Effects of labeling and pointing on object gaze in boys with fragile X syndrome: An eye-tracking study

Abstract

We examined the visual processing of a social learning stimulus and the ways in which visual attention was distributed to objects as well as to the examiner’s face during word learning under conditions that varied only in the presence or absence of a label. The goal of the current study, then, was to evaluate the effects of differentially providing pointing and labeling during exposure to a novel target object in males with fragile X syndrome (FXS) (n = 14, ages 4.33–10.02), autism spectrum disorder (ASD) (n = 17, ages 4.04–10.4), or typical development (TD) (n = 18, ages 2.05–5.33). In particular, the present study examined attention to the examiner’s face as well as target and distracter objects that were presented as video stimuli. An eye-tracker captured gaze to the video stimuli as they were shown in order to examine the way in which children with FXS, ASD, or TD distributed their gaze toward the examiner and the objects. Results indicated that no group showed increased gaze toward the target object compared to the distracter object. However, results revealed that participants with FXS showed significantly increased face gaze compared to the novel objects, whereas children with ASD and TD both showed similar amounts of relative gaze toward the face and objects. Furthermore, the act of pointing at the target object was found to increase gaze toward the target objects compared to when there was no pointing in all groups. Together, these findings suggest that social cues like those employed in a word-learning task, when presented with video, may relate to gaze in FXS in context- or task-dependent ways that are distinct from those expected during live interaction.

Evaluating Social Interactions Using the Autism Screening Instrument for Education Planning-3rd Edition (ASIEP-3): Interaction Assessment in Children and Adults with Fragile X Syndrome

“…Progress has been made over the past 5 years in the Fragile X field by evaluating more objective outcome measures that do not involve parental reporting, including measures of attention [40], expressive language [41,42], and executive functioning [43,44]. Eye tracking technology has been used to examine aspects of social attention while viewing videos [45,46], as well as in a naturalistic setting [47]. While these and other new measures have been studied, the identification of measures that directly and efficiently assess and quantify the different aspects of social interaction skills remains lacking [38].…”

An Open Conversation on Using Eye-Gaze Methods in Studies of Neurodevelopmental Disorders

“…Research on NDD often involves collaboration across sites to increase recruitment. When testing at multiple sites is necessary, monitor resolution for automatic eye trackers might need to be adjusted prior to collecting data to ensure that data can be aggregated without errors (Benjamin et al, 2014). It is also possible to adjust the sampling rate after data have been collected, during data processing.…”

“…Reading a story about the procedures ahead of time, either at home or at the research site, may decrease anxiety. For example, an illustrated booklet read before the task could inform children that it is now time to watch a short movie, that they will go into a room that is a little bit dark, that they can sit quietly and watch and listen, and that they will get a sticker (Benjamin et al, 2014;Kover, 2012).…”

Visual Exploration of Dynamic or Static Joint Attention Bids in Children With Autism Syndrome Disorder

“…There are different categorical states: “partner-oriented,” “object-oriented,” “introspective,” “initiating joint attention,” and “responding joint attention.” Regarding the joint attention response, Jording et al (2018) explain that, in literature, “the invitation of another person thereby establishing a rudimentary form of joint attention appears to be deeply rooted in human behavior.” This can be observed in a naturalistic interaction implying that “B chooses an object and A follows B's gaze toward the object,” which leads us to the conclusion that the same process is operationalized in joint attention tasks. Therefore, most eye-tracking studies of joint attention in literature have been limited to an analysis based on tracking the gaze line, with or without head orientation (Riby and Doherty, 2009; Bedford et al, 2012; Falck-Ytter et al, 2012, 2015; Billeci et al, 2016), or on visual tracking of pointing (Falck-Ytter et al, 2012; Benjamin et al, 2014; Franchini et al, 2017). In addition, the AOI used are frequently the face and/or the referent, also called the “target” (Swanson et al, 2013; Franchini et al, 2017), as well as the hand that is pointing at the target (Benjamin et al, 2014).…”

“…Therefore, most eye-tracking studies of joint attention in literature have been limited to an analysis based on tracking the gaze line, with or without head orientation (Riby and Doherty, 2009; Bedford et al, 2012; Falck-Ytter et al, 2012, 2015; Billeci et al, 2016), or on visual tracking of pointing (Falck-Ytter et al, 2012; Benjamin et al, 2014; Franchini et al, 2017). In addition, the AOI used are frequently the face and/or the referent, also called the “target” (Swanson et al, 2013; Franchini et al, 2017), as well as the hand that is pointing at the target (Benjamin et al, 2014).…”