Judging intentionality in the context of ambiguous actions among autistic adults / Antonia EISENKOECK in Research in Autism Spectrum Disorders, 96 (August 2022)  

Public ISBD [article]  inResearch in Autism Spectrum Disorders > 96 (August 2022) . - 101997 Titre : Judging intentionality in the context of ambiguous actions among autistic adults Type de document : Texte imprimé et/ou numérique Auteurs : Antonia EISENKOECK, Auteur ; Rachel J. M. SLAVNY-CROSS, Auteur ; James W. MOORE, Auteur Article en page(s) : 101997 Langues : Anglais (eng) Mots-clés : Social cognition  Theory of mind  Intention attribution  Intentionality bias Index. décimale : PER Périodiques Résumé : Background Discerning intentional from unintentional actions is a key aspect of social cognition. Mental state attribution tasks show that autistic people are less accurate than neurotypicals in attributing an agent?s intention when there is clearly a right answer. Little is known about how autistic people judge the intentionality of ambiguous actions (i.e., actions that are neither clearly intentional nor clearly unintentional). Aims This study sought to find out whether autistic individuals differ in their interpretation of ambiguous action compared to neurotypical controls. Methods and procedures 20 autistic and 20 neurotypical adults completed an ambiguous action and theory of mind task. Autistic traits, verbal reasoning and non-verbal perceptual reasoning ability were measured. Outcomes and results Results show that intentionality endorsement scores for ambiguous but prototypically accidental actions were higher in autistic participants than controls. Theory of Mind (ToM) scores did not correlate with intentionality endorsement scores in either group therefore group differences could not be explained by ToM ability. Conclusion and implications Autistic participants had a tendency to over-attribute intention compared to neurotypicals, which could not be explained by ToM ability. Studying ambiguous action is important with respect to ecological validity, given that we often face ambiguous actions during social encounters. En ligne : https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rasd.2022.101997 Permalink : https://www.cra-rhone-alpes.org/cid/opac_css/index.php?lvl=notice_display&id=480 [article] Judging intentionality in the context of ambiguous actions among autistic adults [Texte imprimé et/ou numérique] / Antonia EISENKOECK, Auteur ; Rachel J. M. SLAVNY-CROSS, Auteur ; James W. MOORE, Auteur . - 101997. Langues : Anglais (eng) in Research in Autism Spectrum Disorders > 96 (August 2022) . - 101997 Mots-clés : Social cognition  Theory of mind  Intention attribution  Intentionality bias Index. décimale : PER Périodiques Résumé : Background Discerning intentional from unintentional actions is a key aspect of social cognition. Mental state attribution tasks show that autistic people are less accurate than neurotypicals in attributing an agent?s intention when there is clearly a right answer. Little is known about how autistic people judge the intentionality of ambiguous actions (i.e., actions that are neither clearly intentional nor clearly unintentional). Aims This study sought to find out whether autistic individuals differ in their interpretation of ambiguous action compared to neurotypical controls. Methods and procedures 20 autistic and 20 neurotypical adults completed an ambiguous action and theory of mind task. Autistic traits, verbal reasoning and non-verbal perceptual reasoning ability were measured. Outcomes and results Results show that intentionality endorsement scores for ambiguous but prototypically accidental actions were higher in autistic participants than controls. Theory of Mind (ToM) scores did not correlate with intentionality endorsement scores in either group therefore group differences could not be explained by ToM ability. Conclusion and implications Autistic participants had a tendency to over-attribute intention compared to neurotypicals, which could not be explained by ToM ability. Studying ambiguous action is important with respect to ecological validity, given that we often face ambiguous actions during social encounters. En ligne : https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rasd.2022.101997 Permalink : https://www.cra-rhone-alpes.org/cid/opac_css/index.php?lvl=notice_display&id=480

---

1 (1 - 1 / 1)