Patterns of sensory abnormalities in children and adults with autism were examined using the Diagnostic Interview for Social and Communication Disorders (DISCO). This interview elicits detailed information about responsiveness to a wide range of sensory stimuli. Study 1 showed that over 90% of children with autism had sensory abnormalities and had sensory symptoms in multiple sensory domains. Group differences between children with autism and clinical comparison children were found in the total number of symptoms and in specific domains of smell/taste and vision. Study 2 confirmed that sensory abnormalities are pervasive and multimodal and persistent across age and ability in children and adults with autism. Age and IQ level affects some sensory symptoms however. Clinical and research implications are discussed.

Esta es la versión de autor del artículo publicado en: This is an author produced version of a paper published in: El acceso a la versión del editor puede requerir la suscripción del recurso Access to the published version may require subscriptionResilience (RS) refers to positive adaptation or recovery despite experiences of significant adversity, that is, despite life situations that usually produce maladjustment (Luthar, 2006). According to this author's review (2006), that covers five decades of research on resilience, it is not unusual that children exposed to different kinds of adversities and life stressors develop positive adaptation. Confronted with this fact, researchers have recognized the importance of identifying which environmental and personal factors are responsible of such adaptation, in order to develop intervention programs aimed at promoting resilience. Three kinds of protective factors had been identified: family, community and personal factors (Luthar, 2006). However, the different conceptual perspectives and methodological strategies used in research make progress difficult, unless some problems are solved (Luthar & Brown, 2007;Masten, 2007). First, there is a conceptual problem. Resilience, competence, ego-resilience and hardiness overlap in some way, and it is necessary to decide whether they are unique or redundant scientific constructs. With the intent to clarify their similarities and differences, Luthar (2006) relied on theoretical criteria. For her, resilience implies two elements, positive adaptation and adverse situations, whereas competence implies only the first.As for ego-resilience, it is considered a trait reflecting general resourcefulness in response to varying situations, whereas resilience is a phenomenon. As for hardiness, it is a general trait including three personality dispositions: commitment (having a purpose, being active, etc.), control expectancies, and challenge (Kobasa, Maddi, & Kahn, 1982). Other authors even consider that resilience is a personality super-factor including different intermediate personality factors (Block, 2001). For us, from a conceptual point of view, most personality traits need to be explained. Their identification, in most cases, is the result of analysing self-report measures describing and summarizing behavioural tendencies resulting from the interaction between temperament and environment conditions, but not of the identification of the "personality processes" underlying such tendencies. So, it might be the case that such processes were common for resilience and the personality factors mentioned. And the same happens to resilience. In fact, resilience -as a phenomenonneeds to be explained (Leopold & Greve, 2009). So, in order to determine in précis way which kinds of factor contribute to resilience, or whether it is different or not from the characteristics referred to by the personality constructs above mentioned, the phenomenon itself needs to be measured in some way. That is, it is necessary to state the degree of positive adaptatio...

The findings suggest that sensory features in ASD may be driving the high prevalence of parental stress in carers. They also suggest that the effect on parental stress that has been attributed traditionally to maladaptive behaviours may be driven by sensory difficulties. The implications of these findings are discussed in relation to the development of interventions and the need to explore contextual and cultural variables as possible sources of variability.

No abstract

No abstract