New research from Drexel University is shedding light on the hidden toll of a phenomenon known as “autism masking” or “passing as non-autistic,” particularly among teens. This study, recently published in Scientific Reports, offers the first direct evidence of how masking manifests in brain activity. Using EEG technology, researchers observed that autistic adolescents who mask their traits in social settings show distinct patterns of brain response—faster automatic recognition of faces and muted emotional reactivity. These findings not only deepen our understanding of the cognitive effort behind masking but also raise critical questions about how many autistic youth may be going unnoticed in schools and lacking the support they need.

Autism masking, or passing as non-autistic, refers to the practice of suppressing or compensating for autistic traits in order to blend into neurotypical environments. It’s a concept that has gained increasing attention in recent years, especially within autism advocacy communities. However, until now, there has been little empirical evidence of how this behavior affects the brain. The Drexel study changes that by providing measurable neurological differences between autistic teens who mask and those who do not.

In the study, researchers used electroencephalograms (EEGs) to record the brain activity of 44 community-recruited autistic adolescents during a facial emotion recognition task. The participants, with an average age of 13.36, were shown various facial expressions and asked to interpret the emotions depicted. Two specific brain responses were analyzed: the N170, which reflects early facial recognition, and the Late Positive Potential (LPP), associated with emotional processing. Teens who were identified as masking showed faster N170 responses and reduced LPP amplitudes, particularly in response to subtle emotional expressions. These findings suggest more efficient automatic processing of faces but a dampened emotional engagement with them.

What makes this study especially compelling is its methodology for identifying who was “passing” as non-autistic. Rather than relying solely on self-reporting or teacher assessments, the researchers cross-referenced gold-standard clinical diagnostic criteria with observations from parents and teachers. If a teen met formal diagnostic criteria for autism but showed few or no signs of it in classroom settings, they were considered to be masking. According to the study, about 44% of the participants fit this profile—an unexpectedly high proportion that signals the prevalence of masking may be underestimated.

Matthew Lerner, PhD, the study’s lead author and associate professor at Drexel University, emphasized the significance of this discrepancy. “These findings offer the first direct evidence of how brain activity might differ in those who pass as non-autistic, shedding light on the hidden mental effort behind social masking in autism,” Lerner stated. He also noted that the brain’s faster response to faces and reduced emotional reactivity could be a coping mechanism, allowing these teens to navigate complex social environments while minimizing emotional strain.

I found this detail striking: the teens who masked did not just behave differently—they processed the world differently at a neurological level. This distinction underscores the importance of understanding autism not just as a behavioral condition but as one deeply rooted in how individuals experience and interpret their environments. It also raises ethical and educational considerations. If nearly half of autistic teens in the study were able to “pass” undetected by teachers, how many students are silently struggling without access to resources or accommodations?

The implications for support systems in schools are profound. Traditional methods of identifying autism often rely on observable behaviors, which may not capture those who are actively masking. This research suggests that educators and clinicians need more nuanced tools for recognizing and supporting autistic students. Masking, while it may help individuals fit in socially, comes at a cognitive and emotional cost that should not be overlooked.

Additionally, the study’s findings could inform future interventions aimed at reducing the need for masking in the first place. If autistic teens feel compelled to hide their traits to be accepted, it points to a broader issue of social inclusion and acceptance. Creating environments where neurodiversity is understood and valued could lessen the psychological burden on those who currently feel they must mask to succeed or belong.

It’s also worth noting that this study included participants who had not previously received an autism diagnosis. By recruiting a broad community sample, the researchers were able to include teens who met diagnostic criteria but had not been formally identified. This inclusive approach offers a more comprehensive picture of how autism manifests across different settings and highlights the importance of early and accurate diagnosis.

Ultimately, this research marks a significant step forward in our understanding of autism masking and its neurological underpinnings. It challenges assumptions about what autism “looks like” and calls for more empathetic, informed approaches to support. As Lerner puts it, “We hope this will spur greater inquiry into identifying autistic youth who are ‘passing as non-autistic,’ determining what cognitive efforts are involved in this, and developing improved ways to support the lives of those who are doing so.”

Read more at neurosciencenews.com