1. Nah YH, Young RL, Brewer N, Berlingeri G. {{Autism Detection in Early Childhood (ADEC): Reliability and Validity Data for a Level 2 Screening Tool for Autistic Disorder}}. {Psychological assessment}. 2014 Feb 3.
The Autism Detection in Early Childhood (ADEC; Young, 2007) was developed as a Level 2 clinician-administered autistic disorder (AD) screening tool that was time-efficient, suitable for children under 3 years, easy to administer, and suitable for persons with minimal training and experience with AD. A best estimate clinical Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (4th ed., text rev.; DSM-IV-TR; American Psychiatric Association, 2000) diagnosis of AD was made for 70 children using all available information and assessment results, except for the ADEC data. A screening study compared these children on the ADEC with 57 children with other developmental disorders and 64 typically developing children. Results indicated high internal consistency (alpha = .91). Interrater reliability and test-retest reliability of the ADEC were also adequate. ADEC scores reliably discriminated different diagnostic groups after controlling for nonverbal IQ and Vineland Adaptive Behavior Composite scores. Construct validity (using exploratory factor analysis) and concurrent validity using performance on the Autism Diagnostic Observation Schedule (Lord et al., 2000), the Autism Diagnostic Interview-Revised (Le Couteur, Lord, & Rutter, 2003), and DSM-IV-TR criteria were also demonstrated. Signal detection analysis identified the optimal ADEC cutoff score, with the ADEC identifying all children who had an AD (N = 70, sensitivity = 1.0) but overincluding children with other disabilities (N = 13, specificity ranging from .74 to .90). Together, the reliability and validity data indicate that the ADEC has potential to be established as a suitable and efficient screening tool for infants with AD. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2014 APA, all rights reserved).
Lien vers le texte intégral (Open Access ou abonnement)
2. Neiworth JJ, Whillock KM, Kim SH, Greenberg JR, Jones KB, Patel AR, Steefel-Moore DL, Shaw AJ, Rupert DD, Gauer JL, Kudura AG. {{Gestalt Principle Use in College Students, Children With Autism, Toddlers (Homo sapiens), and Cotton Top Tamarins (Saguinus oedipus)}}. {Journal of comparative psychology (Washington, DC : 1983)}. 2014 Feb 3.
The use of Gestalt principles of proximity, similarity, and closure to recognize objects by configural superiority was examined in college students, low- and high-functioning children with autism, toddlers, and adult cotton top tamarin monkeys. At issue was whether the monkeys showed differences from humans in perceptual processing and whether they showed any similarities with clinical or developmental groups. The method required a pointing response to discriminate an odd item in a 4-item visual display. All subjects were trained to a high accuracy to point to the odd item before being tested with graphic stimuli that differentiated feature changes based on configural superiority. The results were that college students and high-functioning children with autism responded faster and more accurately to trials in which the odd item was easily noticed by the use of Gestalt principles and configural superiority. Toddlers also responded more accurately to the Gestalt trials, but without being faster at making the response. Low-functioning children with autism and tamarins showed no advantage to Gestalt trials but exhibited different processing styles. The implications of these findings to track the evolution of human perception and to develop a primate model for the perceptual deficits of autism are discussed. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2014 APA, all rights reserved).
Lien vers le texte intégral (Open Access ou abonnement)
3. Sims T, Neufeld J, Johnstone T, Chakrabarti B. {{Autistic traits modulate frontostriatal connectivity during processing of rewarding faces}}. {Social cognitive and affective neuroscience}. 2014 Feb 3.
Deficits in facial mimicry have been widely reported in autism. Some studies have suggested that these deficits are restricted to spontaneous mimicry and do not extend to volitional mimicry. We bridge these apparently inconsistent observations, by testing the impact of reward value on neural indices of mimicry, and how autistic traits modulate this impact. Neutral faces were conditioned with high and low reward. Subsequently, functional connectivity between the ventral striatum (VS) and inferior frontal gyrus (IFG) was measured whilst neurotypical adults (n = 30) watched happy expressions made by these conditioned faces. We found greater VS-IFG connectivity in response to high-reward vs. low-reward happy faces. This difference was negatively proportional to autistic traits, suggesting that reduced spontaneous mimicry of social stimuli seen in autism, maybe related to a failure in the modulation of the mirror system by the reward system rather than a circumscribed deficit in the mirror system.
