Hyperfocus or flow? Attentional strengths in autism spectrum disorder
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The comorbidity of autism spectrum disorder (ASD) and attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) diagnoses is well established. An ASD diagnosis is associated with elevated ADHD traits and symptoms, as well as strengths in attention. In the ASD literature, attentional strengths have been described as maladaptive (e.g., hyperfocus), in contrast with positive portrayals in the typically developing population (e.g., flow). The objective of this study was to (1) compare profiles of attentional strengths and weaknesses in ASD and ADHD and (2) determine whether attentional strengths in ASD are associated with impairment, poorer cognitive flexibility, and perseveration/perfectionism. In a community sample of 5,744 children and youth, 131 children were reported as having a diagnosis of ASD (mean age 10.3 years) and 346 children were reported as having a diagnosis of ADHD (mean age 10.7 years). We used the Strengths and Weaknesses of Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity-symptoms and Normal-behaviors (SWAN) rating scale to calculate attentional and hyperactive/impulse control strength and weakness counts and scores. The Autism-Spectrum Quotient Switching factor served as a measure of cognitive flexibility. Impairment was assessed with the Columbia Impairment Scale. We used the symmetry/ordering factor on the Toronto Obsessive-Compulsive Scale as a measure of perseveration/perfectionism. No differences were found between the ADHD and ASD groups in SWAN weakness scores, symptoms, or hyperactive/impulse control strengths; however, autistic children had higher rates of attentional strengths [odds ratio: 5.7, 95% CI (2.8, 11.6), p < 0.0001]. Post-hoc pairwise testing identified four attentional strengths with significantly higher rates in ASD than in ADHD. Attentional strength scores were not associated with impairment or poor cognitive flexibility, but predicted levels of perseveration/perfectionism. The effect of attentional strengths on impairment and cognitive flexibility did not differ between autistic and Control children, but the higher perseveration/perfectionism scores seen in ASD were not found in Control children. ASD is associated with a pattern of attentional strengths that is not found in ADHD Characterizing the full range of attentional abilities in autistic children may explain variability in outcomes such as quality-of-life indicators and identify protective factors, providing targets for strength-based behavioral interventions. The clinical and etiological implications of the subgroup of autistic children with attentional strengths require further investigation.
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 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".