Autistic individuals typically engage in lower levels of physical activity (PA), and this pattern frequently continues from childhood into adulthood (Healy et al., 2019; Hillier et al., 2020; Tomaszewski et al., 2022). In response, many PA interventions have been developed, primarily focusing on aerobic exercise (Pitetti et al., 2007; Savage et al., 2022; Shields et al., 2019), structured games and sports (Barak et al., 2019; Duffy et al., 2017; Zabriskie et al., 2005), and motor skill development (Barak et al., 2019; Yu & Jee, 2020). These interventions have shown benefits in fitness, motor coordination, and social interactions (Barak et al., 2019; Yu & Jee, 2020; Zabriskie et al., 2005). However, they often overlook other forms of movement and may not reflect the interests and needs of autistic individuals, especially as they gain more independence.

Strength training is a promising form of PA that focuses on building muscular strength through resistance exercises, but it has been largely overlooked in autism research. Compared to other types of PA, strength training may be more compatible with the needs and preferences of many autistic individuals, particularly those who benefit from structured, repetitive movements and a focus on individual progress (Wong et al., 2024). Strength training offers several physical benefits, such as increasing muscular fitness, enhancing bone density, and improving body composition (Cormie et al., 2010; Fragala et al., 2019; Maestroni et al., 2020; Smith et al., 2014; Suchomel et al., 2016). It has also been linked to psychological benefits, such as reduced anxiety and depression, along with increased self-esteem and resilience (Goldfield et al., 2015; Gordon et al., 2017, 2018).

Despite its relevance, few studies have examined strength training as a standalone intervention for autistic individuals. Most interventions that include strength components combine them with other activities, making it difficult to isolate the specific effects of strength training (Arslan et al., 2022; Toscano et al., 2018). One of the few studies focusing exclusively on strength training was conducted by Lochbaum and Crews (2003), who explored physical benefits of traditional strength training exercises (e.g., leg press and abdominal crunches) in two autistic adolescents. The authors reported gains in muscular strength, but did not explore how participants experienced the training, whether they felt supported, or how the environment and instruction affected their motivation. The lack of attention to participants’ experiences and program design highlights the need to understand how autistic individuals engage with strength training. It also raises important questions about what makes a program feel welcoming and feasible. To date, most research has focused on physical outcomes, leaving a gap in understanding how autistic individuals experience these programs and what makes them meaningful.

Qualitative research can help build this understanding by centering community voices and highlighting the factors that make participation feel approachable and meaningful. Understanding their experiences, preferences, and needs is essential for creating programs that reflect autistic individuals’ goals, strengths, and priorities. Therefore, the purpose of this study was twofold: (1) to explore autistic young adults’ experiences with strength training, and (2) to examine their recommendations for designing programs that meet their needs. The following research questions guided this study:

  1. 1.

    What are autistic young adults’ experiences in strength training and how do they make sense of those experiences?

  2. 2.

    What recommendations do autistic young adults have for designing strength training programs that meet their needs and preferences?

Methods

Research Approach

We adopted a qualitative descriptive design approach with a constructivist lens to examine autistic young adults’ experiences with strength training and their recommendations for future programs. A constructivist paradigm, which assumes a relativist ontology where multiple realities exist and are co-constructed between participants and researchers (Charmaz, 2006; Denzin & Lincoln, 2008, p. 24), was selected as the most appropriate approach. This allowed us to explore each participant’s unique reality while identifying commonalities in their experiences to synthesize shared themes. With the guiding principle of “Nothing about us, without us” (Hoekstra et al., 2018), we aimed to amplify the participants’ voices and share their recommendations by highlighting direct quotations throughout the Findings section.

