The present study addresses children's assessments of responses to teasing. Participants viewed videotaped interactions in which one child was being teased by two other children and responds in one of three ways (i.e., with humor, by ignoring, or with hostility). Participants rated the humorous response to teasing as the most effective way to respond to teasing, followed by ignoring. The hostile response was rated the least effective. The target's response to teasing significantly affected perceptions of the friendliness and popularity of the teasers and target. In addition, participants' previous experiences with teasing, as both victim and teaser, significantly affected their perceptions of the teasing interaction. Results are discussed as they relate to understanding childhood teasing and effective ways of responding to teasing.

Twenty six children with autism, 24 children with developmental disabilities, and 15 typically developing children participated in tasks in which an adult displayed emotions. Child focus of attention, change in facial tone (i.e., hedonic tone), and latency to changes in tone were measured and summary scores of emotional contagion were created. Group differences existed in the ratio of episodes that resulted in emotional contagion. Correlations existed between measures of emotional contagion, measures of joint attention, and indices of severity of autism. Children with autism demonstrated muted changes in affect, but these responses occurred much less frequently than in comparison groups. The findings suggest directions for early identification and early treatment of autism.

No abstract

No abstract

We examined the characteristics of children at 4 to 5 years of age who were correctly and incorrectly classified as "at risk" for an autism spectrum diagnosis using the Checklist for Autism in Toddlers (CHAT) at age 2 to 3 years. Information is provided on the stability of risk/disorder status over a 2-year period of early development. Participants were 19 children with autism and 11 children with other developmental disabilities who had all been administered the CHAT between 2 and 3 years of age (Time 1) and received diagnostic and developmental re-evaluations between 4 and 6 years of age (Time 2). The risk status of children was discussed based on the original CHAT authors' criteria for risk of autism and the Denver modification for risk. High levels of stability in risk/diagnostic status from Time 1 assessments to Time 2 assessments were noted. Specifically, the original CHAT criteria for medium to high risk of autism applied at Time 1 predicted Time 2 diagnostic classification for 83% of the sample, and the Denver modification of the CHAT risk criteria predicted Time 2 diagnostic classification for 93% of the sample. Implications of the findings are discussed as they relate to early screening and identification of autism spectrum disorders.