2014
DOI: 10.1080/13546805.2014.943365
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

That looks familiar: attention allocation to familiar and unfamiliar faces in children with autism spectrum disorder

Abstract: Use policyThe full-text may be used and/or reproduced, and given to third parties in any format or medium, without prior permission or charge, for personal research or study, educational, or not-for-prot purposes provided that:• a full bibliographic reference is made to the original source • a link is made to the metadata record in DRO • the full-text is not changed in any way The full-text must not be sold in any format or medium without the formal permission of the copyright holders.Please consult the full D… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

2
12
0

Year Published

2015
2015
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
9

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 14 publications
(14 citation statements)
references
References 45 publications
2
12
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Thus, it is unlikely that familiarization alone could account for the clear differences observed between groups. It is possible that inclusion of familiar social images (e.g., faces of family members) may have elicited enhanced social attention in participants with ASD, although this has not been observed in previous studies (Dalton et al, 2005; Sterling et al, 2008; Gillespie-Smith et al, 2014). Likewise, it is important to note that our HAI stimuli were also not individualized to be the most salient or familiar object for each ASD participant in relation to his or her own idiosyncratic circumscribed interest.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 76%
“…Thus, it is unlikely that familiarization alone could account for the clear differences observed between groups. It is possible that inclusion of familiar social images (e.g., faces of family members) may have elicited enhanced social attention in participants with ASD, although this has not been observed in previous studies (Dalton et al, 2005; Sterling et al, 2008; Gillespie-Smith et al, 2014). Likewise, it is important to note that our HAI stimuli were also not individualized to be the most salient or familiar object for each ASD participant in relation to his or her own idiosyncratic circumscribed interest.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 76%
“…Although participants gained some familiarity with test faces due to their repeated presentation within the testing session, the identities were unknown to them at the outset of the study. This is important to note, as past work (albeit with children) suggests that severity of social autistic traits is related to atypical deployment of social attention when viewing unfamiliar (but not familiar) faces [Gillespie‐Smith, Doherty‐Sneddon, Hancock, & Riby, ]. This may contribute to impaired learning of facial identity, which has been described in adults with ASD [e.g., Ipser, Ring, Murphy, Gaigg, & Cook, ].…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 91%
“…However when scenes are simpler, more cartoon like or more relevant to the child with ASD no difference is observed (van der Geest, Kemner, Camferrman, Verbaten and van Engeland, 2002;Boraston and Blakemore, 2007;Gillespie-Smith, Riby, Hancock and Doherty-Sneddon, 2014). Additionally when considering simple attention towards either a person or object Fletcher-Watson, Leekam, Benson, Frank and Findlay (2009) found no difference between individuals with ASD and a TD comparison group.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%