Positionality

Given the researchers’ role in shaping the interpretation of the data, it is important we disclose the identities and positionalities of the research team. The lead researcher, a White female graduate student, had both personal and professional interests in developing strength training programs for autistic individuals to enhance their quality of life and overall well-being. The senior researcher, a Latino male professor with extensive experience conducting research with autistic populations, served as the academic advisor. Other team members included two male professors and one female professor, with expertise in adapted physical education, strength and conditioning program design, and kinesiology. While none of the researchers identified as autistic, we acknowledge that our collective backgrounds influenced the lens through which we analyzed the participants’ experiences.

Participants

Participants were recruited via flyers, social media, and snowball sampling. Physical flyers were posted in coffee shops and on bulletin boards, while digital copies were shared on social media. The snowball sampling technique, a common method in qualitative research (Parker et al., 2019), involved asking eligible participants to recommend others who may be interested and meet the inclusion criteria (Etikan, 2016). To be eligible for the study, individuals were required to: (a) be 22–25 years old, (b) identify as autistic, (c) have the requisite expressive and receptive communication skills to participate in a verbal interview, (d) are proficient in English, and (e) have current or previous PA experience.

Young adulthood (ages 22–25) was selected for this study because it often marks a major life transition in which autistic individuals move from structured environments (e.g., school-based services) to greater personal autonomy and reduced external support (Cheak-Zamora et al., 2015; Van Schalkwyk & Volkmar, 2017). This stage is considered developmentally important for identity formation, establishing health-related behaviors, and pursuing independent living, including participation in self-directed PA (Øverland et al., 2024; Sullivan et al., 2024). Participants were included if they self-identified as autistic; a formal diagnosis was not required because this study focused on personal experiences, in line with qualitative approaches that prioritize lived experience (Ardeleanu et al., 2024). Strength training experience was not required given the limited research on strength training programs for autistic individuals. Exclusion criteria included: (a) presence of orthopedic impairments, (b) non-ambulatory status, (c) non-verbal communication status, and (d) a diagnosis of cognitive disabilities. Eligibility was confirmed during phone screens, during which potential participants were informed about the study, the consent process was explained, and any questions were addressed. Participation was entirely voluntary, and individuals could decline or withdraw at any point without penalty. Those interested in participating were sent an electronic consent form. This study was approved by the lead author’s Institutional Review Board.

A total of 13 participants met the inclusion criteria and were enrolled in the study (N = 13; 7 females, 6 males). The average age of participants was 23.6 years. All participants identified as African American, which, though not intentional, adds an important dimension given the historical underrepresentation of African American voices in research (Webber-Ritchey et al., 2022). Participants resided in different states across the United States, including Tennessee (n = 7), Michigan (n = 2), New York (n = 2), Florida (n = 1), and Texas (n = 1). To protect confidentiality, pseudonyms were used through the study and in the demographics table (Table 1). Our participants were part of a larger study examining the PA experiences of autistic young adults (blinded for review).

Table 1 Participant demographic information
Full size table

Data Collection

Semi-structured interviews were conducted by the first author via Zoom to enhance accessibility (Griffith et al., 2012; MacLeod et al., 2018). The interview guide was developed based on a review of prior literature on PA experiences among autistic individuals (e.g., Wong et al., 2024), as well as existing studies on strength training preferences and access in disability communities. In line with a constructivist paradigm, questions were open-ended and designed to elicit participants’ lived experiences and personal meanings associated with strength training. The flexible format allowed participants to guide the direction of the conversation, facilitating co-construction of knowledge between interviewer and participant. This strategy helped make the interview process reflect participants’ voices and gave them space to expand on and clarify their unique perspectives.

The semi-structured format encouraged natural conversation, allowing participants to share their experiences in depth while giving researchers the flexibility to ask follow-up questions as needed. The primary goal was to explore autistic young adults’ experiences with strength training and gain a better understanding of their perspectives to develop more accessible programs. Interviews lasted between 35 and 60 min and were audio recorded for later analysis. Sample questions included the following: (a) How did you first get introduced to strength training?, (b) Have you ever worked with a coach while strength training?, What was that experience like?, (c) What benefits have you noticed from strength training?, (d) What would an ideal strength training program look like for you?, (e) Do you prefer training alone or with others? Why?, and (f) How often would you like to strength train, and what kind of exercises would you include?

