This study aimed to gather feedback from autistic adults on common behavioral intervention goals and practices. Autistic adults (N=235) completed the Autism Intervention Attitudes Scale (AIAS), a survey assessing their views on intervention goals and practices. Results showed that goals and practices emphasizing quality of life, safety, and autistic interactions were seen as socially valid, while those focusing on normalization based on neurotypical standards were not. An exploratory graph analysis identified three communities of goals: "uncontroversial goals" (e.g., reducing danger, increasing independence), "controversial goals" (e.g., increasing eye contact, reducing motor/vocal stimulating), and "social goals" (e.g., improving conversational ability, learning social rules). Autistic participants favored naturalistic strategies over structured ones. The study found that intervention goals related to safety and quality of life were highly endorsed, while goals focused on reducing behaviors associated with autism were less accepted. Social goals, though endorsed by most, had lower mean ratings, suggesting they may not be as relevant as other goals. Participants preferred naturalistic reinforcement, using the child's interests to teach new skills, and interventions in natural settings. They also favored promoting any communication method over focusing on verbal communication and preferred interventions delivered by clinicians over parents. The study highlights the importance of incorporating autistic perspectives in behavioral interventions to ensure they are socially valid. It suggests that interventions should prioritize quality of life over normalization and consider the autistic way of being. The findings indicate that while some aspects of naturalistic developmental behavioral interventions (NDBIs) are socially valid, there is a need for more research to determine the extent to which autistic adults prefer certain intervention models over others. The study also notes limitations, including potential sampling bias and the need for more diverse participant representation. Overall, the study underscores the importance of involving autistic individuals in the development of intervention goals and practices to ensure they are socially valid and effective.This study aimed to gather feedback from autistic adults on common behavioral intervention goals and practices. Autistic adults (N=235) completed the Autism Intervention Attitudes Scale (AIAS), a survey assessing their views on intervention goals and practices. Results showed that goals and practices emphasizing quality of life, safety, and autistic interactions were seen as socially valid, while those focusing on normalization based on neurotypical standards were not. An exploratory graph analysis identified three communities of goals: "uncontroversial goals" (e.g., reducing danger, increasing independence), "controversial goals" (e.g., increasing eye contact, reducing motor/vocal stimulating), and "social goals" (e.g., improving conversational ability, learning social rules). Autistic participants favored naturalistic strategies over structured ones. The study found that intervention goals related to safety and quality of life were highly endorsed, while goals focused on reducing behaviors associated with autism were less accepted. Social goals, though endorsed by most, had lower mean ratings, suggesting they may not be as relevant as other goals. Participants preferred naturalistic reinforcement, using the child's interests to teach new skills, and interventions in natural settings. They also favored promoting any communication method over focusing on verbal communication and preferred interventions delivered by clinicians over parents. The study highlights the importance of incorporating autistic perspectives in behavioral interventions to ensure they are socially valid. It suggests that interventions should prioritize quality of life over normalization and consider the autistic way of being. The findings indicate that while some aspects of naturalistic developmental behavioral interventions (NDBIs) are socially valid, there is a need for more research to determine the extent to which autistic adults prefer certain intervention models over others. The study also notes limitations, including potential sampling bias and the need for more diverse participant representation. Overall, the study underscores the importance of involving autistic individuals in the development of intervention goals and practices to ensure they are socially valid and effective.