CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 144Disability Education and EmploymentAutism Spectrum Disorder ResearchEmployment and Welfare Studies

Success factors enabling employment for adults on the autism spectrum from employers’ perspective

Dreaver, Jessica, Thompson, Craig, Girdler, Sonya, Adolfsson, Margareta, Black, Melissa H., Falkmer, Marita·2020·Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders
DOI 10.1007/s10803-019-03923-3
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Employment outcomes for individuals with autism spectrum disorder (ASD) are poor and there is limited understanding on how best to support individuals with ASD in the workplace. Stakeholders involved in the employment of adults with ASD, including employers and employment service providers have unique insights into the factors influencing employment for this population. Organisational and individual factors facilitating successful employment for adults with ASD across Australia and Sweden were explored, including the supports and strategies underpinning employment success from an employers' perspective. Three themes including Knowledge and Understanding of ASD, Work Environment and Job Match emerged, suggesting that a holistic approach was key to supporting success, with employer knowledge and understanding of ASD underpinning their ability to facilitate employment.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s10803-019-03923-3

Cites

45 of 45 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • More structured approaches, including transparent recruitment stages, clearly sequenced workflows, and role-aligned assessments, may improve clarity and consistency across organisational processes.

    “more structured approaches, including transparent recruitment stages, clearly sequenced workflows, and role-aligned assessments, may improve clarity and consistency across organisational processes (Nishith et al., 2025; Dreaver et al., 2020; Diener et al., 2020)”

    From The system-level organisational design framework: a neuro-cognitive trait interaction approach to workplace inclusion for autistic people (2026) · cites this paper as Dreaver et al., 2020

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 46 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Dreaver, J., Thompson, C., Girdler, S., Adolfsson, M., Black, M. H., & Falkmer, M.
Affiliations
  • Curtin University (AU)
  • Jönköping University (SE)
Corresponding author
Falkmer, Marita
ORCID
Venue
Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Published
2019-02-15
Volume
50
Issue
5
Pages
1657-1667
ISSN
  • 0162-3257 (ISSN-L)
  • 1573-3432
DOI
10.1007/s10803-019-03923-3
OpenAlex
W2914690720
Cited by
144
References
46
Citations by year
2026: 16 · 2025: 21 · 2024: 35 · 2023: 23 · 2022: 26 · 2021: 15 · 2020: 8
FWCI
21.40
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
www.springer.com/tdm (tdm)
Locations
  • Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • eSpace (Curtin University) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Safety Research › Disability Education and Employment
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Autism Spectrum Disorder Research
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Employment and Welfare Studies
Keywords
autism spectrum disorder, employer perceptions, workplace support, job matching, work environment
MeSH terms
Autism Spectrum Disorder, Achievement, Adult, Australia, Employee Performance Appraisal, Employment, Female, Humans, Male, Sweden, Workplace

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review