Participating in interviews can sometimes cause anxiety, including for autistic individuals. To alleviate potential discomfort, participants received the interview guide a week in advance (Colombo-Dougovito et al., 2021; Haegele & Maher, 2022; Petalas et al., 2015). Questions were displayed on PowerPoint slides during the interview, occasionally supplemented with images for clarity. Definitions and examples of strength training were provided to ensure participants fully understood the questions (Tierney et al., 2016). For example, the term “strength training” was clarified with examples such as push-ups, bicep curls, and squats. Although participants had the option to invite a support person for the interview (Huws & Jones, 2015), none chose to do so.

Data Analysis

Following the interviews, the audio recordings were transcribed using the Microsoft Word® Transcription tool. The first author carefully reviewed and corrected the transcripts while listening to the recordings to ensure accuracy. The edited transcripts were then uploaded into NVIVO software® for analysis (Lumivero, 2024).

We used a reflexive thematic analysis, as outlined by Braun et al. (2023), to identify patterns and construct themes from the dataset. This method highlights the researcher’s influence on data interpretation (Braun & Clarke, 2019), recognizing how their values, assumptions, and expectations shape decisions throughout the research process (Braun et al., 2023). The analysis was inductive, with codes constructed directly from the data. This approach aligns with the study’s constructivist framework, which acknowledges the researcher’s role in deriving meaning.

The first author led the data analysis, following the six-phase process described by Braun et al. (2023). After familiarizing herself with the data by reading the transcripts multiple times, she created initial descriptive codes that captured key aspects of participants’ experiences. These codes were refined in collaboration with the last author. In later stages, similar codes were combined into broader patterns, shifting the focus from individual experiences to common themes across participants. This process included multiple rounds of data reduction to provide a more comprehensive insight to the participants’ experiences. Potential themes were then reviewed and assessed for their relevance to the research questions. Themes or categories that did not offer substantial insights were discarded. Finally, remaining themes were named, defined, and supported by participant quotes.

Quality of Data

Quality of this study was evaluated using Tracy (2010) eight key criteria for qualitative research. First, the researchers aimed to explore a topic with limited existing evidence. Second, rigor was supported through a methodologically coherent study design. Third, the researchers supported sincerity through self-reflexivity, transparency, and openness about their own positionalities. Fourth, credibility was supported by providing detailed descriptions of themes and incorporating participants’ quotes, allowing readers to interpret the findings independently. Fifth, the results and discussion were carefully written to emphasize participants’ experiences through their own words. This was done by prioritizing rich, chunky quotes over authors’ interpretations within the findings section. Sixth, the study filled gaps in the literature by highlighting the voices of an underrepresented populations and underexplored topics. Seventh, ethical standards, including procedural, situational, and relational ethics, were consistently maintained. Lastly, the study supported meaningful coherence by staying true to its purpose and connecting findings to relevant literature.

Findings

Despite not requiring strength training experience to participate in this study, all participants conveyed some level of participation in strength training prior to the interviews. Participants reflected on their experiences with strength training, and three main themes were constructed to capture the commonalities and differences across their narratives. These themes are: (1) Supported Every Step of the Way, (2) More Than Just Muscles, and (3) Strength Training That Fits My Needs. These themes are supported by subthemes.

Theme 1: Supported Every Step of the Way

Participants consistently emphasized the important role of external support in their strength training participation. Family and friends provided motivation and companionship. They often introduced participants to basic exercises or accompanying them to the gym, making training feel more achievable and enjoyable. Meanwhile, coaches offered guidance, helping participants build confidence by ensuring they used equipment safely and effectively. This theme is supported by two subthemes: (a) Training with Family and Friends and (b) A Coach Who Makes a Difference.

