ArticleJournal of intellectual disability research : JIDR2019
Adults with autism are less proficient in identifying biological motion actions portrayed with point-light displays.
Article in Journal of intellectual disability research : JIDR, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Differential contributions of body form, motion, and temporal information to subjective action understanding in naturalistic stimuli.Frontiers in integrative neuroscience · 2024Article
- The impact of visual display of human motion on observers' perception of music performance.PloS one · 2023Article
- Differences in functional brain organization during gesture recognition between autistic and neurotypical individuals.Social cognitive and affective neuroscience · 2022Article
- Differences in the production and perception of communicative kinematics in autism.Autism research : official journal of the International Society for Autism Research · 2021Article
- Brain function distinguishes female carriers and non-carriers of familial risk for autism.Molecular autism · 2020Article
- Adults with autism are less proficient in identifying biological motion actions portrayed with point-light displays.Journal of intellectual disability research : JIDR · 2019Article
- Motion Processing in ASD: From Low-Level Information to Higher-Level Social Information.Wiley interdisciplinary reviews. Cognitive scienceReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundWhether individuals with autism spectrum disorder (ASD) have impairments with biological motion perception has been debated. The present study examined the ability to identify point-light-displayed (PLD) human actions in neurotypical (NT) adults and adults with ASD.
methodTwenty-seven adults with ASD (mean age = 28.36) and 30 NT adults (mean age = 22.45) were tested. Both groups viewed 10 different biological motion actions contacting an object/tool and 10 without making contact. Each action was presented twice, and participant's naming responses and reaction times were recorded.
resultsThe ASD group had a significantly lower total number of correct items (M = 29.30 ± 5.08 out of 40) and longer response time (M = 4550 ± 1442 ms) than NT group (M = 32.77 ± 2.78; M = 3556 ± 1148 ms). Both groups were better at naming the actions without objects (ASD group: 17.33 ± 2.30, NT group: 18.67 ± 1.30) than those with objects (ASD group: 11.96 ± 3.57, NT group: 14.10 ± 1.97). Correlation analyses showed that individuals with higher Autism-spectrum Quotient scale scores tended to make more errors and responded more slowly.
conclusionAdults with ASD were able to identify human point-light display biological motion actions much better than chance; however, they were less proficient compared with NT adults in terms of accuracy and speed, regardless of action type.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.