Behavioural and neural indices of perceptual decision-making in autistic children during visual motion tasks

Manning, Catherine; Hassall, Cameron D.; Hunt, Laurence T.; Norcia, Anthony M.; E-J., Wagenmakers; Evans, Nathan J.; Scerif, Gaia

doi:10.31234/osf.io/s5r3m

Cited by 5 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 75 publications

(139 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The pattern of differences found here for dyslexic children compared to typically developing children (increased internal noise in the motion task and elevated orientation-coherence thresholds) is therefore different to that reported for autistic children. Therefore, we suggest that perceptual differences are specific to each condition (see also [ 52 , 71 ]. Accounts which suggest general impairments in motion processing across neurodevelopmental disorders (e.g.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Integration of visual motion and orientation signals in dyslexic children: an equivalent noise approach

Manning

Hulks

Tibber³

et al. 2022

R. Soc. open sci.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Dyslexic individuals have been reported to have reduced global motion sensitivity, which could be attributed to various causes including atypical magnocellular or dorsal stream function, impaired spatial integration, increased internal noise and/or reduced external noise exclusion. Here, we applied an equivalent noise experimental paradigm alongside a traditional motion-coherence task to determine what limits global motion processing in dyslexia. We also presented static analogues of the motion tasks (orientation tasks) to investigate whether perceptual differences in dyslexia were restricted to motion processing. We compared the performance of 48 dyslexic and 48 typically developing children aged 8 to 14 years in these tasks and used equivalent noise modelling to estimate levels of internal noise (the precision associated with estimating each element's direction/orientation) and sampling (the effective number of samples integrated to judge the overall direction/orientation). While group differences were subtle, dyslexic children had significantly higher internal noise estimates for motion discrimination, and higher orientation-coherence thresholds, than typical children. Thus, while perceptual differences in dyslexia do not appear to be restricted to motion tasks, motion and orientation processing seem to be affected differently. The pattern of results also differs from that previously reported in autistic children, suggesting perceptual processing differences are condition-specific.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Integration of visual motion and orientation signals in dyslexic children: an equivalent noise approach

Manning

Hulks

Tibber³

et al. 2022

R. Soc. open sci.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…EEG data were collected during task performance in 47 typically developing and 44 children with dyslexia (although EEG data were available only in the motion coherence task for one child with dyslexia and one typically developing child). The EEG data from these participants were included in a paper investigating responses locked to the onset of coherent motion in typically developing children and children with autism or dyslexia ( Toffoli et al, 2021 ), and the larger group of 60 typically developing children were used to form the comparison group in an autism study ( Manning et al, 2021b ).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Visual Motion and Decision-Making in Dyslexia: Reduced Accumulation of Sensory Evidence and Related Neural Dynamics

et al. 2021

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Children with and without dyslexia differ in their behavioural responses to visual information, particularly when required to pool dynamic signals over space and time. Importantly, multiple processes contribute to behavioural responses. Here we investigated which processing stages are affected in children with dyslexia when performing visual motion processing tasks, by combining two methods that are sensitive to the dynamic processes leading to responses. We used a diffusion model which decomposes response time and accuracy into distinct cognitive constructs, and high-density EEG. 50 children with dyslexia (24 male) and 50 typically developing children (28 male) aged 6 to 14 years judged the direction of motion as quickly and accurately as possible in two global motion tasks (motion coherence and direction integration), which varied in their requirements for noise exclusion. Following our pre-registered analyses, we fitted hierarchical Bayesian diffusion models to the data, blinded to group membership. Unblinding revealed reduced evidence accumulation in children with dyslexia compared to typical children for both tasks. Additionally, we identified a responselocked EEG component which was maximal over centro-parietal electrodes which indicated a neural correlate of reduced drift-rate in dyslexia in the motion coherence task, thereby linking brain and behaviour. We suggest that children with dyslexia tend to be slower to extract sensory evidence from global motion displays, regardless of whether noise exclusion is required, thus furthering our understanding of atypical perceptual decision-making processes in dyslexia. Significance statementReduced sensitivity to visual information has been reported in dyslexia, with a lively debate about whether these differences causally contribute to reading difficulties. In this large preregistered study with a blind modelling approach, we combine state-of-the art methods in both computational modelling and EEG analysis to pinpoint the stages of processing that are atypical in children with dyslexia in two visual motion tasks that vary in their requirement for noise exclusion. We find reduced evidence accumulation in children with dyslexia across both tasks, and identify a neural marker, allowing us to link brain and behaviour. We show that children with dyslexia exhibit general difficulties with extracting sensory evidence from global motion displays, not just in tasks that require noise exclusion.