Subtheme 1: Training with Family and Friends

As articulated in the overarching theme, family and friends played a key role in participants’ engagement with strength training by introducing them to exercises and offering guidance. Many participants described family members as informal coaches who helped them build confidence in basic exercises. Anthony, for example, shared how watching his father’s workouts at home sparked his interest in strength training,

My dad was in charge of the things [exercises] I was doing… I began it [strength training] at home. I could copy what my dad was doing like push-ups, press ups…that’s how I got interested. When you’re doing it with your father, your dad understands you better. It’s kind of a process that moves almost smoothly.

In addition to parents, other family members, such as siblings, also played an influential role in some participants’ involvement in strength training. For example, Josiah described his brother’s steady support and considered his guidance essential. He noted, “I look forward to getting more involved…but I can’t right now, [because my brother’s] on vacation. Once he’s back, I will ask him to accompany me more to the gym.”

Friendships and peer support also played an important role in encouraging participation in strength training. For example, Gabi shared, “I go to the gym, maybe once [a week], if I got a friend who maybe is going there, then they pick me up.” Similarly, Darius described how his social network helped him stay accountable to maintaining a consistent gym routine. He reflected, “[My friends and I] usually advise each other to go to the gym to keep fit… Sometimes when I meet my friends we usually go [to the gym] together.” Exercising with peers also provided both motivation and inspiration to stay engaged and push themselves during workouts, as Josiah explained,

With peers, it’s a very good motivation there because you’re into doing something, and being surrounded with people, you’re gonna have some inspiration and you also get challenged by the ability of other people, so you can also just do better as well.

Beyond motivation, friends also provided essential safety support during strength training. Calvin emphasized that friends offered safety during challenging exercises. He shared,

You also need people to assist you because some of the lifting activities… You can be overwhelmed with the weight. And you find yourself having some unnecessary injuries because there was no one to help you, so it would be better if you have friends around to assist you.

Subtheme 2: A Coach Who Makes a Difference

For most participants, having a coach was key to feeling secure and capable in their strength training routine. Coaches not only provided technical guidance but also helped build the confidence needed to try new exercises and use unfamiliar equipment. For example, Gabi expressed a desire for a coach who could teach her how to use dumbbells. She shared, “Because I’ve never used [dumbbells], I would like a coach to teach me to use them… maybe someone that can give me help. Somebody who can be guiding me through.” Jasmine also expressed hesitation about using dumbbells after an unencouraging experience, noting that she would need a coach’s support in the future. She commented, “[I] tried to lift them [dumbbells] but not successfully. [I needed] the coaching and the motivation.”

While some participants, like Gabi and Jasmine, had access to a gym but still felt uncertain about using specific types of equipment, others who trained at home faced even greater challenges due to the absence of both a coach and proper equipment. Serena shared, “I need the equipment I don’t have, and I need an instructor to help me.” Additionally, Ava expressed interest in joining a gym but desired oversight from a coach. She commented, “I’d like to be supported [at the gym], for sure.”

Other participants felt that a coach’s presence was critical to their engagement in strength training. For example, Kennedy noted that her workout routine depended on the presence of her coach. She explained, “It [the exercises] depends on the day, if the instructor is available.” Trey expressed a similar reliance on having a coach, emphasizing that he would not train without one. He stated, “I must do it with a coach. I’m with my friends who are also lifting. But a coach must be there. That’s a must.” Even participants who felt independent still valued the expertise a coach could provide; as Jade put it, “I still [use] my coach… A coach knows a lot.”

Theme 2: More Than Just Muscles

Participants perceived strength training as improving many aspects of their physical and mental health. Many appreciated the visible improvements in muscular strength and body composition. For example, Michelle shared, “[My] experiences with strength training have mostly been positive. I enjoy the feeling of my muscles working and getting stronger. Participating in strength training can help you cut weight. So I think that in itself is a motivation.” Isaiah agreed, emphasizing the role of strength training in both building strength and maintaining a healthy weight. He explained, “[Strength training] helps you develop strength, and also maintain the body weight.” For Calvin, strength training played a key role in improving his self-image. He said, “Strength training has made me physically fit and my muscles big. And it has made me in the shape of the man I want.”

