How behavioral differences between autistic and nonautistic suspects in forensic interviews affect observers' evaluations: Evidence for expectancy violations theory but not the double empathy hypothesis.

OBJECTIVE

Despite suggestions that autistic individuals' behavioral characteristics may arouse suspicion and undermine credibility during police and courtroom questioning, specific contributing behaviors have not been identified. We examined whether (a) suspects' figurative language difficulties and speech hesitations led to unfavorable evaluations, especially for autistic suspects, (b) evaluations of autistic and nonautistic suspects reflected the observer's diagnostic status as predicted by the double empathy hypothesis, and (c) evaluations were predicted by expectancy violations theory.

HYPOTHESES: We predicted harsher evaluations of suspects (a) with figurative language difficulties and speech hesitations, particularly for autistic suspects, (b) when the diagnostic status of observers and suspects differed, and (c) following violations of expected behavior.

METHOD: Autistic and nonautistic observers (Experiment 1 Ns = 212 and 215; Experiment 2 Ns = 125 and 125) watched online interviews with autistic or nonautistic chatroom participants suspected of computer hacking. Suspects with relatively high or low levels of either figurative language difficulties (Experiment 1) or speech hesitations (Experiment 2) were rated on suspiciousness, credibility, guilt, and expectancy violations.

RESULTS

Harsher evaluations were detected for autistic than nonautistic male suspects and when autistic suspects displayed more marked speech hesitations. The observer's diagnostic status did not affect evaluations of suspects, but expectancy violations did, regardless of the suspect's autism diagnostic status.

CONCLUSIONS

Male autistic suspects, and autistic suspects displaying more pronounced speech hesitations, appear vulnerable to negative evaluations. More extreme expectancy violations may exacerbate such evaluations. The double empathy hypothesis was not supported, but findings aligned with expectancy violations theory predictions. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2026 APA, all rights reserved).