Neurotypical individuals fail to understand action vitality form in children with autism spectrum disorder.
Neurotypical individuals fail to understand action vitality form in children with autism spectrum disorder.
复制标题
DOI：
10.1073/pnas.2011311117
复制
发表时间：
2020-11-03
影响因子：
11.1
通讯作者：
Sinigaglia C
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Casartelli L;Federici A;Fumagalli L;Cesareo A;Nicoli M;Ronconi L;Vitale A;Molteni M;Rizzolatti G;Sinigaglia C
动作活力形式是日常生活中非常普遍的方面，被广泛认为是基本社会互动的关键。先前的证据表明，自闭症儿童表达他们自己的活力形式的方式与TD儿童的运动方式不同。在这里，我们证明，当观察ASD儿童温和或粗鲁的行为时，这种运动差异阻止了神经典型成年人识别活力形式。尽管自闭症儿童区分了这些活力形式，但神经典型的成年人在识别它们方面明显不准确。这表明，自闭症患者在社交方面的困难不应完全归因于他们缺乏对他人的理解，正如标准假设的那样。神经典型性个体未能理解它们也起到了关键作用。被诊断为自闭症谱系障碍(ASD)的人的任何社交缺陷都可以用这些人在各种认知功能上的假定障碍来标准地解释。然而，最近强调了社交互动的双向方法的必要性。这种方法突出了ASD和神经典型个体在基本行为方式上的差异，这将阻止他们相互理解。在这里，我们通过关注反映代理的情绪和情感状态的基本动作特征来追求这一方法。这些是斯特恩命名为“活力形式”的动作特征，并被广泛认为证实了核心的社会互动[D.N.斯特恩，婴儿的人际世界(1985)；D.N.斯特恩，探索心理学、艺术、心理治疗和发展中的动态体验的活力形式(2010)]。之前我们已经证明，尽管自闭症和典型发育障碍(TD)儿童在执行动作时都会区分活力形式，但ASD儿童表达活力的方式与TD儿童的运动方式不同。为了评估这种运动差异是否可能对活力形式识别产生影响，我们要求神经典型参与者识别ASD或TD儿童执行的不同类型动作的活力形式。我们发现，参与者在识别自闭症儿童的活力形式时表现出显著的不准确。有趣的是，他们的表现并没有从信息反馈中受益。这表明，人们的行为对理解他人和被他人理解很重要。由于活力形式渗透到日常生活的方方面面，我们的发现有望为更深入地理解自闭症和神经典型个体在相互作用中的双向困难打开道路。
Action vitality forms are highly pervasive aspects of daily life and have been widely assumed to be critical for basic social interactions. Previous evidence indicates that ASD children express their own vitality forms in a way that is motorically dissimilar to TD children. Here we demonstrate that this motor dissimilarity prevents neurotypical adults from recognizing vitality forms, when observing ASD children acting gently or rudely. Although ASD children differentiate these vitality forms, neurotypical adults were remarkably inaccurate in identifying them. This indicates that difficulty in social interaction for ASD individuals should not be entirely ascribed to their lack of understanding others, as standardly assumed. The failure of neurotypical individuals to understand them plays a critical role too. Any defects of sociality in individuals diagnosed with autism spectrum disorder (ASD) are standardly explained in terms of those individuals’ putative impairments in a variety of cognitive functions. Recently, however, the need for a bidirectional approach to social interaction has been emphasized. Such an approach highlights differences in basic ways of acting between ASD and neurotypical individuals which would prevent them from understanding each other. Here we pursue this approach by focusing on basic action features reflecting the agent’s mood and affective states. These are action features Stern named “vitality forms,” and which are widely assumed to substantiate core social interactions [D. N. Stern, The Interpersonal World of the Infant (1985); D. N. Stern, Forms of Vitality Exploring Dynamic Experience in Psychology, Arts, Psychotherapy, and Development (2010)]. Previously we demonstrated that, although ASD and typically developing (TD) children alike differentiate vitality forms when performing actions, ASD children express them in a way that is motorically dissimilar to TD children. To assess whether this motor dissimilarity may have consequences for vitality form recognition, we asked neurotypical participants to identify the vitality form of different types of action performed by ASD or TD children. We found that participants exhibited remarkable inaccuracy in identifying ASD children’s vitality forms. Interestingly, their performance did not benefit from information feedback. This indicates that how people act matters for understanding others and for being understood by them. Because vitality forms pervade every aspect of daily life, our findings promise to open the way to a deeper comprehension of the bidirectional difficulties for both ASD and neurotypical individuals in interacting with one another.
登录
查看更多内容
影响因子：
3.8
作者：
Di Cesare G;Sparaci L;Pelosi A;Mazzone L;Giovagnoli G;Menghini D;Ruffaldi E;Vicari S
通讯作者：
Vicari S
DOI：
10.1002/aur.1508
发表时间：
2016-02
期刊：
Autism research : official journal of the International Society for Autism Research
影响因子：
--
作者：
Brewer R;Biotti F;Catmur C;Press C;Happé F;Cook R;Bird G
通讯作者：
Bird G
影响因子：
4.6
作者：
De Marco, Doriana;Scalona, Emilia;Fabbri-Destro, Maddalena
通讯作者：
Fabbri-Destro, Maddalena
DOI：
10.1098/rspb.2019.1319
发表时间：
2019-07-31
影响因子：
4.7
作者：
Amoruso, Lucia;Narzisi, Antonio;Urgesi, Cosimo
通讯作者：
Urgesi, Cosimo
影响因子：
4.6
作者：
Casartelli L;Cesareo A;Biffi E;Campione GC;Villa L;Molteni M;Sinigaglia C
通讯作者：
Sinigaglia C