (2008). Social challenges and supports from the
perspective of individuals with Asperger syndrome and other autism spectrum
disabilities. Autism, 12(2), 173–190. https://doi.org/10.1177/1362361307086664
Murphy, M., & Weber, K. (2019). Confirmation of the ability of the Personal Report of
Communication Apprehension-24 (PRCA-24) to predict behavioral indicators of social
interaction. Communication Research Reports, 36(5), 393–403,
https://doi.org/10.1080/08824096.2019.1683527
Nagib, W., & Wilton, R. (2020). Gender matters in career exploration and job-seeking among
adults with autism spectrum disorder: evidence from an online community. Disability and
Rehabilitation, 42(18), 2530–2541. https://doi.org/10.1080/09638288.2019.1573936
125

Nicholas, D. B., Attridge, M., Zwaigenbaum, L., & Clarke, M. (2015). Vocational support
approaches in autism spectrum disorder: a synthesis review of the literature. Autism,
19(2), 235–245. https://doi.org/10.1177/1362361313516548
Nicholas, D. B., Hodgetts, S, Zwaigenbaum, L., Smith. L. E., Shattuck, P., Parr, J. R., Conlon,
O., Germani, T., Mitchell, W., Sacrey, L., & Stothers, M. E. (2017). Research needs and
priorities for transition and employment in autism: Considerations reflected in a ‘Special
Interest Group’ at the International Meeting for Autism Research. Autism Research,
10(1), 15–24. https://doi.org/10.1002/aur.1683
Nicholas, D. B., Mitchell, W., Dudley, C., Clarke, M., & Zulla, R. (2018). An ecosystem
approach to employment and autism spectrum disorder. Journal of Autism and
Developmental Disorders, 48, 264–275. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10803-017-3351-6
Nicholas, D. B., Zwaigenbaum, L., Zwicker, J., Clarke, M. E., Lamsal, R., Stoaddart, K. P.,
Carroll, C., Muskat, B., Spoelstra, M., & Lowe, K. (2018). Evaluation of employment-
support services for adults with autism spectrum disorder. Autism, 22(6), 693–702.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1362361317702507
Orsmond, G. I., Shattuck, P. T., Cooper, B. P., Sterzing, P. R., & Anderson, K. A. (2013). Social
participation among young adults with an autism spectrum disorder. Journal of Autism
and Developmental Disorders, 43(11), 2710–2719. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10803-013-
1833-8
Ortiz, L. A. (2020). Reframing neurodiversity as competitive advantage: Opportunities,
challenges, and resources for business and professional communication educators.
Business and Professional Communication Quarterly, 83(3), 261–284.
https://doi.org/10.1177/2329490620944456
126

Pallathra, A. A., Cordero, L., Wong, K., & Brodkin, E. S. (2019). Psychosocial interventions
targeting social functioning in adults on the autism spectrum: A literature review. Current
Psychiatry Reports, 21, article 5. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11920-019-0989-0
Parr, A. D., & Hunter, S. T. (2013). Enhancing work outcomes of employees with autism
spectrum disorder through leadership: Leadership for employees with autism spectrum
disorder. Autism, 18(5), 545–554. https://doi.org/10.1177/1362361313483020
Parr, A. D., Hunter, S. T., & Ligon, G. S. (2013). Questioning universal applicability of
transformational leadership: Examining employees with autism spectrum disorder. The
Leadership Quarterly, 24(4), 608–622. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2013.04.003
Pazzaglia, A. M., Stafford, E. T., & Rodriguez, S. M. (2016). Survey methods for educators:
Selecting samples and administering surveys (part 2 and 3). IES.
Peijen, R., & Bos, M. C. M. (2021). Brief report: The benefits of an employer-based work-
experience program for participants with ASD. Journal of Autism and Developmental
Disorders. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10803-021-04976-z
Pisano, G. P., & Austin, R. D. (2016a). Hewlett Packard Enterprise: The Dandelion Program.
Ivey Publishing.
Pisano, G. P., & Austin, R. D. (2016b). SAP SE: Autism at work. Ivey Publishing.
Rao, B., & Polepeddi, J. (2019). Neurodiverse workforce: Inclusive employment as an HR
strategy. Strategic HR Review, 18(5), 204–209. https://doi.org/10.1108/SHR-02-2019-
0007
Raymond, M. A., McNabb, D. E., & Matthaei, F. (1993). Preparing graduates for the workforce:
The role of business education. Journal of Education for Business, 68(4), 202–206.
https://doi.org/10.1080/08832323.1993.10117613
127

Richards, J. (2012). Examining the exclusion of employees with Asperger syndrome from the
workplace. Personnel Review, 41, 630–646. https://doi.org/
10.1108/00483481211249148
Rizvi, N., Begel, A., & Annabi, H. (2021). Inclusive interpersonal communication education for
technology professionals. AMCIS 2021 Proceedings, 2, Paper 1187.
Robinson, S. B., & Leonard, K. F. (2019). Designing quality survey questions. Sage.
Rosqvist, H. B. (2019). Doing things together: Exploring meanings of different forms of sociality
among autistic people in an autistic work space. ALTER, European Journal of Disability
Research, 13, 168–178. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.alter.2019.03.003
Roux, A. M., East, J. E., & Shattuck, P. T. (2020). State-level variation in vocational
rehabilitation service use and related outcomes among transition-age youth on the autism
spectrum. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 50, 2449–2461.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10803-018-3793-5
Roux, A. M., Shattuck, P. T., Cooper, B. P., Anderson, K. A., Wagner, M., & Narendorf, S. C.
(2013). Postsecondary employment experiences among young adults with an autism
spectrum disorder: Employment in young adults with autism. Journal of the American
Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, 52(9), 931–939.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaac.2013.05.019
Roux, A.M., Shattuck, P.T., & Rast, J.E. (2015). National autism indicators report: Transition
into young adulthood. Drexel Autism Institute, Drexel University.
Rubin, R. B., Rubin, A. M., & Jordan, F. F. (2009). Effects of instruction on communication
apprehension and communication competence. Communication Education, 46(2), 104–
114. https://doi.org/10.1080/03634529709379080
128

Shattuck, P. T., Narendorf, S. C., Cooper, B., Sterzing, P. R., Wagner, M., & Taylor, J. L.
(2012). Postsecondary education and employment among youth with an autism spectrum
disorder. Pediatrics, 129(6), 1042–1049. https://doi.org/10.1542/peds.2011-2864
Schall, C. M., Wehman, P., Brooke, V., Graham, C., McDonough, J., Brooke, A., Ham, W.,
Rounds, R., Lau, S., & Allen, J. (2015). Employment interventions for individuals with
ASD: The relative efficacy of supported employment with or without prior Project
SEARCH Training. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 45, 3990–4001.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10803-015-2426-5
Schall, C., Wehman, P., Avellone, L., & Taylor, J. P. (2020). Competitive integrated
employment for youth and adults with autism: Findings from a scoping review. Child and
Adolescent Psychiatric Clinics of North America, 29(2), 373–397.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chc.2019.12.001
Schall, C., Wehman, P., & Carr, S. (2014). Transition from high school to adulthood for
adolescents and young adults with autism spectrum disorders. In F. R. Volkmar, B.
Reichow, & J. & C. McPartland (Eds.), Adolescents and adults with autism spectrum
disorders (pp. 41–60). Springer.
Schaller, J., & Yang, N. K. (2005). Competitive employment for people with autism.
Rehabilitation Counseling Bulletin, 49, 4–16.
https://doi.org/10.1177/00343552050490010201
Schuck, R. K., Flores, R. E., & Fung, L. K. (2019). Sex/gender differences in symptomology and
camouflaging in adults with Autism Spectrum Disorder. Journal of Autism and
Developmental Disorders, 49, 2597–2604. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10803-019-03998-y
129