While participants recognized the importance of these physical benefits, they emphasized that strength training offered much more than just improvements in muscular strength and body composition. Physical changes gave participants a stronger sense of confidence (Jasmine, Anthony, and Darius) and control over their bodies (Serena), helping them feel more independent. As Anthony reflected, “[Strength training] helped me know that I’m in control of my body… being engaged makes me feel more confident in any physical activities.” Jasmine similarly expressed, “[Strength training] makes me feel empowered and in control of my body and its capabilities. It helps me feel more confidence in my physical abilities.” For some, like Jade, these benefits extended to other areas of life, such as sports performance. Jade explained, “Strength training gives me a sense of power and readiness, preparing me for the dynamic movements of volleyball. It gave me more strength to be able to play the game. You can’t play if you’re not energetic.”

Participants also valued strength training for its mental health benefits, describing it as a way to relieve stress and build resilience. Jade explained, “Strength training goes beyond physical development. It helps with mental resilience, determination, and success for whatever you’re doing… it makes me happy and healthy…It also releases stress.” Additionally, Darius found strength training essential for managing stress and anxiety. He said, “When I’m stressed out… I stop and go to the gym. It’s gone now. I feel refreshed. It just brings me hope when I workout. It helps me relieve my stress and anxiety.” Isaiah echoed this, noting, “When I’m at the gym, I feel relieved from the anxiety, tension… all the things going through my mind. I feel like all the stress is gone while I’m at the gym.” Additionally, other participants recognized that strength training required mental resilience, which helped “boost morale” (Josiah). For participants like Darius, strength training was more than just a physical activity. It represented perseverance, self-improvement, and a sense of empowerment. He asserted,

[Strength training] symbolizes personal growth, resilience and empowerment. The strength part, when I’m able to lift every heavyweight, I feel empowered…. like when I get a heavy lift, I feel like energetic and everything. Then resilience is when I’m able to start to workout for long hours, not giving up, waking up every day and not giving up going to the gym so that I can keep fit and everything.

Theme 3: Strength Training That Fits My Needs

Participants highlighted the need for strength training programs to be adaptable to different preferences and lifestyles. This includes offering flexible training environments, incorporating a variety of exercises to suit individual needs, and allowing participants to choose schedules that fit their routines. Our participants indicated that programs incorporating these factors would help them feel more supported and motivated to stay engaged. This theme is supported by three subthemes: (1) Balance Between Energy and Calm, (2) Strengthening with Variety and Purpose, and (3) Flexible Routines for Real-Life Schedules.

Subtheme 1: Balance Between Energy and Calm

Participants had different preferences for the ideal training environment, highlighting the importance of providing both high-energy group settings and quieter, more focused spaces. About half of the participants preferred training in a lively gym with a group of peers, finding motivation in the shared energy and social interaction. Jade, for example, enjoyed training in a busy gym and said, “I prefer a group of people. Being by yourself can get boring… so I would prefer 15 to 20 people.” Similarly, Kennedy appreciated training with peers and music. She said, “The gym… with peers so that you can motivate other people… and some music to entertain.” Darius shared a similar preference, explaining, “In an environment that’s motivating, possibly with music. I would invite my peers to make it fun.”

On the other hand, several participants found high-energy settings overwhelming and preferred a quieter, more private space for their workouts. For example, Gabi, described the noise of large gyms as “overwhelming”, while Michelle emphasized her preference for a “quiet, private setting”. She explained, “[I prefer] a quite, private setting. Large loud gyms bother me.” Jasmine and Ava similarly preferred strength training in small groups, such as “with a friend or two” (Jasmine) or “one on one with a peer and also a coach” (Ava).

