MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4411207526 · doi:10.1007/s10803-025-06891-z

Dyadic Synchrony and Responsiveness Within the Context of Elevated Autism Likelihood: Applying Time-Varying Effect Models

2025· article· en· W4411207526 on OpenAlexaff
Ashleigh Kellerman, Amy Janis, Antonia M. H. Piergies, Sarah S. Dermody, Daniel S. Messinger, Meghan Miller, A. J. Schwichtenberg

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Autism and Developmental Disorders · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicAutism Spectrum Disorder Research
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
FundersEunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human DevelopmentNational Institute of Child Health and Human DevelopmentNational Institute of Mental HealthPurdue University
KeywordsAutismPsychologyContext (archaeology)Developmental psychologyPublic healthDevelopmental disorderCognitive psychologyMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The ability to engage in synchronous interactions develops in the first year, as infants learn to sequentially regulate prosocial behaviors. Difficulty developing competence in these early social building blocks is linked to later developmental concerns, including autism spectrum disorder (ASD). Currently, metrics for quantifying social competence rely primarily on mean-level indices; however, interactions are dynamic. The present study modeled change in the odds of dyadic synchrony (DS), maternal responsiveness (MR), and infant responsiveness (IR) over time to explore if temporal patterns can inform developmental monitoring. Dyads were recruited from families with at least one older child with ASD (elevated ASD likelihood, n = 95) or families with no history of ASD (typical ASD likelihood, n = 72). Theory-driven indices of dyadic synchrony and responsiveness were derived from micro-analytically coded gaze, positive affect, and vocalizations. A series of logistic time-varying effect models (TVEMs) were conducted to compare temporal changes in synchrony and responsiveness across the infant/toddler groupings of (1) elevated- vs typical-ASD likelihood and (2) typical (TYP), ASD, or other developmental concerns (Non-ASD DC). DS, IR, and MR patterns were temporally stable but lower for the elevated ASD likelihood group. Temporal patterns of DS, IR, and MR were more variable for the ASD and Non-ASD DC groups. TVEMs captured meaningful dyadic information and could be used in future studies to inform prospective monitoring and parent-mediated intervention approaches.

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 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 score0.328
Threshold uncertainty score0.781

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.262
Teacher spread0.251 · 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.

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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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