Scott, M., Falkmer, M., Girdler, S., Falkmer, T. (2015). Viewpoints on factors for successful
employment for adults with autism spectrum disorder. PLOS ONE, 10(10), e0139281.
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0139281
Scott, M., Falkmer, M., Falkmer, T., & Girdler, S. (2018). Evaluating the effectiveness of an
autism-specific workplace tool for employers: A randomised controlled trial. Journal of
Autism and Developmental Disorders, 48, 3377–3392. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10803-
018-3611-0
Scott, M., Milbourn, B., Falkmer, M., Bӧlte, S., Halladay, A., Lerner, M., Taylor, J. L., &
Girdler, S. (2019). Factors impacting employment for people with autism spectrum
disorder: A scoping review. Autism, 23(4), 869–901.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1362361318787789
Segrin, C., & Abramson, L. Y. (1994). Negative reactions to depressive behaviors: A
communication theories analysis. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 103(4), 655–668.
Shattuck, P. T., Roux, A. M., Hudson, L. E., Taylor, J. L., Maenner, M. J., & Trani, J.-F. (2012).
Services for adults with an autism spectrum disorder. Canadian Journal of Psychiatry,
57(5), 284–291. https://doi.org/10.1177/070674371205700503
Sizoo, B. B., & Kuiper, E. (2017). Cognitive behavioural therapy and mindfulness based stress
reduction may be equally effective in reducing anxiety and depression in adults with
autism spectrum disorders. Research in Developmental Disabilities, 64, 47–55.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ridd.2017.03.004
Smith, H. M., & Betz, N. E. (2000). Development and validation of a scale of perceived social
self-efficacy. Journal of Career Assessment, 8(3), 283–301.
https://doi.org/10.1177/106907270000800306
130

Soeker, M. S. (2020). A descriptive, qualitative study of the challenges that individuals with
autism spectrum disorder experience when transitioning from skills training programs
into the open labor market in Cape Town, South Africa. Work, 65(4), 733–747.
https://doi.org/10.3233/WOR-203127
Solomon, C. (2020). Autism and employment: Implications for employers and adults with ASD.
Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 50, 4209–4217.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10803-020-04537-w
Sosnowy, C., Silverman, C., & Shattuck, P. (2018). Parents’ and young adults’ perspectives on
transition outcomes for young adults with autism. Autism, 22(1), 29–39.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1362361317699585
Sosnowy, C., Silverman, C., Shattuck, P., & Garfield, T. (2019). Setbacks and successes: How
young adults on the autism spectrum seek friendship. Autism in Adulthood, 1(1), 44–51.
https://doi.org/10.1089/aut.2018.0009
Spek, A. A., van Ham, N. C., & Nyklicek, I. (2013). Mindfulness-based therapy in adults with an
autism spectrum disorder: a randomized controlled trial. Research in Developmental
Disabilities, 34(1), 246–53. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ridd.2012.08.009
Spain, D., Blainey, S. H., & Vaillancourt, K. (2017). Group cognitive behaviour therapy (CBT)
for social interaction anxiety in adults with autism spectrum disorders (ASD). Research
in Autism Spectrum Disorders, 41–42, 20–30. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rasd.2017.07.005
Strindlund, L, Abrandt-Dahlgren, M., & Stahl, C. (2019). Employers’ views on disability,
employability, and labor market inclusion: A phenomenographic study. Disability and
Rehabilitation, 41(24), 2910–2917. https://doi.org/10.1080/09638288.2018.1481150
131

Sumner, K. E., & Brown, T. J. (2015). Neurodiversity and human resource management:
Employer challenges for applicants and employees with learning disabilities.
Psychologist-Manager Journal, 18(2), 77–85. https://doi.org/10.1037/mgr0000031
Sung, C., Sanchez, J., Kuo, H.-J., Wang, C.-C., & Leahy, M. J. (2015). Gender differences in
vocational rehabilitation service predictors of successful competitive employment for
transition-aged individuals with autism. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders,
45, 3204–3218. doi:10.1007/s10803-015-2480
Taylor, J. L., & DaWalt, L. S. (2017). Brief report: Postsecondary work and educational
disruptions for youth on the autism spectrum. Journal of Autism and Developmental
Disorders, 47(12), 4025–4031. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10803-017-3305-z
Taylor, J. L., DeWalt, L. S., Marvin, A. R., Law, J. K., & Lipkin, P. (2019). Sex differences in
employment and supports for adults with autism spectrum disorder. Autism, 23(7), 1711–
1719. https://doi.org/10.1177/1362361319827417
Taylor, J. L., Henninger, N. A., & Mailick, M. R. (2015). Longitudinal patterns of employment
and postsecondary education for adults with autism and average-range IQ. Autism, 19(7),
785–793. https://doi.org/10.1177/1362361315585643
Taylor, J. L., & Hodapp, R. M. (2012). Doing nothing: Adults with disabilities with no daily
activities and their siblings. American Journal on Intellectual and Developmental
Disabilities, 117(1), 67–79. https://doi.org/10.1352/1944-7558-117.1.67
Taylor, J. L., Hodapp, R. M., Burke, M. M., Waitz-Kudla, S. N., & Rabideau, C. (2017).
Training parents of youth with autism spectrum disorder to advocate for adult disability
services: Results from a pilot randomized controlled trial. Journal of Autism and
Developmental Disorders, 47(3), 846–857. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10803-016-2994-z
132

Taylor, J. L., & Mailick, M. R. (2014). A longitudinal examination of 10-year change in
vocational and educational activities for adults with autism spectrum disorders.
Developmental Psychology, 50(3), 699–708. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0034297
Taylor, J. L., McPheeters, M. L., Sathe, N. A., Dove, D. Veenstra-Vanderweele, J., & Warren, Z.
(2012). A systematic review of vocational interventions for young adults with autism
spectrum disorders, Pediatrics, 130(3), 531–538. https://doi.org/10.1542/peds.2012-0682
Taylor, J. L., Seltzer, M. M. (2011). Employment and post-secondary educational activities for
young adults with autism spectrum disorders during the transition to adulthood. Journal
of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 41, 566–574. doi:10.1007/S10803-010-1070-3
Taylor, J. L., & Seltzer, M. M. (2012). Developing a vocational index for adults with autism
spectrum disorder. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 42(12), 2669–2679.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10803-012-1524-x
Ulinksi, M., & O’Callaghan, S. (2002). A comparison of MBA students’ and employers’
perceptions of the value of oral communication skills for employment. Journal of
Education for Business, 77(4), 193–197. https://doi.org/10.1080/08832320209599070
Van Herwegen, J., Ashworth, M., & Palikara, O. (2019). Views of professionals about the
educational needs of children with neurodevelopmental disorders. Research in
Developmental Disabilities, 91. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ridd.2019.05.001
Wareham, J., & Sonne, T. (2008). Harnessing the power of Autism Spectrum Disorder.
Innovations: Technology, Governance, Globalization, 3(1), 11–27.
Wei, M., Russell, D. W., & Zakalik, R. B. (2005). Adult attachment, social self-efficacy, self-
disclosure, loneliness, and subsequent depression for freshman college students: A
133

longitudinal study. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 52(4), 602–614.
https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0167.52.4.602
Whelpley, C. E., Banks, G. C., Bochantin, J. E., & Sandoval, R. (2021). Tensions on the
spectrum: An inductive investigation of employee and manager experiences of autism.
Journal of Business and Psychology, 36, 283–297. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10869-019-
09676-1
Yan, T. T., Tangirala, S., Vadera, A. K., & Ekkirala, S. (2022). How employees learn to speak
up from their leaders: Gender congruity effects in the development of voice self-efficacy.
Journal of Applied Psychology, 107(4), 650–667. https://doi.org/10.1037/apl0000892

