A new analysis has revealed key differences in how autistic and neurotypical children learn words – differences that could reshape how language development is supported in educational and therapeutic settings.

One of the most comprehensive meta-analyses investigating how autistic children acquire language compared to their neurotypical peers, the study took data from 47 studies, encompassing over 3,000 children.

Lancaster University PhD student and lead author Sophie Lund found that, on average, autistic children showed lower accuracy in word learning tasks than neurotypical children. However, the research highlights that the performance gap is not uniform and can vary widely depending on the context, method of assessment, and children’s traits.

The researchers focused on three distinct components of word learning: fast mapping (quick initial learning of a word), retention (remembering the word), and generalisation (extending new words to other referents in the same category e.g., the word ‘cat’ refers to both black cats and ginger cats).

The most pronounced differences were found in fast mapping tasks involving social interaction, where autistic children were significantly less likely to succeed when asked to use non-verbal indicators like eye gaze to guide word learning. This aligns with known differences in social communication and attention in autism. Interestingly, the study found little to no significant difference in the ability to retain words over time or to generalise words. This suggests that, once learned, autistic children can remember new words and extend them to their multiple potential referents just as well as their peers.

Therefore, the researchers call for incorporating non-social strategies in language interventions, such as using visual supports, technology, or repetitive structures that do not rely on subtle social signals.

Another major takeaway is how the method used to study word learning significantly influenced the results. When tasks were highly structured or provided multiple explicit cues, autistic children often performed on par with neurotypical children. In more naturalistic settings, where social interpretation was required, their performance declined.

This raises questions about how current assessments may underestimate autistic children's learning potential by failing to account for the ways they best absorb information.

Sophie Lund stresses the findings are not meant to pathologise autistic learning styles, but rather to deepen understanding and promote inclusion. She also calls for greater diversity in research, pointing out many of the studies included in the meta-analysis involved children with relatively strong verbal skills, potentially excluding those with more significant communication challenges.

Sophie Lund said: “This meta-analysis highlights where autistic children’s strengths lie when learning new words, providing knowledge on how to support their vocabulary development”

As awareness of neurodiversity grows, this study offers critical insights for parents, teachers, and clinicians who support children in the acquisition of language.

The full paper can be found here