Subtheme 2: Strengthening with Variety and Purpose

Participants described their ideal strength training program as one that includes balanced routines targeting major muscles groups. They emphasized a focus on compound exercises using body weight or free weights. Kennedy reflected this perspective, stating, “I [would design] a training program that incorporates a mix of compound exercises using weights and body weight. Making sure the program focuses on different muscle groups and includes a variety of activities.” Resistance bands and medicine balls were the most popular equipment mentioned by participants. For instance, Jasmine noted that resistance bands were a favorite among her friends, adding, “Most people like using the resistance bands, so I would include them … all the other [equipment] will [stay the same]. That will increase the number [of participants].” Dumbbells were only mentioned by three participants (Kennedy, Darius, and Trey), and participants collectively did not have interest in machines, barbels or heavy weight plates.

Some participants also wanted programs that incorporated other aspects of fitness. For example, Gabi and Darius preferred adding aerobic exercises to complement their strength training. Gabi explained, “[The program should] incorporate a mix of body weight exercises and different equipment like medicine balls… and a mix of cardio and strength training to keep it interesting.” Others, like Trey, Jade, and Isaiah, preferred sport-specific exercises to enhance athletic skills. Isaiah, a soccer player, shared, “I have a passion for soccer, so it would a program that uses soccer-specific movements, agility drills, and strength training to enhance my performance on the field.”

Subtheme 3: Flexible Routines for Real-Life Schedules

Participants wanted a strength training program that could support their fitness goals while fitting into their busy schedules. Each participant had unique preferences for how often and how long they would train based their personal goals and schedules. For most, a routine of two to three times per week, each lasting about an hour, seemed ideal. Some participants, like Serena, Kennedy, Darius, and Anthony, preferred more frequent sessions, aiming for three to four times per week. Trey even suggested, “up to five days per week.” Conversely, Ava preferred less frequent, but longer sessions, stating, “twice a week for long sessions of 5 to 6 hours”, as she explained this approach would help her achieve her fitness goals. Michelle and Jasmine found shorter commitments (twice a week for 45 min) more manageable. For those with tight schedules, Calvin offered a flexible solution, “morning and evening training, maybe 30 minutes in the morning, then around one hour in the evening.” Across different preferences, participants largely agreed that an ideal program would offer two to three weekly sessions lasting around an hour each to balance effectiveness with the demands of daily life.

Discussion

The purpose of this study was to explore autistic young adults’ experiences with strength training and to examine their recommendations for designing programs that meet their needs. Participants highlighted social support, accessible coaching, and the benefits of strength training as key facilitators of engagement. They also shared specific recommendations for program design, including ideal environments, training routines, and scheduling preferences. These findings highlight factors that influence participation in strength training and provide practical guidance for developing supportive programs.

While literature on strength training among autistic individuals is limited, findings from our participants demonstrated some consistencies with those of neurotypical populations and individuals with other disabilities. For example, in studies with adults with intellectual disabilities, structured strength training programs have shown improvements in physical function, confidence, and emotional well-being (Jacinto et al., 2021; Obrusnikova et al., 2022). Similarly, other studies have highlighted the importance of personalized coaching and accessible spaces (Hidding et al., 2018; Mollee et al., 2018), which are in line with the preferences shared by participants in this study. Although autistic individuals may have unique support needs, the emphasis on social support, individualized instruction, and flexible training environments appears to be broadly relevant across different populations. These overlapping preferences suggest that certain program features may be applicable across disability populations, but they also emphasize the need to adapt those features to align with the specific needs of autistic individuals. Future research should focus on how these shared features can be adapted to better support autistic young adults, especially by offering personalized supports and creating programs that are welcoming and accessible to a wide range of participants.

Participants emphasized the importance of their social network in facilitating their strength training experiences. Family members served as informal coaches who introduced the participants to basic exercises. This role, where family members model healthy behaviors, has been identified as being important to help supporting PA participation among autistic individuals in prior work (Ku et al., 2020; Shields et al., 2012). Peer support also played a role, providing motivation, accountability, and, in some cases, a sense of safety assistance. This finding is consistent with previous research highlighting the role of social connections in PA participation (Blagrave et al., 2021).