134

Appendix A: Survey Questions
Thank you for participating in this study about communication in the workplace. This
study focuses on how professionals experience confidence or apprehension in various
communication situations at work.
The survey takes about 5 to 10 minutes to complete. Please read each item carefully.
This survey is completely anonymous. If you’re uncomfortable with any portion of the
survey, you don’t need to respond or you can discontinue at any point.
Happy to share summary results with you if you’re interested. You can email me directly
if you’d like to see them: petercardon@gmail.com.
Thanks again for your help.
Peter Cardon
University of Southern California

135

Table A1
Survey Items
Question Response options (if
close-ended)
Concept being
measured
I consent to participate in this project. Yes or no Screening: If
participants select
“no,” the survey
will end
automatically.
Have you been diagnosed with any of the
following:
Check all that apply:
Auditory sensory
disorder
Autism
ADHD
Anxiety
Depression
None of the above

Screening: Only
participants who
selected “Autism”
advanced to the
remaining survey
questions. All
other respondents
were informed the
survey was
completed.
1. I dislike participating in group discussions. 1 (strongly disagree)
to 5 (strongly
agree)

PRCA-24:
Apprehension in
group discussions
2. Generally, I am comfortable while
participating in group discussions.
1 (strongly disagree)
to 5 (strongly
agree)

PRCA-24:
Apprehension in
group discussions
3. I am tense and nervous while participating
in group discussions.
1 (strongly disagree)
to 5 (strongly
agree)

PRCA-24:
Apprehension in
group discussions
4. I like to get involved in group discussions. 1 (strongly disagree)
to 5 (strongly
agree)

PRCA-24:
Apprehension in
group discussions
5. Engaging in a group discussion with new
people makes me tense and nervous.
1 (strongly disagree)
to 5 (strongly
agree)

PRCA-24:
Apprehension in
group discussions
6. I am calm and relaxed while participating
in group discussions.
1 (strongly disagree)
to 5 (strongly
agree)

PRCA-24:
Apprehension in
group discussions
136

Question Response options (if
close-ended)
Concept being
measured
7. Generally, I am nervous when I have to
participate in a meeting.
1 (strongly disagree)
to 5 (strongly
agree)

PRCA-24:
Apprehension in
meetings
8. Usually, I am comfortable when I have to
participate in a meeting.
1 (strongly disagree)
to 5 (strongly
agree)

PRCA-24:
Apprehension in
meetings
9. I am very calm and relaxed when I am
called upon to express an opinion at a
meeting.
1 (strongly disagree)
to 5 (strongly
agree)

PRCA-24:
Apprehension in
meetings
10. I am afraid to express myself at meetings. 1 (strongly disagree)
to 5 (strongly
agree)

PRCA-24:
Apprehension in
meetings
11. Communicating at meetings usually
makes me uncomfortable.
1 (strongly disagree)
to 5 (strongly
agree)

PRCA-24:
Apprehension in
meetings
12. I am very relaxed when answering
questions at a meeting.
1 (strongly disagree)
to 5 (strongly
agree)

PRCA-24:
Apprehension in
meetings
13. While participating in a conversation with
a new acquaintance, I feel very nervous.
1 (strongly disagree)
to 5 (strongly
agree)

PRCA-24:
Apprehension in
interpersonal
conversations
14. I have no fear of speaking up in
conversations.
1 (strongly disagree)
to 5 (strongly
agree)

PRCA-24:
Apprehension in
interpersonal
conversations
15. Ordinarily I am very tense and nervous in
conversations.
1 (strongly disagree)
to 5 (strongly
agree)

PRCA-24:
Apprehension in
interpersonal
conversations
16. Ordinarily I am very calm and relaxed in
conversations.
1 (strongly disagree)
to 5 (strongly
agree)

PRCA-24:
Apprehension in
interpersonal
conversations
17. While conversing with a new
acquaintance, I feel very relaxed.
1 (strongly disagree)
to 5 (strongly
agree)

PRCA-24:
Apprehension in
interpersonal
conversations
137

Question Response options (if
close-ended)
Concept being
measured
18. I'm afraid to speak up in conversations. 1 (strongly disagree)
to 5 (strongly
agree)

PRCA-24:
Apprehension in
interpersonal
conversations
19. I have no fear of giving a speech. 1 (strongly disagree)
to 5 (strongly
agree)

PRCA-24:
Apprehension in
speeches
20. Certain parts of my body feel very tense
and rigid while giving a speech.
1 (strongly disagree)
to 5 (strongly
agree)

PRCA-24:
Apprehension in
speeches
21. I feel relaxed while giving a speech. 1 (strongly disagree)
to 5 (strongly
agree)

PRCA-24:
Apprehension in
speeches
22. My thoughts become confused and
jumbled when I am giving a speech.
1 (strongly disagree)
to 5 (strongly
agree)

PRCA-24:
Apprehension in
speeches
23. I face the prospect of giving a speech with
confidence.
1 (strongly disagree)
to 5 (strongly
agree)

PRCA-24:
Apprehension in
speeches
24. While giving a speech, I get so nervous I
forget facts I really know.
1 (strongly disagree)
to 5 (strongly
agree)

PRCA-24:
Apprehension in
speeches
25. Generally, what types of communication
situations at work make you most nervous
or anxious?
Anxiety in
communication
26. Generally, what types of communication
situations at work make you most
comfortable or confident?
Confidence in
communication
27. Gender Woman, Man, Other,
Prefer not to say
Gender
28. Age: 18 to 20, 21 to 25, 26
to 30, 31 to 35, 36
to 40, 41 to 45, 46
to 50, 51 to 55, 56
to 60, 61 to 65,
over 65
Age
138

Question Response options (if
close-ended)
Concept being
measured
29. Current employment: Not employed, part-
time, full-time,
other
Employment status
30. Work experience: None, 1 to 2 years, 3
to 5 years, 6 to 10
years, 11 to 15
years, 16 to 20
years, over 20
years
Work experience
31. Income level: Under 25k, 25 to 50k,
50 to 75k, 75 to
100k, 100k to
125k, 125k to
150k, over 150k
Income level
32. Do you have a mentor at work? Yes or No Professional and
training
background

139

Appendix B: Interview Questions
Introduction to the interview:
Thanks so much for taking part in this project. As we discussed via email, my main goal
is to understand how people with autism build or sometimes lose confidence in their
relationships at work. I’m working on this project with the encouragement of several of my
family members who have autism. Everything you say is completely confidential, as mentioned
in the informed consent form that I sent you last week. Last week when we emailed, I mentioned
I prefer to record the interviews. As long as you’re okay with it, I’ll record our conversation
today. The recording of our conversation will only be on my computer. As soon as I finish the
research, I’ll delete the recording. I make a transcript of the conversation but remove any
identifiable name, such as your name. If you’re okay with me recording, I want you to know we
can stop at any time. Please feel free to tell me if that’s the case. Again, thanks so much for your
help with this project.
You’ve seen the questions I hope to ask ahead of time. I’ll try to cover all those
questions, but you don’t need to respond to any of the questions that you’re not comfortable
with. Again, thanks so much for your help with this project and let’s get started if it’s okay with
you.

