Sensory Perceptual Issues in Autism and Asperger Syndrome Different Sensory Experiences Different Perceptual Worlds
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Bogdashina presents a very convincing argument that many of the behavioral patterns seen in people with Autism and Asperger Syndrome have a different sensory perceptual experience than people without these conditions. The experiences may involve hyper- or hyposensitivity, fluctuation between different “volumes” of perception or difficulty interpreting a sense. Any, and frequently several, sensory modalities are affected in an individual. The book starts with many clinical examples of unusual sensory perceptual experiences of people with these conditions. The book then provides one approach to assess sensory integration problems and establish interventions to eliminate problems and enhance the individuals’ strengths. In my clinical experience, understanding the child’s sensory experience and directing interventions to assist the child become more comfortable in his or her world, is a major part of treatment. The majority of the book describes the issues on “Possible Sensory Experiences in Autism”, “Perceptual Styles”, “Cognitive Styles” and “Other Sensory Conditions”. There is only limited information about interventions. It would have been preferable to have a larger chapter to describe interventions that follow post identification of child’s difficulties with sensory experiences. The key point that the interventions must be individualized for the specific child could have been better emphasized. The information from the chapters devoted to “Treatment” and “Recommendations” would then balance more convincingly. This book is easily understood by both parents and professionals. It is well referenced. The Table of Contents and the Subject and Author Indexes are easy to use. This book may be a good place to start learning about the altered sensory experience of people with Autism or Asperger Syndrome.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".