Cookies on this website

We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you click 'Accept all cookies' we'll assume that you are happy to receive all cookies and you won't see this message again. If you click 'Reject all non-essential cookies' only necessary cookies providing core functionality such as security, network management, and accessibility will be enabled. Click 'Find out more' for information on how to change your cookie settings.

A body of research suggests cross-neurotype interpersonal interactions may be more challenging, and non-autistic individuals show less interest in interacting with their autistic peers. However, it is not clear whether such cross-neurotype differences extend to prosocial decision-making behaviour – something that is vital for forming and maintaining social bonds. Using a physical-effort-based decision-making paradigm, in combination with computational modelling, we examined 30 autistic and 30 non-autistic individuals’ prosocial willingness to exert physical effort for oneself and others, as a function of whether the beneficiary shares their neurotype or not. We compared decisions to exert effort and action energisation when participants made decisions for the Self, Other Same neurotype and Other Different neurotype. Results showed a robust self-bias in effort discounting, with both groups choosing to exert more effort for themselves than others, and no differences between same and different neurotype others. However, while non-autistic participants showed no difference in action energisation between the same and different neurotype others, autistic participants exerted significantly more force for others of the same neurotype. Implicit, but not explicit, biases held about autism played a role: in autistic participants, higher implicit autism stigma predicted differences in effort discounting between same and different neurotype others, while in non-autistic participants, implicit bias predicted differences in actual effort exerted rather than decision-making. This work has important implications for understanding how interactor neurotypes and autism-specific biases may feed into prosocial decision-making contexts such as employment, health and education settings, where autistic individuals face the everyday consideration of whether to disclose their diagnostic status.

More information Original publication

DOI

10.1016/j.reia.2025.202710

Type

Journal article

Publication Date

2025-10-01T00:00:00+00:00

Volume

128