140

Table B1
Semi-structured Interview Questions
Interview questions Key concepts addressed
1. Could you tell me about your colleagues right now? How
many do you work with closely? In what ways do you work
with them?
General professional
background and overall
social self-efficacy
2. What has it been like to work with your bosses or
supervisors in the past? What have your relationships been
like with your bosses?
General professional
background and overall
social self-efficacy
3. Which types of meetings and conversations do you
participate in the most? Perhaps you could talk about small
and large face-to-face meetings as well as online meetings.
General professional
background and overall
social self-efficacy
4. What types of situations do you feel most confident or
comfortable communicating in at work? Why?
Overall social self-efficacy
and communication
apprehension; Desired
professional environment
5. What types of situations do you feel least confident or
comfortable communicating in at work? Why?
Overall social self-efficacy
and communication
apprehension; Desired
professional environment
6. Thinking about your colleagues, including your bosses or
supervisors, how well do they communicate with others?
Social self-efficacy–vicarious
learning
7. Do you have mentors, coaches, or others who support you at
work? How effective are they at communicating with
others?
Social self-efficacy–vicarious
learning
8. What type of direct feedback about your ability to work
with others do you get from bosses or supervisors?
Social self-efficacy–social
persuasion and
communication
apprehension
9. What type of direct feedback about your ability to work
with others do you get from bosses or colleagues?
Social self-efficacy–social
persuasion and
communication
apprehension
10. What type of direct feedback about your ability to work
with others do you get from people other than your bosses
or colleagues? For example, clients or customers?
Social self-efficacy–social
persuasion and
communication
apprehension
11. What have been some of your successes at communicating
and working with others?
Social self-efficacy–past
experiences and
communication
apprehension
12. What have been some of your challenges when
communicating and working with others?
Social self-efficacy–past
experiences
141

Interview questions Key concepts addressed
13. How do you think your past experiences communicating
with others have impacted your confidence?
Social self-efficacy–past
experiences and
communication
apprehension
14. What types of social interactions at work are the most and
least stressful? Why do you think that’s the case?
Social self-efficacy–
emotional arousal and
communication
apprehension
15. Could you share some examples of when you get nervous or
uncomfortable when communicating with colleagues or
customers? How do you try to overcome that nervousness?
Social self-efficacy–
emotional arousal
16. If you were going to give advice to someone on the
spectrum who is just starting out their career, what would
you tell them about building relationships at work?
Overall social self-efficacy
17. What do you view as your main strengths and abilities at
work? How often do you get to use these strengths?
Perceived strengths
18. What do you think is the best environment for autistic
professionals to feel more confident in communication
situations? To improve their communication skills?
Professional environment
19. If you could give advice to managers of autistic employees,
what would you tell them about how to help their autistic
employees succeed at work? To build effective work
relationships?
Professional environment
20. If you could give advice to an early-career autistic employee
about how to interact effectively with colleagues,
customers, or others, what would you tell them?
Professional environment

142

Appendix C: Coding and Code Descriptions for Survey Items
Table C1
Coding, Code Descriptions, Examples, and Results for Uncomfortable Communication
Situations at Work
Category Code Description Examples Code
count
(%)
Category
count (%)
Unpredictable
work-
related
situations
Situations in
which people
do not have
time to
adequately
formulate
their work-
related
content and
ideas.
74
(30.6%)
Put on the spot Situations in
which people
must
spontaneousl
y explain
their views or
solve a
problem
without
enough time
to prepare
content
and/or ideas.
“Being asked
questions in
front of groups
of people.”
(P81)
“When I’m told
to present
something I
didn’t prepare
in front of
people.” (P86)
“Meetings I can’t
prepare for.”
(P172)
44
(18.2%)

Disagreement
or
confrontatio
n
Situations in
which people
must
navigate
differences of
views and
sensitive
work topics.
“Confrontations
with co
workers.”
(P83)
“If there’s
anything that
requires either
confrontation
or calling
someone out, I
get very
29
(12.0%)

143

Category Code Description Examples Code
count
(%)
Category
count (%)
nervous.”
(P156)
“Discipling
subordinates.”
(P267)
Unstructured
work
interactions
Situations, such
as meetings,
that lack
clear
agendas,
structure,
focus, or
norms for
turn-taking.
“Informal group
setting when I
don’t know if
it’s my turn to
talk.” (P67)
“Unknown
topics.” (P182)
“Dynamic group
discussions
without clear
rank/order.”
(P216)
10
(4.1%)

Unpredictable
social
situations
at work
Situations in
which the
social nature
of the
conversation
influences
communicati
on dynamics
62
(25.6%)
Working with
new people
Situations in
which people
interact with
others
without
knowing
them well.
“Anything to do
with new
people or those
I don’t speak to
often.” (P141)
“Talking to new
people, it
becomes better
when I get to
know them but
otherwise it
makes me
really
nervous.”
(P147)
“I’m mostly
anxious in
groups where I
34
(14.0%)

144

Category Code Description Examples Code
count
(%)
Category
count (%)
don’t know
people. Once I
know the
people, I’m
much more
relaxed.”
(P185)
Feeling singled
out or
judged
Situations
where people
feel they
draw
unwanted
attention or
feel
negatively
judged by
others.
“In person
meetings
where all focus
is on me and
everyone else
is quiet.” (P15)
“When people
talk and stare
into my eyes
the whole
time.” (P118)
“Speaking with or
in front of
people I do not
know. I fear
they’re
laughing at
me.” (P318)
24
(9.9%)

Small talk or
uncomfortab
le topics of
conversation
Situations in
which people
are expected
to engage in
small talk or
conversations
about private
or non-work
matters.
“Dealing with
personal
discussions and
issues. Either
discussing my
own or
discussing
someone
else’s.” (P129)
“I don’t do well
with small
talk.” (P187)
“Speaking with
people about
non-work
topics.” (P265)
10
(4.1%)

145

Category Code Description Examples Code
count
(%)
Category
count (%)
Nature of
relationship
s
Situations
defined by
the nature of
the people
involved.
39
(16.1%)
With a boss or
superior
Interactions
with bosses
or authority
figures.
“Talking with
supervisors
about
opinions.” (P9)
“Talking with my
manager or a
higher up.”
(P32)
“Meeting with
boss.” (P166)
35
(14.5%)

With
colleagues
or peers
Interactions
with
colleagues,
peers, or
others who
are of the
same role or
authority
level.
“Scared to talk to
peers.” (P181)
“Presenting in
front of my
colleagues.”
(P221)
4 (1.7%)
With
subordinates
Interactions
with direct
reports or
subordinates.
N/A 0 (0.0%)
With
customers
Interactions
with clients
or customers.
“I get especially
nervous when
speaking with
customers.”
(P79)
2 (0.8%)
Types of
communica
tion
situations
Situations that
are
characterized
by the
medium or
channel of
conversation
or the
number of
116
(47.9%)
146

Category Code Description Examples Code
count
(%)
Category
count (%)
people
involved

One-on-one
communicat
ion
Interactions
with just two
people
“One on one
meetings.”
(P35)
“I get most
nervous when
I’m working
alone with
people.”
(P219)
8 (3.3%)
Group
conversation
s or
meetings
Discussion or
meetings
involving
three or more
people
“Group
meetings.” (P7)
“Group
discussion.”
(P221)
“Speaking with
more than 2
peers.” (P235)
53
(21.9%)

Large groups Group
discussions
or meetings
that are
specifically
described as
“large.” If
participants
referred to
large groups,
it was only
coded in this
category (not
in the “group
conversations
or meetings”
category.
“Large group
discussions.”
(P14)
“Large groups
and more
formal
meetings are
most difficult
for me.” (P15)
“Communication
in a quiet room
with a lot of
people.”
(P294)

23
(9.5%)

Presentations Situations
involving
public
speaking or
presentations.
“Speaking in
front of a large
group (stage
fright).” (P54)
54
(22.3%)

