No abstract

Speech and prosody-voice profiles for 15 male speakers with High-Functioning Autism (HFA) and 15 male speakers with Asperger syndrome (AS) were compared to one another and to profiles for 53 typically developing male speakers in the same 10- to 50-years age range. Compared to the typically developing speakers, significantly more participants in both the HFA and AS groups had residual articulation distortion errors, uncodable utterances due to discourse constraints, and utterances coded as inappropriate in the domains of phrasing, stress, and resonance. Speakers with AS were significantly more voluble than speakers with HFA, but otherwise there were few statistically significant differences between the two groups of speakers with pervasive developmental disorders. Discussion focuses on perceptual-motor and social sources of differences in the prosody-voice findings for individuals with Pervasive Developmental Disorders as compared with findings for typical speakers, including comment on the grammatical, pragmatic, and affective aspects of prosody.

Speakers with autism spectrum disorders (ASD) show difficulties in suprasegmental aspects of speech production, or prosody, those aspects of speech that accompany words and sentences and create what is commonly called "tone of voice." However, little is known about the perception of prosody, or about the specific aspects of prosodic production that result in the perception of "oddness." The present study examined the perception and production of a range of specific prosodic elements in an experimental protocol involving natural speech among speakers with ASD between 14 and 21 years of age, in comparison with a typical control group. Results revealed ceiling effects limiting interpretation of findings for some aspects of prosody. However, there were significant between-group differences in aspects of stress perception and production. The implications of these findings for understanding prosodic deficits is speakers with autism spectrum disorders, and for future research in this area, are discussed.

The study provides support for stability of clinical diagnosis and syndrome expression in the second year and highlights advantages and limitations of the ADI-R and ADOS-G for diagnosing and documenting symptoms of ASD in infants.