Anomalous Perception of Biological Motion in Autism: A Conceptual Review and Meta-Analysis

Abstract

Despite its popularity, the construct of biological motion (BM) and its putative anomalies in autism spectrum disorder (ASD) are not completely clarified. In this article, we present a meta-analysis investigating the putative anomalies of BM perception in ASD. Through a systematic literature search, we found 30 studies that investigated BM perception in both ASD and typical developing peers by using point-light display stimuli. A general meta-analysis including all these studies showed a moderate deficit of individuals with ASD in BM processing, but also a high heterogeneity. This heterogeneity was explored in different additional meta-analyses where studies were grouped according to levels of complexity of the BM task employed (first-order, direct and instrumental), and according to the manipulation of low-level perceptual features (spatial vs. temporal) of the control stimuli. Results suggest that the most severe deficit in ASD is evident when perception of BM is serving a secondary purpose (e.g., inferring intentionality/action/emotion) and, interestingly, that temporal dynamics of stimuli are an important factor in determining BM processing anomalies in ASD. Our results question the traditional understanding of BM anomalies in ASD as a monolithic deficit and suggest a paradigm shift that deconstructs BM into distinct levels of processing and specific spatio-temporal subcomponents.

“Motion or Emotion? Recognition of Emotional Bodily Expressions in Children With Autism Spectrum Disorder With and Without Intellectual Disability”

“…We performed a post hoc power analysis to check whether this sample size was acceptable for the 3 × 2 × 3 mixed ANCOVA model to detect an effect. We ran a post hoc F-test power analysis (R package pwr) with medium effect size of 0.15 and sample size equal to 69 (see estimated effect size from Federici et al, 2019). We obtained that the power of detecting such an effect at 0.05 level is equal to 0.90.…”

Brain function distinguishes female carriers and non-carriers of familial risk for autism

“…Although there are many reports of reduced sensitivity to biological motion in individuals with ASD [ 68 – 70 ], there are likewise a number of reported null findings [ 71 – 73 ]. Recent meta-analyses aimed at clarifying these discrepancies concluded that biological motion effects in ASD are weak, non-specific, and highly conditional on experimental design [ 45 , 46 , 74 ]. Experimental design may vary with respect to task features (e.g., spatially scrambled vs. phase-scrambled motion [ 68 , 70 ]), sample characteristics (e.g., infants vs. adults [ 75 , 76 ]), and response set (e.g., preferential looking vs. reaction time [ 76 , 77 ]).…”

Italian youth’s sentiment about world and life and school and rights/duties: youth in a bubble and the education emergency, a field research

“…This kind of researches is closer to our approach, given that it focuses young people as a subject; in this sense, it is mainly a domain of psychology, rather than sociology. This means that often the attention of the researchers concentrates better on deviance aspects instead of ordinary ones; phenomena like hikikomori 2 and addictions of various kinds are widely studied (for example Takahiro & Kato, 2019) as well as some acknowledged actual behavioural pathologies like autism (Federici et al , 2020 ;Gallese & Rochat, 2018;Gallese et al , 2012 ;Zappella, 2005;Frith, 1989Frith, -2009 or borderline behaviours like ADHD (Attention-Deficit / Hyperactivity Disorder) and SLD (Specific Learning Disabilities, like dyslexia and others) in young people, also with highly specialistic studies. For example about ADHD, what is it and how to treat: American Psychiatric Association, 2013; Steinau, 2013;Rigoni et al , 2020 ;Danielson et al , 2018.…”