Social Interactions and Long‐Term Relationships Among Canadian Parents With Autism Spectrum Disorder: A Qualitative Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Studies have shown that many high‐functioning individuals with autism spectrum disorder (ASD) are interested in developing their social skills and relationships, but they tend to experience challenges in this area continuing into adulthood. There is very little literature addressing the type of relationships, especially long‐term ones, among adults on the spectrum. This study was aimed at examining the interpersonal interactions of adults with ASD, who were also parents, from their own perspectives. Methods: We recruited and interviewed 10 Canadian parents with ASD to learn about their lived experiences. Semi‐structured interviews were conducted using open‐ended questions to identify factors related to the interpersonal interactions of adults with ASD. Interviews were then transcribed, coded, categorized, and analyzed using thematic analysis. Results: The most significant experiences of participants fit within three themes: (1) informal social interactions, (2) parent–child dynamics, and (3) long‐term romantic relationships. Our findings indicate that adults with ASD find building and developing relationships meaningful. Conclusions: This study is one of the first studies that highlight the perspectives of individuals on the spectrum as parents in interpersonal interactions with their children and friends. Findings from this study provide a basis for future studies to better support adults with ASD in their relationships.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.021 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".