Modeling risk perception using independent and social learning: application to individuals with autism spectrum disorder

No differences between autistic and non-autistic adults in social influence on risky decision-making

“…Thus, it is highly plausible that the removal of overtly social cues in our paradigm has led to comparable performance between the autistic and non-autistic groups. These findings add to existing literature demonstrating no differences in social influence when information is presented conceptually (Lazzaro et al, 2019;Wadhera & Kakkar, 2020). This growing body of evidence is important for understanding whether social influence per se is typical in ASD but can appear atypical if the social information is presented via overtly social cues.…”

“…Importantly, some of these presentations involve the use of a visual social stimulus whereas others do not. It is notable that the two aforementioned studies reporting a difference in social influence between autistic and non-autistic groups involved overt social cues as their form of social influence (Izuma et al, 2011;Large et al, 2019), whereas the latter two studies finding no difference between autistic and non-autistic groups did not present social information as overt social cues (Lazzaro et al, 2019;Wadhera & Kakkar, 2020). The former paradigms contain a potentially important confound.…”

“…A number of studies, however, have found no difference between autistic individuals and non-autistic individuals. For example, Lazzaro et al (2019) reported that autistic adults were just as susceptible to social influence as non-autistic adults during a memory test, and Wadhera and Kakkar (2020) found susceptibility to social influence in safety judgements for both autistic and non-autistic adults.…”

“…Another difference between tasks which may account for conflicting findings in the ASD social influence literature is the strength of the social influence presented. Due to the use of a variety of social influence formats (e.g., Izuma et al, 2011;Large et al, 2019;Lazzaro et al, 2019;Wadhera & Kakkar, 2020), it is unclear whether the strength of social information is comparable across studies. This variation may be responsible for the disparity in the literature; specifically, studies reporting successful social influence in the autistic population may have exerted a greater strength of influence compared to studies in which an effect of social influence is not found.…”

Comparison of Analog Performance of AlN/β-Ga2O3 HEMT by Variation in Dielectric Materials

“…The material beta-phase gallium oxide (β-Ga 0 O 2 ) has grabbed much preference of the researchers in different applications such as photodetectors, Schottky barrier diodes, and power devices due to wide bandgap (4.7 eV), more breakdown strength (8 78 ), better electron mobility (180 0 / ), higher saturation velocity (∼2 × 10 7 cm/s ) and ability to be fabricated as a single-crystal substrate [1][2][3][4]. Moreover, a higher Figure-of-Merit (FOM) for (β-Ga 0 O 2 ) makes it preferable to other materials like Silicon Carbide (SiC) or Gallium Nitride (GaN).…”