Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders

, Volume 45, Issue 6, pp 1588–1602 | Cite as

Impact of Choice on Social Outcomes of Adults with ASD

Original Paper
First Online:

Abstract

This study explores social outcomes for adults with autism spectrum disorder (ASD) in comparison to adults with developmental disabilities other than ASD by investigating the relationships between the constructs Social Participation and Relationships, Social Determination, and Personal Control. Structural equation modeling (SEM) was used to test a model of the relationships among constructs of interest and structured means analysis was used to test for mean group differences on these constructs. Results indicated that individuals with ASD had lower levels of Social Determination and Friendships than individuals with other developmental disabilities. SEM analyses yielded significant relationships between constructs. Results provide insight with regards to novel statistical, theoretical, and practical approaches to the study of social outcomes for individuals with ASD.

Keywords

Autism Social relationships Social participation Access to services Personal control National core indicators 
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Notes

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to acknowledge Robert Cudeck, Ph.D. and Rebecca Andridge Ph.D. for their consultation regarding the statistical analyses carried out in this study. Authors would also like to acknowledge Human Services Research Institute (HSRI) and the National Association of State Directors of Developmental Disabilities Services (NASDDDS) and thank these organizations for their contribution of the National Core Indicators (NCI) dataset to this study. This study was supported in part with funding from the U.S. Administration on Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities Grant #99-DD-0621.

