Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29876255›Full record

ArticleNeuroImage. Clinical2018

Brain activity for spontaneous and explicit mentalizing in adults with autism spectrum disorder: An fMRI study.

Annabel D Nijhof, Lara Bardi, Marcel Brass, Jan R Wiersema

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in NeuroImage. Clinical, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 28 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
28citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

28 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Trial
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Annabel D NijhofFaculty of Psychology and Educational Science, Ghent University, Henri Dunantlaan 2, 9000 Ghent, Belgium. Electronic address: annabel.nijhof@ugent.be.
Lara BardiFaculty of Psychology and Educational Science, Ghent University, Henri Dunantlaan 2, 9000 Ghent, Belgium.
Marcel BrassFaculty of Psychology and Educational Science, Ghent University, Henri Dunantlaan 2, 9000 Ghent, Belgium.
Jan R WiersemaFaculty of Psychology and Educational Science, Ghent University, Henri Dunantlaan 2, 9000 Ghent, Belgium.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The socio-communicative difficulties of individuals with autism spectrum disorder (ASD) are hypothesized to be caused by a specific deficit in the ability to represent one's own and others' mental states, referred to as Theory of Mind or mentalizing. However, many individuals with ASD show successful performance on explicit measures of mentalizing, and for this reason, the deficit is thought to be better captured by measures of spontaneous mentalizing. While there is initial behavioral support for this hypothesis, spontaneous mentalizing in ASD has not yet been studied at the neural level. Recent findings indicate involvement of the right temporoparietal junction (rTPJ) in both explicit and spontaneous mentalizing (Bardi et al., 2016). In the current study, we investigated brain activation during explicit and spontaneous mentalizing in adults with ASD by means of fMRI. Based on our hypothesis of a core mentalizing deficit in ASD, decreased rTPJ activity was expected for both forms of mentalizing. A group of 24 adults with ASD and 21 neurotypical controls carried out a spontaneous and an explicit version of the same mentalizing task. They watched videos in which both they themselves and another agent formed a belief about the location of an object (belief formation phase). Only in the explicit task version participants were instructed to report the agent's belief on some trials. At the behavioral level, no group differences were revealed in either of the task versions. A planned region-of-interest analysis of the rTPJ showed that this region was more active for false- than for true-belief formation, independent of task version, especially when the agent's belief had a positive content (when the agent was expecting the object). This effect of belief was absent in adults with ASD. A whole-brain analysis revealed reduced activation in the anterior middle temporal pole in ASD for false - versus true-belief trials, independent of task version. Our findings suggest neural differences between adults with ASD and neurotypical controls both during spontaneous and explicit mentalizing, and indicate the rTPJ to be crucially involved in ASD. Moreover, the possible role of the anterior middle temporal pole in disturbed mentalizing in ASD deserves further attention. The finding that these neural differences do not necessarily lead to differential performance warrants further research.

Indexed as

Magnetic Resonance ImagingAdultAnalysis of VarianceAutism Spectrum DisorderFemaleHumansImage Processing, Computer-AssistedMaleOxygenParietal LobeReaction TimeSurveys and QuestionnairesTemporal LobeTheory of MindYoung AdultOxygenAutism spectrum disorderfMRITemporo-parietal junctionTheory of Mind

Identifiers

PMID29876255
PMCPMC5987841

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.