show abstract

“…Ten of the 21 studies (47.6%) reported no statistical difference in perceptual discrimination (i.e. on performance metrics or neural activity) between autistic and comparison participants (Greimel et al, 2013;Manning et al, 2022;Peiker et al, 2015;Pirrone et al, 2017;Plaisted et al, 1998;Sapey-Triomphe et al, 2021b;Sheppard & Altgassen, 2021). Ewbank et al (2016) reported that neural response was unrelated to autistic traits on a repetition suppression task; Powell et al (2016) found that autistic traits did not uniquely explain sensory thresholds.…”

Section: Perceptual Decision-makingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Decision-making in autism: A narrative review

Plas

Mason

Happé

2023

Autism

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Autistic people often have an atypical profile of abilities: while excelling in some structured paradigms, many report difficulties with making real-life decisions. To test whether decision-making in autism is different from in typically developing controls, we reviewed 104 studies that compared decision-making performance between autistic and comparison participants ( N = 2712 autistic and N = 3189 comparison participants) between 1998 and 2022. Our searches revealed four main decision-making paradigms that are widely used in the field of decision neuroscience: perceptual discrimination, reward learning, metacognition and value-based decision-making paradigm. Our synthesis highlights that perceptual processing and reward learning were similar between autistic and comparison participants, whereas value-based decision-making and metacognitive accuracy were often different between groups. Furthermore, decision-making differences were most pronounced when the autistic participant was explicitly probed to report on an internal belief, while implicit markers of the same decision (e.g. error-related response times) were usually not different. Our findings provide evidence in favour of a metacognitive explanation of decision-making atypicalities in autism. Lay summary Many autistic people report difficulties with real-life decision-making. However, when doing decision-making tests in laboratory experiments, autistic people often perform as well or better than non-autistic people. We review previously published studies on autistic people’s decision-making, across different types of tests, to understand what type of decision-making is more challenging. To do this, we searched four databases of research papers. We found 104 studies that tested, in total, 2712 autistic and 3189 comparison participants on different decision-making tasks. We found that there were four categories of decision-making tests that were used in these experiments: perceptual (e.g. deciding which image has the most dots); reward learning (e.g. learning which deck of cards gives the best reward); metacognition (e.g. knowing how well you perform or what you want); and value-based (e.g. making a decision based on a choice between two outcomes that differ in value to you). Overall, these studies suggest that autistic and comparison participants tend to perform similarly well at perceptual and reward-learning decisions. However, autistic participants tended to decide differently from comparison participants on metacognition and value-based paradigms. This suggests that autistic people might differ from typically developing controls in how they evaluate their own performance and in how they make decisions based on weighing up the subjective value of two different options. We suggest these reflect more general differences in metacognition, thinking about thinking, in autism.

show abstract

Behavioural and neural indices of perceptual decision-making in autistic children during visual motion tasks

Cited by 5 publications

References 75 publications

Integration of visual motion and orientation signals in dyslexic children: an equivalent noise approach

Integration of visual motion and orientation signals in dyslexic children: an equivalent noise approach

Visual Motion and Decision-Making in Dyslexia: Reduced Accumulation of Sensory Evidence and Related Neural Dynamics

Decision-making in autism: A narrative review

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About