MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3213944115 · doi:10.1007/s10803-021-05352-7

Distinct Biological Motion Perception in Autism Spectrum Disorder: A Meta-Analysis

2021· review· en· W3213944115 on OpenAlexaff
Victoria Foglia, Hasan Siddiqui, Zainab Khan, Stephanie Liang, M. D. Rutherford

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Autism and Developmental Disorders · 2021
Typereview
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicAutism Spectrum Disorder Research
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAutismAutism spectrum disorderPsychologyPerceptionMeta-analysisMotion (physics)Public healthDevelopmental disorderDevelopmental psychologyCognitive psychologyClinical psychologyNeuroscienceMedicinePhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

If neurotypical people rely on specialized perceptual mechanisms when perceiving biological motion, then one would not expect an association between task performance and IQ. However, if those with ASD recruit higher order cognitive skills when solving biological motion tasks, performance may be predicted by IQ. In a meta-analysis that included 19 articles, we found an association between biological motion perception and IQ among observers with ASD but no significant relationship among typical observers. If the task required emotion perception, then there was an even stronger association with IQ in the ASD group.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.964
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0050.003
Bibliometrics0.0030.004
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.108
GPT teacher head0.352
Teacher spread0.244 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designOther design
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations16
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Autism and Developmental DisordersSame topicAutism Spectrum Disorder ResearchFrench-language works237,207