Purpose <p>Task analysis is an evidence-based intervention in which a complex activity is broken down into smaller steps and then presented to an individual in what is called an activity schedule. Extant literature has found both low- and high-tech presentations of activity schedules are effective at teaching Autistic individuals the steps to complete complex tasks, including cooking tasks. Researchers have found Autistic individuals endorse the use of low- and high-tech activity schedules. However, the ways researchers have elicited feedback from Autistic participants in research has been limited to simplified interviews with Likert-type scales. The purposes of this study were to: (a) identify the effectiveness of low- and high-tech activity schedules, and (b) examine the social validity of the low- and high-tech activity schedules through interviews and preference assessments.</p> Method <p>A multiple baseline design across groups with an embedded withdrawal variation was used to identify if low- and high-tech presentations of activity schedules would increase participants’ meal preparation skills. Additionally, participants engaged in a social validity interview that included both close- and open-ended questions about their preferred presentation of activity schedules. A preference phase allowed participants to choose their presentation of activity schedules.</p> Results <p>Results indicated both low- and high-tech activity schedules were effective at increasing the steps of recipe completion for participants. There were mixed opinions from participants regarding the preferred presentation of the activity schedules.</p> Conclusions <p>Results indicate either low- or high-tech presentation of activity schedules are effective at changing behavior. Additionally, participants endorsed both presentations of the activity schedules. Our findings point to the importance of considering input from Autistic individuals before implementing interventions.</p>