147

Category Code Description Examples Code
count
(%)
Category
count (%)
“Giving
presentations.”
(P294)
Face-to-face
communicat
ion
Communication
that is in
person.
“Any thing that is
face to face.”
(P110)
“Face to face.”
(P232)
5 (2.1%)
Phone
conversation
s
Communication
by phone.
“I get very
nervous when
it comes to
making/receivi
ng phone
calls.” (P79)
“On the phone
idk why.”
(P145)
10
(4.1%)

Online
meetings
Communication
by online
meeting.
“Zoom or
FaceTime is
aggravating
because of the
time lag.”
(P25)
1 (0.4%)
Email or
texting
Communication
by email or
text.
“Email.” (P136) 4 (1.7%)
Overall 25
(10.3%)
All
communicat
ion
situations
In some cases,
respondents
reported they
were nervous
or anxious in
all
communicati
on situations.
“Anything really
makes me
anxious at
work.” (P3)
“All
communication
.” (P163)
20
(8.3%)

No
communicat
ion
situations
In some cases,
respondents
reported they
were not
nervous or
anxious in
any
“None.” (P27)
“Nothing really. I
like talking to
colleagues.”
(P186)
5 (2.1%)
148

Category Code Description Examples Code
count
(%)
Category
count (%)
communicati
on situations.

Note. Of 324 respondents who completed the full PRCA-24 survey, 242 (74.5%) completed the
following optional open-ended item: Generally, what types of communication situations at work
make you the most nervous or anxious? Please share just a few thoughts. The percentages in the
table are based on dividing the count by 242 (the number of people who responded to this survey
item). The code counts do not necessarily equal the sum of related subcodes.

149

Table C2
Coding, Code Descriptions, Examples, and Results for Comfortable Communication Situations
at Work
Category Code Description Examples Code
Count
(%)
Category
Count (%)
Predictable
work-related
situations
Situations in
which people
have time to
formulate
their work-
related ideas
or develop
work-related
content for
interactions
47
(19.8%)
Adequate
preparation
and
expertise
Situations in
which people
are given
enough time
to prepare
their content
and ideas or
have the
expertise to
address an
issue
immediately.
“When
answering
questions I
have the
answer.”
(P10)
“Talking about
something I
know very
well.” (P78)
“Ones where I
can present
as a subject
matter expert,
with minimal
questions
outside the
scope of
discussion.”
(P172)
39
(16.5%)

Focus on facts
and
objective
information
Situations in
which
decision-
making and
conversations
are driven by
facts and
“Business
conversations
that are
solidly
focused on a
topic.” (P18)
9 (3.8%)
150

Category Code Description Examples Code
Count
(%)
Category
Count (%)
objective
information.
“Products.
Anything
about a new
gadget, car,
cellphone,
house etc.
Just stuff.
There’s no
politics
involved. It’s
fun.” (P46)
Structured
work
interactions
Situations, such
as meetings,
that have
clear agendas,
structure,
focus, or
norms for
turn-taking.
“Known topics
ahead of
time.” (P182)
2 (.8%)
Predictable and
positive
social
situations at
work
87
(36.7%)
Close and
well-known
colleagues
Interactions
with
colleagues
and others
who are
close, well
known, and
friendly.
“I’m most
comfortable
when
speaking with
someone who
knows me
well.” (P79)
“Speaking one
on one with
someone I
trust.” (P294)
“Being in a
group with
people I
know.”
(P295)
41
(17.3%)

Supportive
communicati
on
Situations in
which people
feel others
“When people
have patience
19
(8.0%)

151

Category Code Description Examples Code
Count
(%)
Category
Count (%)
offer support,
appreciation,
and
encourage
them to speak
up.
with me.”
(P58)
“When people
give
compliments
I feel
comfortable.”
(P210)
“Talking with
customers
that are
friendly.”
(P255)
Casual
conversation
Conversations
and meetings
that are
characterized
by casual,
relaxed, or
information
communicatio
n.
“Casual
conversations
.” (P72)
“Informal
meetings.”
(P195)
11
(4.6%)

Shared and
equal group
efforts
Communication
that is
characterized
by everyone
in the group
equally
sharing
efforts.
“When it is a
group and we
all share
equally.”
(P36)
“I’m
comfortable
in positive
group
discussions
that are about
sharing new
ideas.”
(P156)
11
(4.6%)

Helping others Communication
in situations
that involve
helping
others.
“When giving
help.” (P12)
“Helping people
learn, when i
can help
someone.”
(P227)
6 (2.5%)
152

Category Code Description Examples Code
Count
(%)
Category
Count (%)
Independent
work
Situations
characterized
by working
alone or
independently
.
“Working on
my own.”
(P66)
“Writing by
myself.”
(P175)
6 (2.5%)
Nature of
relationships
Situations
defined by the
nature of the
people
involved
56
(23.6%)
With a boss or
superior
Interactions
with bosses or
authority
figures.
“With my
boss.” (P183)
1 (.4%)
With
colleagues
or peers
Interactions
with
colleagues,
peers, or
others who
are of the
same role or
authority
level.
“Talking with
fellow
coworkers
my age.”
(P94)
“Communicatio
ns with
colleagues of
the same
echelon or
lower.”
(P170)
“Speaking with
my team.”
(P199)
52
(21.9%)

With
subordinates
Interactions
with direct
reports or
subordinates.
“With people
that I
oversee.”
(P98)
2 (.8%)
With
customers
Interactions
with clients or
customers.
“Talking with a
regular
customer.”
(P32)
2 (.8%)
Types of
communicat
ion
situations
Situations that
are
characterized
by the
medium or
104
(43.9%)
153

Category Code Description Examples Code
Count
(%)
Category
Count (%)
channel of
conversation
or the number
of people
involved
One-on-one
communicati
on
Interactions
with just two
people
“One on one.”
(P229)
54
(22.8%)

Group
conversation
s or
meetings
Discussion or
meetings
involving
three or more
people
“Group
meetings.”
(P322)
15
(6.3%)

Small groups Group
discussions or
meetings that
are
specifically
described as
“small.” If
participants
referred to
small groups,
it was only
coded in this
category (not
in the “group
conversations
or meetings”
category.
“Small groups”
(P230)
“When leading
a discussion
with a small
group.”
(P275)
10
(4.2%)

Presentations Situations
involving
public
speaking or
presentations.
“Doing a
presentation.”
(P236)
11
(4.6%)

Face-to-face
communicati
on
Communication
that is in
person.
“Face to face
communicati
on is best.”
(P25
3 (1.3%)
Phone
conversation
s
Communication
by phone.
Not applicable 0 (0.0%)
154

Category Code Description Examples Code
Count
(%)
Category
Count (%)
Online
meetings
Communication
by online
meeting.
“The virtual
style
meeting.”
(P21)
2 (.8%)
Email or
texting
Communication
by email or
text.
“Email.” (P207) 21
(8.9%)

Overall 27
(11.4%)
All
communicati
on situations
In some cases,
respondents
reported they
were
comfortable
or confident
in all
communicatio
n situations.
“I’m
comfortable
on all
platforms,
large or
small.”
(P247)
2 (.8%)
No
communicati
on situations
In some cases,
respondents
reported they
were not
comfortable
or confident
in any
communicatio
n situations.
“None.” (P152)
“Nothing.”
(P162)
25
(10.5%)

Note. Of 324 respondents who completed the full PRCA-24 survey, 237 (72.9%) completed the
following optional open-ended item: Generally, what types of communication situations at work
make you most comfortable or confident? Please share just a few thoughts. The percentages in
the table are based on dividing the count by 237 (the number of people who responded to this
survey item). The code counts do not necessarily equal the sum of related subcodes.

