Autistic adults anticipate and integrate meaning based on the speaker’s voice: Evidence from eye-tracking and event-related potentials.

Barzy, Mahsa; Black, Jo; Williams, David M.; Ferguson, Heather J.

doi:10.1037/xge0000705

Cited by 20 publications

(22 citation statements)

References 97 publications

(196 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Four studies looked at predictions based primarily on social expectations, which are presumably learned over a lifetime of social experiences but may also have an innate component [Wynn, 2008]. All reported some type of impairment in making such predictions: Chambon et al [2017] and von der Lühe et al [2016] found that social cues induced weaker perceptual biases in action identification in the ASD group; Palumbo, Burnett, and Jellema [2015] found that biases in identification of emotions in changing faces were driven by pattern extrapolation rather than emotion‐related priors in the ASD group; and Barzy, Black, Williams, and Ferguson [2019] reported differences in eye movement (though not in EEG activity), indicating differences in predictions based on voice/topic associations.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The RTs indicated their readiness for each specific stimulus and/or response, which indicated the extent to which they had predicted that stimulus and/or response. [Barzy et al, 2019; Deschrijver et al, 2016; Kunchulia et al, 2017, 2020; Lawson et al, 2017; Tam et al, 2017; Thillay et al, 2016].…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Of the remaining four studies, one showed no significant difference in modulation of RT by predictability [Barzy et al, 2019]. The remaining three found increased modulation of RT by predictability in the ASD group.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Prediction in Autism Spectrum Disorder: A Systematic Review of Empirical Evidence

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

According to a recent influential proposal, several phenotypic features of autism spectrum disorder (ASD) may be accounted for by differences in predictive skills between individuals with ASD and neurotypical individuals. In this systematic review, we describe results from 47 studies that have empirically tested this hypothesis. We assess the results based on two observable aspects of prediction: learning a pairing between an antecedent and a consequence and responding to an antecedent in a predictive manner. Taken together, these studies suggest distinct differences in both predictive learning and predictive response. Studies documenting differences in learning predictive pairings indicate challenges in detecting such relationships especially when predictive features of an antecedent have low salience or consistency, and studies showing differences in habituation and perceptual adaptation suggest low‐level predictive processing differences in ASD. These challenges may account for the observed differences in the influence of predictive priors, in spontaneous predictive movement or gaze, and in social prediction. An important goal for future research will be to better define and constrain the broad domain‐general hypothesis by testing multiple types of prediction within the same individuals. Additional promising avenues include studying prediction within naturalistic contexts and assessing the effect of prediction‐based intervention on supporting functional outcomes for individuals with ASD. Lay Summary Researchers have suggested that many features of autism spectrum disorder (ASD) may be explained by differences in the prediction skills of people with ASD. We review results from 47 studies. These studies suggest that ASD may be associated with differences in the learning of predictive pairings (e.g., learning cause and effect) and in low‐level predictive processing in the brain (e.g., processing repeated sounds). These findings lay the groundwork for research that can improve our understanding of ASD and inform interventions. Autism Res 2021, 14: 604–630. © 2021 International Society for Autism Research and Wiley Periodicals LLC

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Prediction in Autism Spectrum Disorder: A Systematic Review of Empirical Evidence

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Hutchins & Brien, 2016;Nadig et al, 2010;Vabalas & Freeth, 2016) and our own previous work on pragmatic language comprehension in autistic adults (e.g. Barzy et al, 2020;Black et al, 2018Black et al, , 2019Ferguson et al, 2019). Post hoc calculations of power were conducted given the current sample size using the simr package in R (Green & MacLeod, 2016) and returned an estimated power of 87.9% with the significance level of α = .05 on 80% of occasions (as suggested by Cohen, 1988).…”

Section: Participantsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Perspective influences eye movements during real-life conversation: Mentalising about self versus others in autism

