ArticleAttention, perception & psychophysics2024
Visuospatial cueing differences as a function of autistic traits.
Article in Attention, perception & psychophysics, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
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 at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Atypical orienting of visuospatial attention in autistic individuals or individuals with a high level of autistic-like traits (ALTs) has been well documented and viewed as a core feature underlying the development of autism. However, there has been limited testing of three alternative theoretical positions advanced to explain atypical orienting - difficulty in disengagement, cue indifference, and delay in orienting. Moreover, research commonly has not separated facilitation (reaction time difference between neutral and valid cues) and cost effects (reaction time difference between invalid and neutral cues) in orienting tasks. We addressed these limitations in two experiments that compared groups selected for Low- and High-ALT levels on exogenous and endogenous versions of the Posner cueing paradigm. Experiment 1 showed that High-ALT participants exhibited a significantly reduced cost effect compared to Low-ALT participants in the endogenous cueing task, although the overall orienting effect remained small. In Experiment 2, we increased task difficulty of the endogenous task to augment cueing effects. Results were comparable to Experiment 1 regarding the finding of a reduced cost effect for High-ALT participants on the endogenous cueing task and additionally demonstrated a reduced facilitation effect in High-ALT participants on the same task. No ALT group differences were observed on an exogenous cueing task included in Experiment 2. These findings suggest atypical orienting in High-ALT individuals may be attributable to general cue indifference, which implicates differences in top-down attentional processes between Low- and High-ALT individuals. We discuss how indifference to endogenous cues may contribute to social cognitive differences in autism.
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.