155

Appendix D: Coding and Code Descriptions for Interviews
Theme/
category
Code Definition Example quotes
Professional
environment
The professional
environment in which
autistic professionals
interact with colleagues,
customers, and others.
This environment is
formed by a combination
of the following
overlapping elements:
support, cadence, and
resilience.

Support The level of support that
autistic professionals say
creates the right
environment for them to
become more confident
in communication
situations at work.
All participants discussed the
support that has sustained
them in their work and led to
higher confidence in
communication situations.
This support was displayed
in the following ways:
managerial support, a sense
of belonging and emotional
support from trusted
colleagues, receiving
favorable social interventions
by others, and tapping into
the neurodiverse community.
Managerial
advocacy
The degree to which
managers support autistic
employees and create an
environment that fosters
their success. This was
often framed in terms of
understanding and
accommodating the
unique needs of
participants. It also
involved managers
advocating to
neurotypical employees
on behalf of neurodiverse
employees.
She [my boss] is so friendly to
me right now, because we’ve
known each other for a long
time. Right now I’m very
confident because I’ve been
working and the boss is very
patient with me and makes
sure the other employees
help me. (Ava)

But there are a lot of them
[autistic employees] are
going to be set up to fail and,
at the very minimum, the
best case, we can hope for is
they’re not going to be able
to fulfill their full potential.
156

Theme/
category
Code Definition Example quotes
They’re just not because
they’re going to spend most
of their energy every day
navigating this environment
that is hostile to them and
you’re not going to get to
them and you’re not going to
get the person you could
have had because they’re
masking and they’re using all
of their daily executive
functions to deal with the
social politics. … Most
autistic people are going to
fail if you don’t train
managers. (Charlotte)

Autistic employees are able to
collaborate as long as you
help them. You have to
understand them and
recognize that we all have
weaknesses and we also have
strengths too. Just try to
support them and make them
feel comfortable to
collaborate with the other
workers. (Isabella)

Reported by 10 participants.

Belonging
and emotional
support
The sense that one is an
important member of a
team of group of
employees. This sense of
belonging was often felt
when participants needed
emotional support.
My mentor really consoles me.
I tell him about my
workplace stress. I stress
about a lot of things in my
head that I can’t handle or
explain it. He assures me I’m
not alone and then I do feel I
like it helps and [feel]
supported. … Sometimes I’m
feeling maybe disadvantaged.
That’s the time I go to him. It
creates an environment that
accommodates autistic
157

Theme/
category
Code Definition Example quotes
people and people who are
not autistic. It just gives them
a good environment that they
can perform to the best of
their ability as long as
they’re given good working
conditions. (Emma)

I have a colleague who I
worked with him very
closely, and he was the one
who I could go and tell
things. (Liam)

I have a good support system
from my colleagues. … I
find, like my colleagues are
on my side. The three of us
they make me feel like I have
you know, like you belong
somewhere. They’re always
on my side so I really feel
like that it’s sort of a support
system. … They are like a
family. They understand me
on a personal level. … My
colleagues are perfect and
then my work I just love it.
(Oliver)

Reported by six participants.

Social
interventions
The degree to participants
received helpful
interventions in social
interactions by managers
and colleagues. These
interventions typically
involved providing a safe
environment for
participants to speak up
or involved mediating or
managing conflict.
I feel more confident when I’m
given a chance to do
something. I feel less
confident when I’m not given
a chance, like denied maybe
some opportunities like
leadership opportunities. But,
my managers, in my office,
they are aware of my
condition. They always give
me a chance to speak. Let’s
say maybe at a meeting they
158

Theme/
category
Code Definition Example quotes
tell me ahead what questions
they will ask. They help me
get involved … sometimes,
they fail to recognize I wanna
talk. Sometimes, they
recognize me and give me a
chance and that gives me the
courage to talk to people in
other groups. (Emma)

He [my supervisor]
understands me really well
because, like, for instance,
when we are dealing with
customers and then
sometimes there can be some
customers who are bothering
me. He just takes me out of
the place I’m working.
Maybe if I was serving the
food, he takes me to maybe
the cashier. (Liam)

When patients are rude to me,
my coworkers will always
help me out. Sometimes they
will take over and work with
the patients. (Oliver)

Reported by 10 participants.

Neurodiverse
community
Relying on formal and
informal support groups
with other autistic
individuals to discuss
challenges at work and
develop coping
strategies.
With them [autism support
group] the fact that we can
share stories. We can talk
regarding our day-to-day
challenges and also have
something have someone to
stand by you. (Olivia)

I recently started a
neurodivergent Slack channel
at my company … what we
do in that channel is we share
experiences and memes and
159

Theme/
category
Code Definition Example quotes
other stuff. We let each other
know like “Hey I’m really
struggling with this time
change like anybody else
struggling?” or “What are
you guys doing with the
trainings sessions?” or “Is
anybody free for me to jump
on a call right and I have a
presentation to prepare?” We
don’t talk to each other, we
just sit on a Zoom call and
work, you know, but we use
that as an accountability. …
From our lived experience
and so you’re able to kind of
cut to the chase with help and
advice, whereas before you
have to weed out the kind of
stuff that [neurotypical]
people are going to offer you
because they don’t know.
(Charlotte)

With autistic people, it can
help when others, maybe you
find people who are autistic
like get to know people who
also identify as you know
autistic and venture out
together and can interact
together and like share like
ideas together, to give you,
each other hope and embrace
each other. (Mia)

Reported by eight participants.

Cadence The predictability or
rhythm of one's work
activities. It is impacted
by work demands, time
management, and the
All participants described the
cadence—the predictability
and rhythmic-based nature of
work—that supported more
confidence in communication
situations. Common elements
160

Theme/
category
Code Definition Example quotes
extent to which one
works with new people.
described by participants as
contributing to a comfortable
cadence included familiarity
with others, scheduling
aligned with preferences, and
avoiding excessive work
demands.

Familiarity
with others
The extent to which work
activities involve
working with colleagues,
customers, or others who
are familiar or unfamiliar.
I don’t really like it when like
it when there are new people
in my office or [when I]
encounter new people that
come in and fail to recognize
my situation and fail to
understand me. They may
not be comfortable with me. I
just prefer to be with my
employees that I’m used to
and I’m so social with them.
They understand my
situation. They know how to
talk with me, and I know
how to handle them. (Emma)

The initial interactions were
not that good. Sometimes
there was arguing. But after a
while, I was just doing my
job and we understood each
other and now he’s is a been
a person who I look up to. …
The newly employed, we
sometimes disagree about
stuff. (Amelia)

I prefer interacting with people
that I have known from the
past or people that we have
some history together. When
it comes to interacting with
new people it’s a bit
stressful. (Noah)

Reported by eight participants.
161

Theme/
category
Code Definition Example quotes

Scheduling The extent to which work
activities align with
participants’ desired
times.
So, like I am useless pretty
much after four. I’ve been
perky at work pretty much all
day. I’m done at four, so I try
not to schedule meetings
after that you know I work
more you know better earlier
in the day. (Charlotte)

The most frustrating thing is
being able to like get to my
job. At 7:30am I’m not a
morning person … he [my
boss] makes me feel
comfortable at my workplace
when I’m late. He does not,
like, make me feel bad or he
does not get that annoyed. He
just understands me. (Sophia)

For me it’s just keeping time
when I’m required to be at
work by 7 or 8 [a.m.], I think
it’s quite a challenge for me.
(Isabella)

Reported by six participants.

