Elif Bastan, Roberta McGuinness, Sarah R Beck, Andrew Dr Surtees
{"title":"Reasoning in social versus non-social domains and its relation to autistic traits.","authors":"Elif Bastan, Roberta McGuinness, Sarah R Beck, Andrew Dr Surtees","doi":"10.1177/17470218241296090","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Enhanced rationality has been linked to higher levels of autistic traits, characterised by increased deliberation and decreased intuition, alongside reduced susceptibility to common reasoning biases. However, it is unclear whether this is domain-specific or domain-general. We aimed to explore whether reasoning tendencies differ across social and non-social domains in relation to autistic traits. We conducted two experiments (<i>N</i><sup>1</sup> = 72, <i>N</i><sup>2</sup> = 217) using a reasoning task with social and non-social scenario comparisons to evaluate the specific information participants used when making judgments about children, in the social domain, and objects, in the non-social domain. We consistently found a greater reliance on behaviour-based information in the non-social domain, compared to the social domain, indicating a more deliberative approach. In Experiment 1, we found a correlation between autistic traits and the proportion of behaviour-based information, suggesting a more deliberative approach, when making judgments about children, and not about objects. In Experiment 2, with a larger sample, shortened version of the reasoning task, and requests for written justification, we did not identify a significant correlation between these variables. With this study, we introduce a novel scenario-based reasoning task that systematically compares the social and non-social domains. Our findings highlight the complex nature of the relationship between reasoning style and autistic traits.</p>","PeriodicalId":20869,"journal":{"name":"Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology","volume":" ","pages":"17470218241296090"},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/17470218241296090","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"PHYSIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Enhanced rationality has been linked to higher levels of autistic traits, characterised by increased deliberation and decreased intuition, alongside reduced susceptibility to common reasoning biases. However, it is unclear whether this is domain-specific or domain-general. We aimed to explore whether reasoning tendencies differ across social and non-social domains in relation to autistic traits. We conducted two experiments (N1 = 72, N2 = 217) using a reasoning task with social and non-social scenario comparisons to evaluate the specific information participants used when making judgments about children, in the social domain, and objects, in the non-social domain. We consistently found a greater reliance on behaviour-based information in the non-social domain, compared to the social domain, indicating a more deliberative approach. In Experiment 1, we found a correlation between autistic traits and the proportion of behaviour-based information, suggesting a more deliberative approach, when making judgments about children, and not about objects. In Experiment 2, with a larger sample, shortened version of the reasoning task, and requests for written justification, we did not identify a significant correlation between these variables. With this study, we introduce a novel scenario-based reasoning task that systematically compares the social and non-social domains. Our findings highlight the complex nature of the relationship between reasoning style and autistic traits.
期刊介绍:
Promoting the interests of scientific psychology and its researchers, QJEP, the journal of the Experimental Psychology Society, is a leading journal with a long-standing tradition of publishing cutting-edge research. Several articles have become classic papers in the fields of attention, perception, learning, memory, language, and reasoning. The journal publishes original articles on any topic within the field of experimental psychology (including comparative research). These include substantial experimental reports, review papers, rapid communications (reporting novel techniques or ground breaking results), comments (on articles previously published in QJEP or on issues of general interest to experimental psychologists), and book reviews. Experimental results are welcomed from all relevant techniques, including behavioural testing, brain imaging and computational modelling.
QJEP offers a competitive publication time-scale. Accepted Rapid Communications have priority in the publication cycle and usually appear in print within three months. We aim to publish all accepted (but uncorrected) articles online within seven days. Our Latest Articles page offers immediate publication of articles upon reaching their final form.
The journal offers an open access option called Open Select, enabling authors to meet funder requirements to make their article free to read online for all in perpetuity. Authors also benefit from a broad and diverse subscription base that delivers the journal contents to a world-wide readership. Together these features ensure that the journal offers authors the opportunity to raise the visibility of their work to a global audience.