Do autistic adults spontaneously reason about belief? A detailed exploration of alternative explanations.

IF 2.9 3区 综合性期刊 Q1 MULTIDISCIPLINARY SCIENCES Royal Society Open Science Pub Date : 2024-07-31 eCollection Date: 2024-07-01 DOI:10.1098/rsos.231889
Ruihan Wu, Jing Tian Lim, Zahra Ahmed, Rachael Berger, Ensar Acem, Ishita Chowdhury, Sarah J White
{"title":"Do autistic adults spontaneously reason about belief? A detailed exploration of alternative explanations.","authors":"Ruihan Wu, Jing Tian Lim, Zahra Ahmed, Rachael Berger, Ensar Acem, Ishita Chowdhury, Sarah J White","doi":"10.1098/rsos.231889","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Southgate <i>et al.</i>'s (Southgate 2007 <i>Psychol. Sci.</i> 18, 587-92 (doi:10.1111/j.1467-9280.2007.01944.x)) anticipatory-looking paradigm has presented exciting yet inconclusive evidence surrounding spontaneous mentalizing in autism. The present study aimed to develop this paradigm to address alternative explanations for the lack of predictive eye movements on false-belief tasks by autistic adults. This was achieved through implementing a multi-trial design with matched true-belief conditions, and both high and low inhibitory demand false-belief conditions. We also sought to inspect if any group differences were related to group-specific patterns of attention on key events. Autistic adults were compared with non-autistic adults on this adapted implicit mentalizing task and an established explicit task. The two groups performed equally well in the explicit task; however, autistic adults did not show anticipatory-looking behaviour in the false-belief trials of the implicit task. Critically, both groups showed the same attentional distribution in the implicit task prior to action prediction, indicating that autistic adults process information from social cues in the same way as non-autistic adults, but this information is not then used to update mental representations. Our findings further document that many autistic people struggle to spontaneously mentalize others' beliefs, and this non-verbal paradigm holds promise for use with a wide range of ages and abilities.</p>","PeriodicalId":21525,"journal":{"name":"Royal Society Open Science","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11289652/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Royal Society Open Science","FirstCategoryId":"103","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1098/rsos.231889","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"综合性期刊","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/7/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MULTIDISCIPLINARY SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Southgate et al.'s (Southgate 2007 Psychol. Sci. 18, 587-92 (doi:10.1111/j.1467-9280.2007.01944.x)) anticipatory-looking paradigm has presented exciting yet inconclusive evidence surrounding spontaneous mentalizing in autism. The present study aimed to develop this paradigm to address alternative explanations for the lack of predictive eye movements on false-belief tasks by autistic adults. This was achieved through implementing a multi-trial design with matched true-belief conditions, and both high and low inhibitory demand false-belief conditions. We also sought to inspect if any group differences were related to group-specific patterns of attention on key events. Autistic adults were compared with non-autistic adults on this adapted implicit mentalizing task and an established explicit task. The two groups performed equally well in the explicit task; however, autistic adults did not show anticipatory-looking behaviour in the false-belief trials of the implicit task. Critically, both groups showed the same attentional distribution in the implicit task prior to action prediction, indicating that autistic adults process information from social cues in the same way as non-autistic adults, but this information is not then used to update mental representations. Our findings further document that many autistic people struggle to spontaneously mentalize others' beliefs, and this non-verbal paradigm holds promise for use with a wide range of ages and abilities.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
自闭症成人会自发地对信念进行推理吗?对其他解释的详细探讨。
索斯盖特等人(Southgate 2007 Psychol.Sci. 18, 587-92 (doi:10.1111/j.1467-9280.2007.01944.x) 的预测性眼动范式提出了令人兴奋但尚无定论的自闭症患者自发心理化的证据。本研究旨在发展这一范式,以解决自闭症成人在假信念任务中缺乏预测性眼动的其他解释。为此,我们采用了多重试验设计,包括匹配的真实信念条件以及高抑制需求和低抑制需求的虚假信念条件。我们还试图考察任何群体差异是否与特定群体对关键事件的注意模式有关。我们将自闭症成人与非自闭症成人在这项经过调整的内隐心智化任务和一项既定的外显任务上进行了比较。两组人在显性任务中的表现不相上下;然而,自闭症成人在隐性任务的假信念试验中并没有表现出预期性的行为。重要的是,在行动预测前的内隐任务中,两组人都表现出了相同的注意力分布,这表明自闭症成人与非自闭症成人以相同的方式处理来自社会线索的信息,但这些信息并没有被用于更新心理表征。我们的研究结果进一步证明,许多自闭症患者都很难自发地将他人的信念心理化,这种非语言范式有望用于不同年龄和能力的人群。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Royal Society Open Science
Royal Society Open Science Multidisciplinary-Multidisciplinary
CiteScore
6.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
508
审稿时长
14 weeks
期刊介绍: Royal Society Open Science is a new open journal publishing high-quality original research across the entire range of science on the basis of objective peer-review. The journal covers the entire range of science and mathematics and will allow the Society to publish all the high-quality work it receives without the usual restrictions on scope, length or impact.
期刊最新文献
Comparative study of the catalytic performance of physically mixed and sequentially utilized γ-alumina and zeolite in methanol-to-propylene reactions. Protein folding, protein dynamics and the topology of self-motions. Biological pest regulation can benefit from diverse predation modes. Spatial and seasonal foraging patterns drive diet differences among north Pacific resident killer whale populations. A new sponge from the Marjum Formation of Utah documents the Cambrian origin of the hexactinellid body plan.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1