Eye gaze differences in school scenes between preschool children and adolescents with high-functioning autism spectrum disorder and those with typical development

Abstract

Background: Children with autism spectrum disorder (ASD) may experience difficulty adapting to daily life in a preschool or school setting and are likely to develop psychosomatic symptoms. For a better understanding of the difficulties experienced daily by preschool children and adolescents with ASD, this study investigated differences in eye gaze behavior in the classroom environment between children with ASD and those with typical development (TD).Methods: The study evaluated 30 children with ASD and 49 children with TD. Participants were presented with images of a human face in a classroom setting. While they gazed at specific regions of visual stimuli, eye tracking was used with an iView X system to evaluate and compare the duration of gaze time between the two groups.Results: Compared with preschool children with TD, preschool children with ASD spent less time gazing at the eyes of the human face and the object to which the teacher pointed in the classroom image. Preschool children with TD, who had no classroom experience, tended to see the object to which the teacher pointed in the classroom image.Conclusion: Children with ASD did not look at the human eyes in the facial image or the object pointed to in the classroom image, which may indicate their inability to analyze situations, understand instruction in a classroom, or act appropriately in a group. It is suggested that this gaze behavior of children with ASD causes social maladaptation and psychosomatic symptoms. A therapeutic approach that focuses on joint attention is desirable for improving the ability of children with ASD to adapt to the social environment.

Autism and intersectionality: Considerations for school‐based practitioners

“…Diagnostic and screening instruments have often not been well studied in other cultures and, when they have, the results have been mixed (see Freeth et al, 2014; Guo et al, 2019; Oien et al, 2017; Volkmar et al, 2021). Similar issues arise with implementation of culturally sensitive intervention programs (Barraza, 2020; Kuhn et al, 2020; Sandoval, 2021; REF; Ishizaki et al, 2021).…”