Work
demands
The extent to which work
deliverables and
deadlines create or do not
create pressure. This
sometimes involves
perceived competition
with others.
I feel much better when I don’t
get pressure from my bosses.
(Olivia)

I feel far less confident when I
have a lot of people to
compete with, especially
people who don’t have my
condition. … I can’t
concentrate on other things
like when I maybe I need to
perform better in the deadline
and maybe the deadlines
become so tight so I always
feel so uncomfortable until I
162

Theme/
category
Code Definition Example quotes
perform what I have to.
(Emma)

[Managers should give autistic
employees] a supportive
environment that does not
give them a lot of pressure in
workplace. (Mia)

Reported by six participants.

Resilience The degree to which one
persists in the face of
challenges at work.
Autistic professionals
described two key
features of resilience:
self-advocating and
determination.
All participants described the
importance of resilience.
Resilience came in two major
forms, self-advocating and
determination.
Self-
advocating
Speaking up for one's own
or other neurodiverse
employees' needs in the
workplace.
I do trainings in front of
thousands of people a year.
So, and I know that I am not
the thing that most people
picture when they think of
autistic. So, if I can announce
in these trainings, “Hey, by
the way, I’m autistic and
ADHD so there might be
some things that I mentioned
that kind of relate to that you
have any questions, let me
know.” So, sometimes it’s as
simple as that just up in front
and put it with my
introduction. You know I’m
a proud member of the
neurodivergent community.
And it’s also kind of the
beacon, then for people to
reach out to me and say,
“Hey you know this is me
too, so because my company
doesn’t have any official
neurodiversity programming
163

Theme/
category
Code Definition Example quotes
or support, I’d love to
connect.” (Charlotte)

I would also want them
[autistic employees] to be
able to express themselves
when you feel like their
rights are being violated.
Please don’t keep quiet.
Communicate. Because, at
times, we autistic people tend
to be misjudged, tend to be
ignored, tend to be sidelined.
Which is not good, because it
can make you feel depressed.
So, try as much as possible to
communicate. (Sophia)

At first I didn’t want anyone to
know that I’m autistic. I
really tried to be normal. I
didn’t want anyone like
knowing that I’m autistic. If I
found that it was leaked that I
was autistic, I really felt so
bad. Maybe a friend told
another person that I’m
autistic, I used to like get
mad at that person. … I was
like not doing any good for
myself or my situation. I had
to develop self-acceptance. I
had like to share it to the
close people in my life so
they can understand how
they should treat me, how
they could react to me, how
they could talk to me, and it
was only by sharing. (Mia)

Reported by seven
participants.

164

Theme/
category
Code Definition Example quotes
Determination Persisting in the face of
negative views and
stereotypes of others.
It’s not that easy. You have to
be psychologically prepared
at times. (Sophia)

Despite my autism, I’ve
always tried to work because
I need to earn a living. I want
to prove people wrong.
Otherwise, they’ll always
think maybe being autistic
when a person is autistic,
you’re unable to work. So,
it’s again because I want to
disprove a lot of people.
(Amelia)

You must practice self-
acceptance and not look at
your situation as an obstacle
to do other things. Look at
your situation as just a
normal situation and you are
just a normal human being so
that if given the chance, just
do your things normally [and
take] the chance to face life
positively and, like interact
with everyone positively.
(Mia)

Reported by nine participants.

Social self-
efficacy
“Confidence in one’s
ability to engage in the
social interactional tasks
necessary to initiate and
maintain interpersonal
relationships in social life
and career activities”
(Anderson & Betz, 2001,
p. 98)
All participants discussed
various aspects of social self-
efficacy. In particular, three
aspects of social self-efficacy
were most salient: emotional
arousal, past performance,
and social persuasion. These
elements of social self-
efficacy operated in the
context of the professional
environment.
165

Theme/
category
Code Definition Example quotes
Emotional
arousal
Emotional arousal involves
the level of unease,
nervousness, and/or
confusion in social
interactions. Key types of
emotional arousal raised
in interviews of autistic
professionals were
agitation, feeling judged,
and controlling emotions.
All participants discussed how
emotional arousal impacted
their social self-efficacy.
They tended to focus on
negative emotions as
obstacles to confidence in
communication situations.
The key elements of
emotional arousal were
agitation, feeling judged, and
feeling out of control.
Agitated Feeling agitated, annoyed,
or exasperated by a social
interaction.
I just get so worked up when
others disagree with me. I
don’t say anything. I just am
so worked up inside. (Olivia)

I get upset when I don’t know
what to say with a certain
person. I feel that I don’t
want to work in in that place.
It can last like maybe if I was
working maybe until that day
ends. Maybe after sleeping I
come back the next day, I
just feel a bit better. (Liam)

I get such a feeling of agitation
sometimes. And now I guess
I’ve learned to let go and
avoid it [the conflict]. I just
learned to let it go, let it be I
just go and take some time
off. I don’t like confronting
someone. (Noah)

Reported by eight participants.

Judged Feeling that others perceive
one as incompetent or
unable to work
effectively in a social
interaction at work.
At first they [my colleagues]
were shocked that I’m able to
maybe do a lot of work
activities and am going to
deliver the best. They just
stereotype what autistic
people can do and just think
166

Theme/
category
Code Definition Example quotes
they can’t do anything. They
assume I can’t work with
customers. They think I
should work on other things
[not with people]. (Emma)

A lot of autistic people say
there’s mistreatment at some
of their jobs. Other people
don’t like you. People don’t
want to associate with you.
(Isabella)

There are some patients that
will come and think that I’m
slow. They keep
misunderstanding me. People
perceive us as slow. That we
do things slowly. (Oliver)

Reported by 11 participants.

Out of control Feeling unable to
effectively control and
channel one’s emotions
during a social
interaction.
I think some of the biggest
challenges are getting to have
people understand me
because, at times, I’ll lose
my cool, especially when I
get agitated. I might lash out
at my co-worker. I’m just
trying to be honest. A lot of
co-workers get upset. (Ava)

When somebody is critical of
an idea that I have [I get
frustrated], and I think it’s
because I don’t know that
I’m upset. Sometimes until
it’s pointed out to me or I
literally cry. You know, and
so, people will say, “Oh, you
need to recognize and
manage your emotions.” It’s
like but I don’t. I don’t get it
like when people say I am
167

Theme/
category
Code Definition Example quotes
not still entirely sure what
happy feels like I just don’t
know like I don’t know what
that feels like in in your body
or in your mind you know,
and so, when people say
recognize your emotions like
well, Good luck, you know,
and then, so I know that in
those situations my face gets
red and I definitely show my
frustration, because I’ve been
told that I show my
frustration and so it’s just
hard for me to re-set once the
train is off the tracks.
(Charlotte)

If someone says something
offensive, I overreact where
it gets all emotional. To the
point that I can’t control
myself. I can end up maybe
like crying or there’s
something weird or like may
be shouting. At some point, I
can’t control myself,
especially when something
triggers it like someone
shouting at me or someone
like telling me something
that’s offensive. (Mia)

Reported by seven
participants.

