Use policyThe full-text may be used and/or reproduced, and given to third parties in any format or medium, without prior permission or charge, for personal research or study, educational, or not-for-prot purposes provided that:• a full bibliographic reference is made to the original source • a link is made to the metadata record in DRO • the full-text is not changed in any way The full-text must not be sold in any format or medium without the formal permission of the copyright holders.Please consult the full DRO policy for further details.

No abstract

Whereas ideomotor approaches to action control emphasize the importance of sensory action effects for action selection, motivational approaches emphasize the role of affective action effects. We used a game-like experimental setup to directly compare the roles of sensory and affective action effects in selecting and performing reaching actions in forced- and free-choice tasks. The two kinds of action effects did not interact. Action selection and execution in the forced-choice task were strongly impacted by the spatial compatibility between actions and the expected sensory action effects, whereas the free-choice task was hardly affected. In contrast, action execution, but not selection, in both tasks was strongly impacted by the spatial compatibility between actions and highly valued action effects. This pattern suggests that sensory and affective action effects serve different purposes: The former seem to dominate rule-based action selection, whereas the latter might serve to reduce any remaining action uncertainty.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.3758/s13423-016-1139-x) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Children with autism spectrum disorder (ASD) are generally characterized by marked impairments in processing of social emotional information, but less is known about emotion processing in adults with the disorder. This study aimed to address this by collecting data on social attention (eye tracking), emotional arousal (skin conductance level, SCL), and emotional awareness (self-report) in a paradigm with social emotional video clips. Fifty-two young, intelligent adults with ASD (IQ range = 88–130, Age range = 18–24) and 31 typically developing (TD) ASD (IQ range = 94–139, Age range = 19–28) gender matched controls participated and reported on severity of autism symptoms [Social Responsiveness Scale for Adults (SRS-A)]. Results showed no group difference in social attention, while autism symptom severity was related to decreased attention to faces across participants ( r = −.32). Average SCL was lower in the ASD group, but no group difference in arousal reactivity (change from baseline to emotional phases) was detected. Lower SCL during video clips was related to autism symptom severity across participants ( r = −.29). ASD individuals reported lower emotional awareness. We conclude that, even though no deviations in social attention or emotional reactivity were found in ASD, an overall lower level of social attention and arousal may help explain difficulties in social functioning in ASD.

Autistic students experience strengths and challenges that can impact their full inclusion in higher education, including stigma. A participatory team of autistic and non-autistic scholars developed an autism and universal design (UD) training. This participatory approach centered the voices of autistic collaborators in training design and evaluation. Ninety-eight educators from 53 institutions across five countries completed assessments before training (pre-tests), 89 completed post-tests (after training), and 82 completed maintenance assessments (a month after post-test). Pre-test autism stigma was heightened among males, educators with less autism knowledge, and those who reported heightened social dominance orientation. Autism knowledge, autism stigma, and attitudes toward UD improved with training. Improvements remained apparent a month after post-test but were somewhat attenuated for knowledge and stigma. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first evidence of maintenance of benefits of an autism training over time. Participants’ main reason for enrolling in the study was to gain a better understanding about neurodiversity. Feedback indicates that this goal was reached by most with the added benefit of gaining understanding about UD. Results suggest that interest in one type of diversity (e.g. autism) can motivate faculty to learn UD-aligned teaching strategies that benefit diverse students more generally. Lay abstract Autistic university students have many strengths. They also go through difficulties that professors may not understand. Professors may not understand what college life is like for autistic students. They might judge autistic students. A team of autistic and non-autistic researchers made a training to help professors understand autistic students better. This training also gave professors ideas to help them teach all of their students. Ninety-eight professors did an online survey before the autism training. They shared how they felt about autism and teaching. Before our training, professors who knew more about autism appreciated autism more. Professors who thought people should be equal and women also appreciated autism more. Then, 89 of the professors did our training and another survey after the training. This helped us see what they learned from the training. They did one more survey a month later. This helped us see what they remembered. Our training helped professors understand and value autism. It also helped them understand how they can teach all students better. The professors remembered a lot of what we taught them. This study shows that a training that autistic people helped make can help professors understand their autistic students better.