MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1963964586 · doi:10.1037/a0029984

The level and nature of autistic intelligence III: Inspection time.

2012· article· en· W1963964586 on OpenAlexafffund
Élise B. Barbeau, Isabelle Soulières, Michelle Dawson, Thomas A. Zeffiro, Laurent Mottron

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Abnormal Psychology · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicAutism Spectrum Disorder Research
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsAutismPsychologyRaven's Progressive MatricesIntelligence quotientWechsler Adult Intelligence ScaleCognitionDevelopmental psychologyAsperger syndromeMatching (statistics)Autism spectrum disorderInspection timeAudiologyCognitive psychologyPsychiatryStatisticsMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Across the autism spectrum, level of intelligence is highly dependent on the psychometric instrument used for assessment, and there are conflicting views concerning which measures best estimate autistic cognitive abilities. Inspection time is a processing speed measure associated with general intelligence in typical individuals. We therefore investigated autism spectrum performance on inspection time in relation to two different general intelligence tests. Autism spectrum individuals were divided into autistic and Asperger subgroups according to speech development history. Compared to a typical control group, mean inspection time for the autistic subgroup but not the Asperger subgroup was significantly shorter (by 31%). However, the shorter mean autistic inspection time was evident only when groups were matched on Wechsler IQ and disappeared when they were matched using Raven's Progressive Matrices. When autism spectrum abilities are compared to typical abilities, results may be influenced by speech development history as well as by the instrument used for intelligence matching.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.051
GPT teacher head0.374
Teacher spread0.323 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations97
Published2012
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Abnormal PsychologySame topicAutism Spectrum Disorder ResearchFrench-language works237,207