Out of mind,out of sight? Investigating abnormal face scanning in autism spectrum disorder using gaze‐contingent paradigm

Diminished social motivation is hypothesized to explain abnormal face scanning pattern in individuals with autism spectrum disorder (ASD), especially reduced eye‐looking time in ASDs than typically developing (TD) people. Here, we tested an alternative explanation that children with ASD may use a compensatory strategy to avoid direct eye contact by processing the eyes through peripheral vision. We compared the face scanning patterns of children with and without ASD in two conditions: in the clear condition, the face was completely visible; in the blur condition, by using the gaze‐contingent paradigm, the whole face was blurred except for a small region being fixated at, thus children could not rely on the peripheral information to process the eyes. We found that children with ASD fixated less on the eyes than TD children in both conditions. Temporal‐course analyses further revealed the possible motivation‐based guidance of attention to process the eyes in the TD group but not in the ASD group. Additionally, we found that children with ASD scanned faces more randomly and less strategically than TD children. These results have ruled out the alternative hypothesis that the abnormal face scanning pattern in ASDs was due to their compensatory strategy to process eyes through peripheral vision, furthering our understanding of the mechanisms underlying their abnormal face scanning.     

Does culture shape face perception in autism? Cross‐cultural evidence of the own‐race advantage from the UK and Japan

Autism spectrum disorders (ASD) are associated with face perception atypicalities, and atypical experience with faces has been proposed as an underlying explanation. Studying the own‐race advantage (ORA) for face recognition can reveal the effect of experience on face perception in ASD, although the small number of studies in the area present mixed findings. This study probed the ORA in ASD by comparing two cultural groups simultaneously for the first time. Children with ASD in the UK (N = 16) and Japan (N = 26) were compared with age‐ and ability‐matched typically developing (TD) children in the UK (N = 16) and Japan (N = 26). Participants completed a two‐alternative forced‐choice task, whereby they had to recognize a just seen face from a foil which was manipulated in one of four ways (IC: identity change; EE: easy eyes; HE: hard eyes; HM: hard mouth). Face stimuli were Asian and Caucasian, and thus the same stimuli were own and other race depending on the cultural group. The ASD groups in the UK and Japan did not show impaired face recognition abilities, or impairments with recognizing faces depending on manipulations to the eye region, and importantly they showed an ORA. There was considerable heterogeneity in the presence of the ORA in ASD and TD and also across cultures. Children in Japan had higher accuracy than children in the UK, and TD children in Japan did not show an ORA. This cross‐cultural study challenges the view that atypical experiences with faces lead to a reduced/absent ORA in ASD.     

When in doubt,it’s not out: Match format is associated with differences in elite-level cricket umpires’ leg-before-wicket decisions

ObjectivesContextual factors can influence the way sports officials apply unambiguous rules. The aim of this study was to better understand the leg-before-wicket (LBW) decision-making behaviour of elite cricket umpires and determine whether their behaviour changes according to the format of the game in which they are adjudicating.MethodsLBW decisions (n = 5578) from actual elite level cricket matches in Australia between 2009 and 2016 were analysed using a signal detection paradigm. Umpire sensitivity (A) and response bias (B) were compared to chance performance in three formats of the game: Four-day, One-day, and T20. Mixed effects models assessed sensitivity and response bias differences between match types.ResultsUmpires were able to differentiate between “out” and “not out” appeals to a high standard but were conservative and had a bias to respond “not out” in all formats of the game. Umpires were less accurate in the shorter formats of the game, particularly T20 cricket and were also significantly more conservative in T20 compared to Four-day Matches.ConclusionsCricket umpires are conservative and are highly accurate LBW decision makers. However, differences in their judgments were associated with different match formats. The unique task goals and contextual pressures afforded by the shorter formats of the game, particularly T20, may account for the observed performance differences we see here.