Opening New Worlds of Meaning—A Scoping Review of Figurative Language in Autism Spectrum Disorder

Figurative language (metaphor, idiom, irony/sarcasm) is central to pragmatic communication but is frequently challenging for children and adolescents with autism spectrum disorder (ASD). A scoping review was conducted to map pedagogical and clinical interventions that target figurative-language skills in school-age learners with ASD and to summarize reported outcomes. Following a PCC (Population–Concept–Context) framework and PRISMA-ScR reporting, systematic searches were performed in ERIC and Google Scholar (2010–2025). Eligibility required an ASD sample (ages 5–18), an intervention explicitly addressing figurative-language comprehension, and empirical outcome data from educational or related practice settings. Seven studies met inclusion criteria: five targeting metaphors, one targeting idioms, and one targeting sarcasm/irony. Interventions were predominantly delivered one-to-one or in small groups and emphasized structured, explicit instruction with visual scaffolds and stepwise prompting. Across studies, participants demonstrated clear gains on trained items. Generalization beyond trained material was most often observed for metaphor and sarcasm interventions, particularly when instruction highlighted underlying semantic relations or cue-based pragmatic signals; by contrast, the idiom program yielded item-specific learning with minimal near-term transfer. Limited follow-up data suggested short-term maintenance where assessed. Reported variability across individuals was substantial, underscoring the influence of underlying structural-language skills and social-pragmatic demands. Overall, the evidence indicates that figurative-language skills in ASD are amenable to targeted intervention; effective programs tend to combine explicit teaching, visual supports, multiple exemplars, and planned generalization opportunities. Given small samples and methodological heterogeneity, further classroom-based trials with longer follow-up and detailed learner profiles are needed. The findings support integrating figurative-language goals within individualized education and speech-language therapy plans, while aligning instructional complexity with each learner’s linguistic and pragmatic profile.