• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

患有自闭症谱系障碍的人做决策更具一致性。

People With Autism Spectrum Conditions Make More Consistent Decisions.

作者信息

Farmer George D, Baron-Cohen Simon, Skylark William J

机构信息

Department of Psychology, University of Cambridge.

出版信息

Psychol Sci. 2017 Aug;28(8):1067-1076. doi: 10.1177/0956797617694867. Epub 2017 Jun 21.

DOI:10.1177/0956797617694867
PMID:28635378
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC5548251/
Abstract

People with autism spectrum conditions (ASC) show reduced sensitivity to contextual stimuli in many perceptual and cognitive tasks. We investigated whether this also applies to decision making by examining adult participants' choices between pairs of consumer products that were presented with a third, less desirable "decoy" option. Participants' preferences between the items in a given pair frequently switched when the third item in the set was changed, but this tendency was reduced among individuals with ASC, which indicated that their choices were more consistent and conventionally rational than those of control participants. A comparison of people who were drawn from the general population and who varied in their levels of autistic traits revealed a weaker version of the same effect. The reduced context sensitivity was not due to differences in noisy responding, and although the ASC group took longer to make their decisions, this did not account for the enhanced consistency of their choices. The results extend the characterization of autistic cognition as relatively context insensitive to a new domain, and have practical implications for socioeconomic behavior.

摘要

患有自闭症谱系障碍(ASC)的人在许多感知和认知任务中对情境刺激的敏感度较低。我们通过研究成年参与者在成对的消费产品之间的选择来调查这是否也适用于决策,这些产品还会呈现出第三个不太吸引人的“诱饵”选项。当集合中的第三个项目发生变化时,参与者在给定对中的项目之间的偏好经常会改变,但这种倾向在患有ASC的个体中有所降低,这表明他们的选择比对照组参与者更一致且更符合传统理性。对来自普通人群且自闭症特征水平不同的人进行比较,发现了相同效应的较弱版本。情境敏感度降低并非由于嘈杂反应的差异,并且尽管ASC组做出决策花费的时间更长,但这并不能解释他们选择的一致性增强。这些结果将自闭症认知相对情境不敏感的特征扩展到了一个新领域,并对社会经济行为具有实际意义。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/8d8b/5549817/e4dbca284236/10.1177_0956797617694867-fig2.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/8d8b/5549817/a985900dbefd/10.1177_0956797617694867-fig1.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/8d8b/5549817/e4dbca284236/10.1177_0956797617694867-fig2.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/8d8b/5549817/a985900dbefd/10.1177_0956797617694867-fig1.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/8d8b/5549817/e4dbca284236/10.1177_0956797617694867-fig2.jpg

相似文献

1
People With Autism Spectrum Conditions Make More Consistent Decisions.患有自闭症谱系障碍的人做决策更具一致性。
Psychol Sci. 2017 Aug;28(8):1067-1076. doi: 10.1177/0956797617694867. Epub 2017 Jun 21.
2
Autistic Traits in the Neurotypical Population do not Predict Increased Response Conservativeness in Perceptual Decision Making.神经典型人群中的自闭症特征并不能预测感知决策中反应保守性的增加。
Perception. 2018 Oct-Nov;47(10-11):1081-1096. doi: 10.1177/0301006618802689. Epub 2018 Oct 4.
3
Impact of past experiences on decision-making in autism spectrum disorder.过去的经验对自闭症谱系障碍决策的影响。
Eur Arch Psychiatry Clin Neurosci. 2020 Dec;270(8):1063-1071. doi: 10.1007/s00406-019-01071-4. Epub 2019 Sep 26.
4
Restricted Interests and Autism: Further Assessment of Preferences for a Variety of Leisure Items.受限兴趣与自闭症:对多种休闲物品偏好的进一步评估
Behav Modif. 2018 Jan;42(1):108-125. doi: 10.1177/0145445516686301. Epub 2017 Jan 10.
5
Jumping to conclusions in autism: integration of contextual information and confidence in decision-making processes.自闭症患者的仓促结论:决策过程中对上下文信息的整合与自信。
Eur Child Adolesc Psychiatry. 2020 Jul;29(7):959-968. doi: 10.1007/s00787-019-01409-2. Epub 2019 Sep 25.
6
Decision-making skills in ASD: performance on the Iowa Gambling Task.自闭症谱系障碍中的决策技能:爱荷华赌博任务表现
Autism Res. 2015 Feb;8(1):105-14. doi: 10.1002/aur.1429. Epub 2014 Nov 4.
7
STORMy Interactions: Gaze and the Modulation of Mimicry in Adults on the Autism Spectrum.暴风雨般的互动:自闭症谱系障碍成年人的注视与模仿调节
Psychon Bull Rev. 2017 Apr;24(2):529-535. doi: 10.3758/s13423-016-1136-0.
8
Should I trust you? Autistic traits predict reduced appearance-based trust decisions.我应该相信你吗?自闭症特质预测信任决策时会较少基于外貌。
Br J Psychol. 2019 Nov;110(4):617-634. doi: 10.1111/bjop.12357. Epub 2018 Nov 13.
9
Adapted to explore: reinforcement learning in Autistic Spectrum Conditions.探索适应性:自闭症谱系障碍中的强化学习。
Brain Cogn. 2010 Mar;72(2):317-24. doi: 10.1016/j.bandc.2009.10.005. Epub 2009 Nov 12.
10
Investigating the structure of the autism-spectrum quotient using Mokken scaling.使用莫肯量表法研究自闭症谱系商数的结构。
Psychol Assess. 2015 Jun;27(2):596-604. doi: 10.1037/pas0000058. Epub 2015 Feb 9.

