"Our study shows that to the extent that they would act if they saw something wrong, employees with autism were much more likely to intervene, regardless of the number of people present.

And in situations where they would not intervene, they were more likely to identify the influence of others as the reason, whereas neurotypical employees were more reluctant to acknowledge this," says lead author Lorne Hartman, an instructor with the Schulich School of Business.

Lorne has a background in clinical psychology and his main area of research looks at unethical behaviour in organizations.

"But most importantly, in all of these cases, there were hundreds, maybe thousands of people who may not have actually been involved in the wrongdoing, but they should have been aware that it was going on," he says, summarizing his earlier research.

The study was published this week in the October issue of Autism Research and created with collaborators from the University of Toronto.

The research participants -- employed individuals, 33 with autism and 34 neurotypical -- were asked to weigh in on hypothetical scenarios involving everything from inefficiencies to inequalities to quality concerns.

The original article contains 483 words, the summary contains 188 words. Saved 61%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!