Conference Program

This contribution presents an intersectional participatory study exploring the co-design of a work-preparation pathway for autistic adolescents (16-18 years old) mediated by the humanoid robot Pepper. The project builds on research in social robotics and autism showing that humanoid robots can function as relational mediators by providing predictable, structured, and emotionally regulated interactions (Scassellati et al., 2012; Belpaeme et al., 2018). The relative directness and reduced ambiguity of robotic communication may decrease social overload and support reflective dialogue in contexts such as job interviews, where implicit norms and micro-expressions often generate anxiety. In this perspective, Pepper is conceptualized not as a substitute for human interaction, but as a scaffold that may facilitate self-expression and gradual engagement in work-related communication.

A preliminary eight-session script was outlined, structured around social stories (Gray & Garand, 1993), guided dialogue, and tangible outputs (e.g., strengths maps, interest profiles, communication-of-needs cards, simulated interviews). Consistent with life-design and self-determination approaches (Nota et al., 2016; Wehman, 2011), the pathway aims to support adolescents in identifying strengths, preferences, and environmental needs, in alignment with current disability rights frameworks emphasizing personal projects of life and quality of life indicators.

The design process unfolded on two interconnected levels. First, prospective adolescent participants were consulted to gather expectations and interests regarding robotic interaction. Second – and this is the focus of the present contribution – four autistic adults (aged 25-64; 1 female, 3 males; diverse professional histories; varied diagnostic trajectories) were interviewed to critically reflect on the proposed script. Drawing on intersectionality (Crenshaw, 1989) and epistemic justice (Fricker, 2007), the study treats adult autistic workers not as informants but as situated epistemic agents whose lived experience can interrogate pedagogical assumptions embedded in work-oriented education.

The interviews revealed several tensions. Participants problematized normative “social skills” training, describing workplace conventions as a form of linguistic translation requiring asymmetric effort (“speaking English” to neurotypical expectations). They highlighted the energetic costs of masking and questioned unidirectional adaptation. Environmental and sensory factors (light, noise, color, unpredictability of schedules) emerged as central to work sustainability yet often treated as secondary. Generational differences were significant: older participants diagnosed in adulthood reported long histories of misrecognition within deficit-oriented school systems, while younger adults described improved awareness but persistent anxiety and ambiguity in professional contexts.

Methodologically, the study demonstrates how an intersectional participatory approach can transform a technological proposal into a site of epistemic negotiation. Rather than validating a predefined model, adult standpoints reframe the robot’s role: from trainer of normative behaviors to potential “translator” and decompression space within broader relational ecologies. The paper argues that intersectional research in educational and organizational contexts must allow marginalized knowledges to reshape not only content but also the very architecture of intervention, thereby advancing equity-oriented and reflexive practices.