Barzy

Ferguson

Williams

2020

Autism

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Social-communication is profoundly impaired among autistic individuals. Difficulties representing others’ mental states have been linked to modulations of gaze and speech, which have also been shown to be impaired in autism. Despite these observed impairments in ‘real-world’ communicative settings, research has mostly focused on lab-based experiments, where the language is highly structured. In a pre-registered experiment, we recorded eye movements and verbal responses while adults ( N = 50) engaged in a real-life conversation. Using a novel approach, we also manipulated the perspective that participants adopted by asking them questions that were related to the self, a familiar other, or an unfamiliar other. Results replicated previous work, showing reduced attention to socially relevant information among autistic participants (i.e. less time looking at the experimenter’s face and more time looking around the background), compared to typically developing controls. Importantly, perspective modulated social attention in both groups; talking about an unfamiliar other reduced attention to potentially distracting or resource-demanding social information and increased looks to non-social background. Social attention did not differ between self and familiar other contexts, reflecting greater shared knowledge for familiar/similar others. Autistic participants spent more time looking at the background when talking about an unfamiliar other versus themselves. Future research should investigate the developmental trajectory of this effect and the cognitive mechanisms underlying it. Lay abstract Previous lab-based studies suggest that autistic individuals are less attentive to social aspects of their environment. In our study, we recorded the eye movements of autistic and typically developing adults while they engaged in a real-life social interaction with a partner. Results showed that autistic adults were less likely than typically developing adults to look at the experimenter’s face, and instead were more likely to look at the background. Moreover, the perspective that was adopted in the conversation (talking about self versus others) modulated the patterns of eye movements in autistic and non-autistic adults. Overall, people spent less time looking at their conversation partner’s eyes and face and more time looking at the background, when talking about an unfamiliar other compared to when talking about themselves. This pattern was magnified among autistic adults. We conclude that allocating attention to social information during conversation is cognitively effortful, but this can be mitigated when talking about a topic that is familiar to them.

show abstract

“…However, only a handful of studies have experimentally tested online emotional processing in narratives, or irony comprehension directly, among autistic adults. In contrast to the broader social‐communication impairments described above, these studies have largely demonstrated an undiminished ability to comprehend irony and track emotional states online, thus adding to a growing literature showing that autistic adults can integrate linguistic input with context in real‐time [e.g., Au‐Yeung et al, 2015; Barzy, Ferguson, Williams, & Black, in press; Black, Williams, & Ferguson, 2018; Ferguson, Black, & Williams, 2019; Howard, Liversedge, & Benson, 2017a, 2017b, 2017c]. Specifically, Au‐Yeung et al [2015] recorded eye movements while autistic and nonautistic participants read stories that could be interpreted as ironic or not, depending on the context.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Emotional Processing of Ironic Versus Literal Criticism in Autistic and Nonautistic Adults: Evidence From Eye‐Tracking

et al. 2020

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Typically developing adults are able to keep track of story characters' emotional states online while reading. Filik et al. showed that initially, participants expected the victim to be more hurt by ironic comments than literal, but later considered them less hurtful; ironic comments were regarded as more amusing. We examined these processes in autistic adults, since previous research has demonstrated socio‐emotional difficulties among autistic people, which may lead to problems processing irony and its related emotional processes despite an intact ability to integrate language in context. We recorded eye movements from autistic and nonautistic adults while they read narratives in which a character (the victim) was either criticized in an ironic or a literal manner by another character (the protagonist). A target sentence then either described the victim as feeling hurt/amused by the comment, or the protagonist as having intended to hurt/amused the victim by making the comment. Results from the nonautistic adults broadly replicated the key findings from Filik et al., supporting the two‐stage account. Importantly, the autistic adults did not show comparable two‐stage processing of ironic language; they did not differentiate between the emotional responses for victims or protagonists following ironic versus literal criticism. These findings suggest that autistic people experience a specific difficulty taking into account other peoples' communicative intentions (i.e., infer their mental state) to appropriately anticipate emotional responses to an ironic comment. We discuss how these difficulties might link to atypical socio‐emotional processing in autism, and the ability to maintain successful real‐life social interactions. Autism Res 2020, 13: 563–578. © 2020 International Society for Autism Research, Wiley Periodicals, Inc. Lay Summary In line with research showing that autistic people have difficulties considering others' mental states, we found autistic adults were impaired at distinguishing the emotions and intentions experienced by story characters who received sarcastic comments (e.g., “That was fantastic parking” in a context where someone's parking was particularly bad). These findings highlight the difficulties that autistic people experience taking into account other peoples' intentions during communication to appropriately anticipate their emotional responses. © 2020 International Society for Autism Research, Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

show abstract

Autistic adults anticipate and integrate meaning based on the speaker’s voice: Evidence from eye-tracking and event-related potentials.

Abstract: The version in the Kent Academic Repository may differ from the final published version. Users are advised to check http://kar.kent.ac.uk for the status of the paper. Users should always cite the published version of record.

Cited by 20 publications

References 97 publications

Prediction in Autism Spectrum Disorder: A Systematic Review of Empirical Evidence

Prediction in Autism Spectrum Disorder: A Systematic Review of Empirical Evidence

Perspective influences eye movements during real-life conversation: Mentalising about self versus others in autism

Emotional Processing of Ironic Versus Literal Criticism in Autistic and Nonautistic Adults: Evidence From Eye‐Tracking

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About