Cognitive disorders of infantile autism: A study employing the WISC, spatial relationship conceptualization, and Gesture Imitations

Abstract

Sixteen autistic children with WISC Performance IQs of 70 or above were analyzed to determine their conceptions of spatial relations, size comparisons, and gesture imitations through the use of the WISC, an originally devised Language Decoding Test (LDT), and a modified Gesture Imitation Test (GIT). WISC results were replicated as in previous studies. The autistic children showed an inability to acquire concepts of size comparison and spatial relationships through verbal instructions. They often gave peculiar responses (partial imitations), which seem to be related to their inability to integrate another person's body as a whole through visual input. These findings support the notion that the basic cognitive deficit is an impairment of symbolic-representational functioning, including language and body images, which results from a combination of delay and deviation of the symbolic-representational function.

The Relationship Between Visual Perspective Taking and Imitation Impairments in Children with Autism

“…In the current study, we also confirmed that children with autism display reversal error during imitation, which is consistent with previous discoveries (Ohta, 1987;Meyer and Hobson, 2004;Smith & Bryson, 1998;Vanvuchelen, et al, 2007). However, the current test differs from the previous studies in that we used a training trail where children were trained to perform mirror-image imitation.…”

“…The results show that both groups made considerable amount of spatial error in their initial response, but autistic children were less willing to change their response style in their second attempt. Considering other studies which revealed that geometric repetition also occurred in children with learning difficulties (Meyer & Hobson, 2004) and its occurrence declined with age in typically developing children of 3-6 years old (Ohta et al, 1987), it might indicate that learning disability play a role in the imitation style of autistic children.…”

“…The imitation test was adapted from Ohta's (1987) Gesture Imitation Test. To optimize the test for younger children, we reduced the number of trials and selected gestures that were easy to perform.…”

Identification: The missing link between joint attention and imitation?

“…Moreover, just as these children's delayed echolalia and personal pronoun reversals are unusual for their anchorage of the communicative act in an original situation as experienced by the child, but not shared with or experienced through! other people~e.g., Charney, 1981;Hobson, 1990;Kanner, 1943!, several studies have reported an incidental observation that children show imitative "reversal errors," for example, when they copy a model who displays her hands facing outward, by facing their own hands inward Ohta, 1987;Smith & Bryson, 1998;Whiten & Brown, 1998!. Such failures in imitating self-0other orientation in actions have been the focus of three published studies. In the first of thesẽ Hobson & Lee, 1999!, individuals with autism were unusual not only in failing to copy the self-0other orientation of actions, for example, omitting to place an object against their shoulder when the demonstrator had placed it against his, but also in adopting the harsh or gentle style with which actions had been demonstrated.…”

Understanding the mechanisms behind deficits in imitation: Do individuals with autism know ‘what’ to imitate and do they know ‘how’ to imitate?

“…Such errors imply that a person holds up the palm of his hand facing towards himself when he has observed the demonstrator facing his palm of the hand towards the other person. A number of studies reported reversal errors in imitation of actions without objects (Beadle-Brown, 2004;Dewey, Cantell, & Crawford, 2007;Ohta, 1987, Smith & Bryson, 1998Whiten & Brown, 1998) and actions with objects (Avikainen, Wohlschlager, Liuhanen, Hanninen, & Hari, 2003;Hobson & Lee, 1999;Meyer & Hobson, 2004) in children and adolescents with autism in contrast to non-autistic controls. Compared to appropriate controls, they were significantly less likely to imitate the orientation of an action in relation to the demonstrator's body.…”