引用本文的文献

1
Intolerance of Uncertainty Mediates the Relationship Between Autistic Traits and a Propensity for Deliberation.不确定性不耐受介导了自闭症特质与审慎倾向之间的关系。
J Autism Dev Disord. 2025 Sep 3. doi: 10.1007/s10803-025-06987-6.
2
The influence of body posture on facial expression perception in Autism.体态对孤独症患者面部表情感知的影响。
Sci Rep. 2024 Nov 12;14(1):27655. doi: 10.1038/s41598-024-79547-0.
3
Reasoning in social versus non-social domains and its relation to autistic traits.社会领域与非社会领域中的推理及其与自闭症特征的关系。

本文引用的文献

1
Eye Movements in Risky Choice.风险决策中的眼动
J Behav Decis Mak. 2016 Apr-Jul;29(2-3):116-136. doi: 10.1002/bdm.1854. Epub 2015 Jan 26.
2
Why contextual preference reversals maximize expected value.为什么情境偏好逆转能使期望值最大化。
Psychol Rev. 2016 Jul;123(4):368-91. doi: 10.1037/a0039996.
3
Brief Report: The Go/No-Go Task Online: Inhibitory Control Deficits in Autism in a Large Sample.简短报告:在线执行/不执行任务:大样本自闭症患者的抑制控制缺陷
Q J Exp Psychol (Hove). 2024 Nov 19;78(9):17470218241296090. doi: 10.1177/17470218241296090.
4
Autistic people differ from non-autistic people subjectively, but not objectively in their reasoning.自闭症患者与非自闭症患者在主观上存在差异,但在推理方面并无客观差异。
Autism. 2025 Feb;29(2):355-366. doi: 10.1177/13623613241277055. Epub 2024 Oct 10.
5
Understanding responses of people with ASD in diverse reasoning tasks: A formal study.理解自闭症谱系障碍患者在各种推理任务中的反应:一项正式研究。
Cogn Process. 2025 Feb;26(1):201-218. doi: 10.1007/s10339-024-01233-w. Epub 2024 Oct 7.
6
Roles of empathy in altruistic cooperation in adults with and without autism spectrum disorder.共情在患有和未患有自闭症谱系障碍的成年人利他合作中的作用。
Heliyon. 2024 Aug 13;10(16):e36255. doi: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e36255. eCollection 2024 Aug 30.
7
An ethical advantage of autistic employees in the workplace.职场中自闭症员工的道德优势。
Front Psychol. 2024 Mar 14;15:1364691. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2024.1364691. eCollection 2024.
8
Cognitive biases as an adaptive strategy in autism and schizophrenia spectrum: the compensation perspective on neurodiversity.认知偏差作为自闭症和精神分裂症谱系中的一种适应性策略:神经多样性的补偿视角
Front Psychiatry. 2023 Dec 4;14:1291854. doi: 10.3389/fpsyt.2023.1291854. eCollection 2023.
9
Autistic adults' experiences of financial wellbeing: Part II.自闭症成年人的财务幸福感体验:第二部分。
Autism. 2024 May;28(5):1090-1106. doi: 10.1177/13623613231191594. Epub 2023 Oct 5.
10
"Simultaneously Vague and Oddly Specific": Understanding Autistic People's Experiences of Decision Making and Research Questionnaires.“既模糊又出奇地具体”:理解自闭症患者的决策体验与研究问卷
Autism Adulthood. 2023 Sep 1;5(3):263-274. doi: 10.1089/aut.2022.0039. Epub 2023 Aug 30.
J Autism Dev Disord. 2016 Aug;46(8):2774-2779. doi: 10.1007/s10803-016-2788-3.
4
SEXUAL SELECTION. Irrationality in mate choice revealed by túngara frogs.性选择。通过火蜥蜴揭示的配偶选择中的非理性。
Science. 2015 Aug 28;349(6251):964-6. doi: 10.1126/science.aab2012.
5
Amazon's Mechanical Turk: A New Source of Inexpensive, Yet High-Quality, Data?亚马逊土耳其机器人:一种新的廉价、高质量数据来源?
Perspect Psychol Sci. 2011 Jan;6(1):3-5. doi: 10.1177/1745691610393980. Epub 2011 Feb 3.
6
Decision-making skills in ASD: performance on the Iowa Gambling Task.自闭症谱系障碍中的决策技能:爱荷华赌博任务表现
Autism Res. 2015 Feb;8(1):105-14. doi: 10.1002/aur.1429. Epub 2014 Nov 4.
7
Low endogenous neural noise in autism.自闭症中内源性神经噪声较低。
Autism. 2015 Apr;19(3):351-62. doi: 10.1177/1362361314552198. Epub 2014 Sep 23.
8
In the attraction, compromise, and similarity effects, alternatives are repeatedly compared in pairs on single dimensions.在吸引力、妥协和相似性效应中,替代方案在单一维度上以两两配对的方式反复进行比较。
Cognition. 2014 Jul;132(1):44-56. doi: 10.1016/j.cognition.2014.03.006. Epub 2014 Apr 21.
9
The multiattribute linear ballistic accumulator model of context effects in multialternative choice.多选项选择中情境效应的多属性线性弹道累加器模型
Psychol Rev. 2014 Apr;121(2):179-205. doi: 10.1037/a0036137.
10
Random effects structure for confirmatory hypothesis testing: Keep it maximal.用于验证性假设检验的随机效应结构:保持其最大化。
J Mem Lang. 2013 Apr;68(3). doi: 10.1016/j.jml.2012.11.001.