Past
performance
Past performance relates to
an individual’s past
experiences in making
friends and other social
experiences. Interviewees
talked about failures and
successes in social
interactions. They also
All participants mentioned
how past failures or
successes impacted their
confidence in communication
situations.
168

Theme/
category
Code Definition Example quotes
discussed failures and
successes in terms of
tasks that had direct
bearing on their social
interactions.
Failure Social interactions that did
not end successfully due
to participants’ perceived
inability to manage the
situation effectively. In
some cases, this involves
failure at tasks that were
not completed
successfully because
there are direct
implications for
confidence in
communication
situations.
Okay, if it’s me that that was
in the wrong, I want to really
look for the colleague later
and maybe we had a conflict
to tell him that I’m sorry
because maybe I did
something that I didn’t
understand. I ended up doing
something wrong. I’m
always sorry. The guilt really
eats me up. I always try to
explain to them, and I will
not always feel comfortable
until I tried to explain, like, I
address an issue that
happened. (Emma)

So, I did that for four or five
years [failing at managing
people]. Then, I realized
what was happening was a
recurring pattern right. I
became really great at what I
did. I was a stellar individual
contributor. I got promoted
to management and the
wheels fell off because I just
could not relate. … A lot of
the things I don’t figure out
until people stop inviting me
to lunch, like the group. The
lunch group that I used to be
a part of now goes to lunch
without me and I don’t go
anymore. Or the projects that
I should get because of my
ability go to somebody who
has less experience and less
skilled but is probably more
169

Theme/
category
Code Definition Example quotes
pleasant and easier to work
with so. Then, I kind of have
to backtrack and go okay,
“Where did this go wrong?”
You know and try to figure
that out, or like the little girl
who used to walk with me to
school now walk a block and
a half, ahead of me, and like
pretends like she doesn’t hear
me, you know so that is it’s
kind of like a forensics
examination sometimes.
(Charlotte)

I don’t know to make friends
at work. I barely have any
friends. So that’s something
I’ll work on. It makes me
kind of wanna give up.
Sometimes it makes me feel
like I am thoughtless and I’ll
just make messes [if I try to
build a relationship].
(Sophia)

Reported by nine participants.

Success Social interactions that
ended successfully due to
participant’s ability to
manage the situation
effectively. In some
cases, this involves
success at tasks that were
completed successfully
because there are direct
implications for
confidence in
communication
situations.
I feel like I’m able to
communicate very well when
it is planned. I enjoy making
presentations. (Olivia)

I was given a chance to lead a
team. We were tackling a
very hard problem. My team
did it, like no other team
could do it. Through my
leadership, because of my
passion, I gave it to them,
and the project was a huge a
success. (Emma)

170

Theme/
category
Code Definition Example quotes
I’ve become more courageous.
To be patient with other
people. No one is perfect. In
the achievement of the
business or the goals of the
organization, I’m able to
collaborate. I’ve gotten much
better at collaborating.
(Isabella)

Reported by 10 participants.

Social
persuasion
Social persuasion involves
feedback given about
one’s social skills.

Formal
feedback
Formal feedback and
training about how to
improve one’s social and
communication skills.
When I started, I got customer
service training. With the
customer and how to conduct
myself in front of customers.
How to overcome complaints
and how to remain patient.
(Ava)

I do receive a performance
appraisal and am told how to
better manage the students
when they come to the
library, how to be fair and
everything. I also get training
about how to treat customers.
(Sophia)

Reported by four participants.

Informal
feedback
Informal feedback
participants’ social
interactions with
colleagues, customers,
and others.
Especially when it comes to
targets and performance,
she’s [my boss] there to
motivate us. She doesn’t
bash someone who makes a
mistake. She gives an
opportunity for growth, and
tells us when standards
change from time to time. If I
say something wrong, she
171

Theme/
category
Code Definition Example quotes
has a gentle way to correct
me. (Olivia)

And again, I ran into the same
problem when I was just
talking to my boss, one on
one she thought I was doing
an amazing job and
everything was great.
Everything was wonderful
and loved me and everything
I did, and then my team
brought some concerns to her
that I didn’t know that they
had and challenges I didn’t
know that they had, and then
it became okay how else
might we find something for
you to do? And at the same
time, I was going through
another situation with a
therapist of mine who had
said, “Hey I know that last
email you sent I didn’t take it
as being mean because I
know you.” I looked at this
email and thought it wasn’t
mean or rude. But because
she knew me and I never
would have thought that this
was potentially bad like
sometimes you know, like oh
this situation got away from
me a little bit that one.
(Charlotte)

Sometimes he [my boss] told
me just try to understand the
customers better. Sometimes
he told me some of my
remarks could upset the
customers. He approached
some of the customers to tell
them about my situation. To
172

Theme/
category
Code Definition Example quotes
tell them to understand those
who have autism and tell
them people with autism
don’t always say things
nicely. (Liam)

Reported by 10 participants.

Abstract (if available)

Linked assets

University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Conceptually similar

PDF

Autistic people’s experiences during the employment process

PDF

Understanding the gaps for neurotypical managers to support college-educated autistic employees across industries

PDF

Trust in the 100% remote workplace in high growth technology consulting firms

PDF

A research study of employee perceptions on identifying phishing attacks in financial organizations

PDF

The experience of Eritrean refugee women in addressing their mental health needs

PDF

The case for leader self-reflection in the workplace

PDF

Senior leadership response to campus flashpoints

PDF

Gender role beliefs of male senior leaders in retail and the impact on women’s advancement

PDF

Addressing degree completion among Latinx working adults

PDF

Students’ sense of belonging: college student and staff perspectives during COVID-19

PDF

Double jeopardy: the influence of prevalent race and gender bias on women of color executive leadership promotions

PDF

Military spouse well-being during the COVID-19 pandemic

PDF

Sense of belonging in an online high school: looking to connect

PDF

Assessing the effects of electronic performance monitoring (EPM) on employee experience

PDF

Online graduate program retention: exploring the impact of community on student retention rates from the perspectives of faculty and alumni

PDF

Attending to the lived experiences of behavior technicians to discover the keys to retention: an exploratory study

PDF

How relationships and institutional structures impact collaboration between early childhood educators and K12 educators

PDF

Access to quality supplemental educational programs for K-12 students in underserved communities

PDF

An examination of ethnic minority physician representation in clinical medicine to reduce health disparities among minoritized groups

PDF

Well-being, employee effectiveness, and organizational support: community college administrators during the COVID-19 pandemic

Asset Metadata

Creator Cardon, Peter Wilson (author)

Core Title Communication apprehension among autistic employees

School Rossier School of Education

Degree Doctor of Education

Degree Program Organizational Change and Leadership (On Line)

Degree Conferral Date 2022-08

Publication Date 07/22/2022

Defense Date 06/08/2022

Publisher University of Southern California (original), University of Southern California. Libraries (digital)

Tag autism,autistic employees,communication apprehension,neurodiversity,OAI-PMH Harvest

Format application/pdf (imt)

Language English

Contributor Electronically uploaded by the author (provenance)

Advisor Carbone, Paula M. (committee chair), Moore, Ekaterina (committee member), Muraszewski, Alison Keller (committee member)

Creator Email cardon@marshall.usc.edu,pcardon@usc.edu

Permanent Link (DOI) https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-oUC111373909

Unique identifier UC111373909

Legacy Identifier etd-CardonPete-10908

Document Type Dissertation

Format application/pdf (imt)

Rights Cardon, Peter Wilson

Type texts

Source 20220722-usctheses-batch-960 (batch), University of Southern California (contributing entity), University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses (collection)

Access Conditions The author retains rights to his/her dissertation, thesis or other graduate work according to U.S. copyright law. Electronic access is being provided by the USC Libraries in agreement with the author, as the original true and official version of the work, but does not grant the reader permission to use the work if the desired use is covered by copyright. It is the author, as rights holder, who must provide use permission if such use is covered by copyright. The original signature page accompanying the original submission of the work to the USC Libraries is retained by the USC Libraries and a copy of it may be obtained by authorized requesters contacting the repository e-mail address given.

Repository Name University of Southern California Digital Library

Repository Location USC Digital Library, University of Southern California, University Park Campus MC 2810, 3434 South Grand Avenue, 2nd Floor, Los Angeles, California 90089-2810, USA

Repository Email cisadmin@lib.usc.edu