Face Perception in School-Aged Children with Autism: A Look at Visual Processing Strategies
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction: Atypical processing of face information has been associated with the social differences that characterize autism. One prominent hypothesis suggests that the unique, detail-oriented visual processing style used by autistic individuals may negatively affect their ability to identify faces when a global analysis is optimal, such as when faces are presented from different viewpoints. Assessing face identification abilities across ages and viewpoint is therefore important in understanding how and when differences in such abilities emerge between autism and typical development. The objective of the present study is to assess the face identity discrimination abilities of school-aged participants with and without autism in a view specific manner, where access to local face attributes is available (same view) or minimized (different views). Methods: Ten autistic and ten typically-developing school aged children matched for full-scale IQ and age (8 to 12 years) performed a two-alternative temporal forced choice, match to sample face identity discrimination task using synthetic, computer-generated face images (Wilson et al., 2002). Performance was measured using face identity discrimination thresholds for conditions where the target and choice faces were presented in the same view (front-front view) and in different views (front-side view). Results: Mean identity discrimination thresholds for the autistic group were higher for the viewpoint change condition (front-side view) when compared to the typically-developing group, which agrees with the findings from studies conducted in adults and adolescents with autism. No between-group differences were found for the same view condition. Conclusions: A decrease in performance for the viewpoint change condition, as indicated by higher mean identity discrimination thresholds, suggests that facial identity discrimination in school-aged children with autism may be more difficult when (i) access to local cues, such as individual facial features, is minimized, and/or (ii) increased dependence on a global, integrative analysis is introduced to the face task. Meeting abstract presented at VSS 2012
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".