References

  1. American Psychiatric Association. (2013). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders (5h ed.). Washington, D.C.: Author.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Billstedt, E., Gillberg, I. C., & Gillberg, C. (2005). Autism after adolescence: Population-based 13- to 22-year follow-up study of 120 individuals with autism diagnosed in childhood. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 35(3), 351–360.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. Billstedt, E., Gillberg, I. C., & Gillberg, C. (2011). Aspects of quality of life in adults diagnosed with autism in childhood: A population-based study. Autism, 15(1), 7–20.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. Browne, M. W., & Cudeck, R. (1989). Alternative ways of assessing model fit. In K. A. Bollen & J. S. Long (Eds.), Testing structural equation models. Newbury Park: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
  5. Byrne, B. M. (2010). Structural equation modeling with AMOS: Basic concepts, application, and programming (2nd ed.). New York: Routledge Taylor & Francis Group.Google Scholar
  6. Davis, P., & Faw, G. (2002). Residential preferences in person-centered planning. In S. Holburn & P. M. Vietze (Eds.), Person-centered planning: Research, practice and future directions (pp. 203–221). Baltimore: Brookes.Google Scholar
  7. Dimitrov, D. M. (2006). Comparing groups on latent variables: A structural equation modeling approach. Work, 26(4), 429–436.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. Eaves, L. C., & Ho, H. H. (2008). Young adult outcomes of autism spectrum disorders. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 38, 739–747.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. Engstrom, I., Ekstrom, L., & Emilsson, B. (2003). Psychosocial functioning in a group of Swedish adults with Asperger syndrome or high-functioning autism. Autism, 7(1), 99–110.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. Gao, S., Mokhtarian, P. L., & Johnston, R. A. (2008). Nonnormality of data in structural equation models. Journal of the Transportation Research Board, 2082, 116–124.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Heller, T., Miller, A. B., & Hsieh, K. (2002). Eight-year follow-up of the impact of environmental characteristics on well-being of adults with developmental disabilities. Mental Retardation, 40(5), 366–378.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. Howlin, P. (2003). Outcomes in high-functioning adults with autism with and without early language delays: Implications for the differentiation between autism and Asperger syndrome. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 33, 3–13.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. Howlin, P. (2005). Outcomes in autism spectrum disorders. In F. R. Volkmar, R. Paul, A. Klin, & D. Cohen (Eds.), Handbook of autism and pervasive developmental disorders, Vol. 1: Diagnosis, Development, Neurobiology (3rd ed., pp. 201–220). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.Google Scholar
  14. Howlin, P., Goode, S., Hutton, J., & Rutter, M. (2004). Adult outcome for children with autism. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 45, 212–229.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. Howlin, P., Mawhood, L. M., & Rutter, M. (2000). Autism and developmental receptive language disorder: A follow-up comparison in early adult life: II. Social, behavioural and psychiatric outcomes. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 41, 561–578.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. Howlin, P. A., & Yates, P. (1999). The potential effectiveness of social skills groups for adults with autism. Autism: The International Journal of Research & Practice, 3(3), 299–307.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Hu, L. T., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling, 6(1), 1–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Human Services Research Institute & National Association of State Directors of Developmental Disabilities Services. (2011). National core indicators adult consumer survey 2009–2010 final report. Cambridge, MA: HSRI.Google Scholar
  19. Human Services Research Institute & National Association of State Directors of Developmental Disabilities Services. (2012). National core indicators adult consumer survey 2010–11 final report. Cambridge, MA: HSRI.Google Scholar
  20. IBM Corporation. (2011). IBM SPSS statistics for windows, Version 20.0. Armonk, NY: IBM Corp.Google Scholar
  21. IBM Corporation. (2012). IBM SPSS amos for windows, Version 20. Somers, NY: IBM Corp.Google Scholar
  22. Jöreskog, K., & Sörbom, D. (1993). LISREL 8: Structural equation modeling with the SIMPLIS command language. Chicago, IL: Scientific Software International Inc.Google Scholar
  23. Kline, R. B. (1998). Principles and practices of structural equation modeling. New York: Guilford Press.Google Scholar
  24. Levy, A., & Perry, A. (2011). Outcomes in adolescents and adults with autism: A review of the literature. Research in Autism Spectrum Disorders, 5(4), 1271–1282.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Lord, C., & Venter, A. (1992). Outcome and follow-up studies of high functioning autistic individuals. In E. Schopler & G. B. Mesibov (Eds.), High functioning individuals with autism (pp. 187–200). New York: Plenum.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Magaziner, J., Zimmerman, S., Gruber-Baldini, A. L., Hebel, J. R., & Fox, K. M. (1997). Proxy reporting in five areas of functional status comparison with self-reports and observations of performance. American Journal of Epidemiology, 146, 418–428.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. Mehling, M. H., & Tassé, M. J. (2014). Empirically derived measurement model of social outcomes and predictors for Adults with ASD using National Core Indicator data. Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities, 52(4), 282–295.Google Scholar
  28. Mawhood, L. M., Howlin, P., & Rutter, M. (2000). Autism and developmental receptive language disorder: A follow-up comparison in early adult life: I. Cognitive and language outcomes. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 41, 547–559.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. Millsap, R. E. (2011). Statistical approaches to measurement invariance. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  30. Neely-Barnes, S., Marcenko, M., & Weber, L. (2008). Does choice influence quality of life for people with mild intellectual disabilities? Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities, 46(1), 12–26.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. Nordin, V., & Gillberg, C. (1998). The long-term course of autistic disorders: Update on follow-up studies. Acta Psychiatrica Scandinavica, 97, 99–108.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. Orsmond, G. I., Krauss, M. W., & Seltzer, M. M. (2004). Peer relationships and social and recreational activities among adolescents and adults with autism. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 34(3), 245–256.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. Renty, J. O., & Roeyers, H. (2006). Quality of life in high-functioning adults with autism spectrum disorders: The predictive value of disability and support characteristics. Autism, 10, 511–522.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. Ruble, L. A., & Dalrymple, N. J. (1996). An alternative view of outcome in autism. Focus on Autism & Other Developmental Disabilities, 11(1), 3–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Schalock, R. L. (2004). The concept of quality of life: What we know and do not know. Journal of Intellectual Disability Research, 48(3), 203–216.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  36. Seltzer, M. M., Schattuck, P., Abbeduto, L., & Greenberg, J. S. (2004). Trajectory of development in adolescents and adults with autism. Mental Retardation and Developmental Disabilities Research Reviews, 10, 234–247.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  37. Smith G., & Ashbaugh J. (2001) National core indicators project: Phase II consumer survey technical report. Retrieved from http://www.hsri.org.
  38. Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (2012). Using multivariate statistics (6th ed.). Boston: Pearson/Allyn & Bacon.Google Scholar
  39. Tichá, R., Hewitt, A., Nord, D., & Larson, S. (2013). System and individual outcomes and their predictors in services and support for people with IDD. Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities, 51, 298–315.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  40. Wheaton, B., Muthen, B., Alwin, D. F., & Summers, G. (1977). Assessing reliability and stability in panel models. Sociological Methodology, 8(1), 84–136.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Whitehouse, A. J., Watt, H. J., Line, E. A., & Bishop, D. V. (2009). Adult psychosocial outcomes of children with specific language impairment, pragmatic language impairment, and autism. International Journal of Language and Communication Disorders, 44(4), 511–528.CrossRefPubMedCentralPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Nisonger CenterThe Ohio State UniversityColumbusUSA

Personalised recommendations