In addition to social support from friends and family, participants also desired support from professional coaches. Many relied on coaches to guide their workouts, build confidence, and ensure safety. This highlights the need for professionals who understand the specific needs of autistic individuals. Organizations such as the American College of Sports Medicine (ACSM) offer educational certificates and training programs for working with individuals with disabilities, including autistic people. These programs include guidance on communication strategies, sensory considerations, and behavioral support. However, while these programs aim to enhance professional knowledge, current certifications are not grounded in research focused specifically on strength training for autistic individuals. This raises concerns about whether coaches are adequately prepared to support this population. To better support autistic individuals, future research should focus on developing evidence-based guidelines that equip professionals to deliver safe, effective, and responsive strength training programs.

In addition to providing individualized support, coaches are often a key part of structured strength training programs, including those used in clinical settings. Some studies have highlighted strength training as a therapeutic option for autistic individuals and emphasize its potential to improve motor coordination, emotional regulation, and behavioral functioning (Healy et al., 2019; Shahane et al., 2024). While our study did not measure outcomes in a clinical or diagnostic sense, participants described personal challenges and accomplishments related to their strength training experiences. These included gaining physical confidence, managing stress, and staying motivated. These experiences echo many of the benefits described in intervention research (Colombo-Dougovito et al., 2021; Gürkan & Kocak, 2020). Our study adds to this work by focusing on how autistic individuals describe their own experiences and what makes strength training feel meaningful and supportive to them.

While participants’ experiences reflect some of the benefits reported in intervention studies, there is still relatively little research focused specifically on autistic populations. This gap is especially noticeable when compared to the amount of research available on strength training for individuals with intellectual disabilities (Jacinto et al., 2021; Obrusnikova et al., 2022), research on strength training for autistic individuals is still in its infancy. While aerobic exercise programs have demonstrated benefits for autistic individuals (Shahane et al., 2024; Wu et al., 2024), it is premature to assume that strength training will yield similar outcomes. Our participants highlighted how much they enjoyed strength training and recognized its potential benefits. This reinforces the need to expand access to strength training while ensuring programs are developed based on research to maximize safety, relevance, and effectiveness. Rather than discouraging participation, efforts should focus on advancing research and providing autistic individuals with the guidance and accommodations needed for successful participation. Strength training may offer unique benefits, but without sufficient research, key questions remain about how best to structure programs to maximize effectiveness and accessibility for this population. Additionally, there is limited understanding of how the FITT principles (frequency, intensity, time, and type) apply to autistic individuals (ACSM, 2013). Addressing these gaps will be essential for developing training programs that effectively support autistic individuals.

Beyond the role of trained professionals, participants emphasized the personal benefits they gained from strength training, which motivated them to stay involved. They described improvements in both physical (e.g., increased strength and fitness) and mental health (e.g., reduced stress and enhanced confidence). Their experiences are consistent with broader research suggesting that strength training can support emotional and psychological well-being in autistic individuals. Similarly, previous studies have shown that autistic individuals engage in physical activity for both physical and psychological reasons (Gürkan & Kocak, 2020). However, while researchers have explored overall PA participation among autistic individuals (Blagrave et al., 2021; Colombo-Dougovito et al., 2021), fewer have focused specifically on the motivators and outcomes related to strength training.

Participants in this study viewed strength training as uniquely beneficial and personally meaningful. Their descriptions reflect existing literature that highlights how perceived benefits can support both adoption and long-term participation in strength-based programs (Tulloch et al., 2013; Vasudevan & Ford, 2022). Given these potential advantages, future research should examine whether strength training offers distinct or enhanced benefits compared to other forms of PA for autistic individuals. Exploring strategies such as wellness check-ins, goal setting, and peer mentorship may further support sustained participation and ensure programs are responsive to individual needs.

