Cargando…

Susceptibility to Ebbinghaus and Müller-Lyer illusions in autistic children: a comparison of three different methods

BACKGROUND: Studies reporting altered susceptibility to visual illusions in autistic individuals compared to that typically developing individuals have been taken to reflect differences in perception (e.g. reduced global processing), but could instead reflect differences in higher-level decision-mak...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Manning, Catherine, Morgan, Michael J., Allen, Craig T. W., Pellicano, Elizabeth
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2017
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5364638/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28344759
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13229-017-0127-y
_version_ 1782517363425411072
author Manning, Catherine
Morgan, Michael J.
Allen, Craig T. W.
Pellicano, Elizabeth
author_facet Manning, Catherine
Morgan, Michael J.
Allen, Craig T. W.
Pellicano, Elizabeth
author_sort Manning, Catherine
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Studies reporting altered susceptibility to visual illusions in autistic individuals compared to that typically developing individuals have been taken to reflect differences in perception (e.g. reduced global processing), but could instead reflect differences in higher-level decision-making strategies. METHODS: We measured susceptibility to two contextual illusions (Ebbinghaus, Müller-Lyer) in autistic children aged 6–14 years and typically developing children matched in age and non-verbal ability using three methods. In experiment 1, we used a new two-alternative-forced-choice method with a roving pedestal designed to minimise cognitive biases. Here, children judged which of two comparison stimuli was most similar in size to a reference stimulus. In experiments 2 and 3, we used methods previously used with autistic populations. In experiment 2, children judged whether stimuli were the ‘same’ or ‘different’, and in experiment 3, we used a method-of-adjustment task. RESULTS: Across all tasks, autistic children were equally susceptible to the Ebbinghaus illusion as typically developing children. Autistic children showed a heightened susceptibility to the Müller-Lyer illusion, but only in the method-of-adjustment task. This result may reflect differences in decisional criteria. CONCLUSIONS: Our results are inconsistent with theories proposing reduced contextual integration in autism and suggest that previous reports of altered susceptibility to illusions may arise from differences in decision-making, rather than differences in perception per se. Our findings help to elucidate the underlying reasons for atypical responses to perceptual illusions in autism and call for the use of methods that reduce cognitive bias when measuring illusion susceptibility. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s13229-017-0127-y) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5364638
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2017
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-53646382017-03-24 Susceptibility to Ebbinghaus and Müller-Lyer illusions in autistic children: a comparison of three different methods Manning, Catherine Morgan, Michael J. Allen, Craig T. W. Pellicano, Elizabeth Mol Autism Research BACKGROUND: Studies reporting altered susceptibility to visual illusions in autistic individuals compared to that typically developing individuals have been taken to reflect differences in perception (e.g. reduced global processing), but could instead reflect differences in higher-level decision-making strategies. METHODS: We measured susceptibility to two contextual illusions (Ebbinghaus, Müller-Lyer) in autistic children aged 6–14 years and typically developing children matched in age and non-verbal ability using three methods. In experiment 1, we used a new two-alternative-forced-choice method with a roving pedestal designed to minimise cognitive biases. Here, children judged which of two comparison stimuli was most similar in size to a reference stimulus. In experiments 2 and 3, we used methods previously used with autistic populations. In experiment 2, children judged whether stimuli were the ‘same’ or ‘different’, and in experiment 3, we used a method-of-adjustment task. RESULTS: Across all tasks, autistic children were equally susceptible to the Ebbinghaus illusion as typically developing children. Autistic children showed a heightened susceptibility to the Müller-Lyer illusion, but only in the method-of-adjustment task. This result may reflect differences in decisional criteria. CONCLUSIONS: Our results are inconsistent with theories proposing reduced contextual integration in autism and suggest that previous reports of altered susceptibility to illusions may arise from differences in decision-making, rather than differences in perception per se. Our findings help to elucidate the underlying reasons for atypical responses to perceptual illusions in autism and call for the use of methods that reduce cognitive bias when measuring illusion susceptibility. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s13229-017-0127-y) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. BioMed Central 2017-03-23 /pmc/articles/PMC5364638/ /pubmed/28344759 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13229-017-0127-y Text en © The Author(s). 2017 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
spellingShingle Research
Manning, Catherine
Morgan, Michael J.
Allen, Craig T. W.
Pellicano, Elizabeth
Susceptibility to Ebbinghaus and Müller-Lyer illusions in autistic children: a comparison of three different methods
title Susceptibility to Ebbinghaus and Müller-Lyer illusions in autistic children: a comparison of three different methods
title_full Susceptibility to Ebbinghaus and Müller-Lyer illusions in autistic children: a comparison of three different methods
title_fullStr Susceptibility to Ebbinghaus and Müller-Lyer illusions in autistic children: a comparison of three different methods
title_full_unstemmed Susceptibility to Ebbinghaus and Müller-Lyer illusions in autistic children: a comparison of three different methods
title_short Susceptibility to Ebbinghaus and Müller-Lyer illusions in autistic children: a comparison of three different methods
title_sort susceptibility to ebbinghaus and müller-lyer illusions in autistic children: a comparison of three different methods
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5364638/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28344759
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13229-017-0127-y
work_keys_str_mv AT manningcatherine susceptibilitytoebbinghausandmullerlyerillusionsinautisticchildrenacomparisonofthreedifferentmethods
AT morganmichaelj susceptibilitytoebbinghausandmullerlyerillusionsinautisticchildrenacomparisonofthreedifferentmethods
AT allencraigtw susceptibilitytoebbinghausandmullerlyerillusionsinautisticchildrenacomparisonofthreedifferentmethods
AT pellicanoelizabeth susceptibilitytoebbinghausandmullerlyerillusionsinautisticchildrenacomparisonofthreedifferentmethods