In addition to discussing their experiences with strength training, participants shared recommendations for program structure and training routines. They emphasized the importance of programs that accommodate individual needs, including exercise selection, equipment use, and fitness goals. Prior research suggests that structured, goal-oriented programs can support participation among autistic individuals (Todd et al., 2019). However, there is limited evidence on how to best adapt strength training specifically for this population. Future studies should examine how individualized programming and goal-setting impact adherence and long-term participation.

Sensory-friendly environments can make strength training more accessible for autistic individuals. Research suggests that sensory sensitivity influences PA participation for autistic individuals (Blagrave et al., 2021; Healy et al., 2013), but few specifically address strength training (Coffey et al., 2021). Participants in this study preferred facilities that offered both group and individual training options, along with modifications to reduce discomfort from noise and crowded spaces. Future research should examine how maintaining consistent training spaces, allowing time for adjustment, and organizing equipment affect long-term participation.

Beyond the physical environment, the structure of training sessions also played a key role in participants’ experiences. While preferences varied, most suggested two to three sessions per week lasting about an hour. This aligns with the CDC’s recommendation for twice-weekly strength training (CDC, 2023) and with the 2020 WHO Guidelines on PA and Sedentary Behavior, which include recommendations for both the general population and individuals with disabilities. However, while these guidelines provide a helpful starting point, caution is needed when applying them to autistic individuals. Very few studies have examined how these recommendations apply to this population, especially in the context of strength training. Participants in this study expressed a desire for consistency, balance, and routines that fit their schedules and energy levels. Although prior research suggests that structured and predictable routines can support participation in PA (Arslan et al., 2022; Stavrou et al., 2018; Ye, 2019), it remains unclear how best to apply these principles to strength training programs. Future programs should explore how to combine routine and structure with the flexibility needed to support long-term participation among autistic young adults.

Strengths and Limitations

This study has several strengths. First, it addresses a significant gap in literature regarding strength training participation for autistic individuals. Second, by centering the voices of autistic young adults, it reinforces the principle of “Nothing about us, without us” (Hoekstra et al., 2018) and prioritizes their lived experiences. Finally, while this study did not intend to recruit a specific racial or ethnic group, it amplifies the voices of African Americans, a population historically underrepresented in research. However, this study is not without limitations. All participants had prior or ongoing PA experience, which may not reflect the experiences of less active individuals. Additionally, although all participants identified as African American, this study did not explore how race or cultural identity influenced their strength training experiences. Future research should include autistic individuals with varying levels of PA experience and examine how cultural factors shape participation.

Implications for Practice and Future Research

The findings of this study may offer some guidance into features that may improve the accessibility and relevance of strength training programs for autistic people. Participants consistently emphasized the importance of social support, including family, friends, and coaches. This suggests a need for training environments that promote trusted relationships and consistent guidance. Participants also described both physical and mental health benefits, which highlights the potential role of strength training in promoting wellness and self-confidence.

In addition, participants preferred flexible routines and a choice between calm or stimulating environments. Programs may be more effective when they offer both individual and group options, along with sensory-friendly accommodations. While most participants reported training two to three times per week for about an hour, these preferences should not be viewed as universal. Existing guidelines from the CDC and WHO recommend strength training at least twice weekly, but these were not developed with autistic individuals in mind. More research is needed to determine how frequency, intensity, and structure should be adapted to accommodate sensory, cognitive, and social needs in this population. Future programs may benefit from combining consistency with flexible scheduling and structured support to sustain long-term participation.

Conclusion

This study provides preliminary evidence on the strength training experiences of autistic young adults, emphasizing the importance of social support, knowledgeable coaching, and the health benefits they reported. Participants recommended designing accessible programs that consider sensory needs, offer flexible schedules, and provide options for both group and individual training. To better support autistic individuals, future research should focus on developing coaching guidelines specifically suited to the needs of this population. Including participants with limited PA experience and from diverse backgrounds in future studies stands to enhance the relevance of these programs. Overall, these findings provide guidance for developing strength training programs that support autistic individuals.