Dwyer Patrick, Takarae Yukari, Zadeh Iman, Rivera Susan M, Saron Clifford D
Neurocognitive Development Lab, Center for Mind and Brain, University of California, Davis, Davis, CA, United States.
Department of Psychology, University of California, Davis, Davis, CA, United States.
Front Hum Neurosci. 2022 May 10;16:811547. doi: 10.3389/fnhum.2022.811547. eCollection 2022.
Reconciling results obtained using different types of sensory measures is a challenge for autism sensory research. The present study used questionnaire, psychophysical, and neurophysiological measures to characterize autistic sensory processing in different measurement modalities.
Participants were 46 autistic and 21 typically developing 11- to 14-year-olds. Participants and their caregivers completed questionnaires regarding sensory experiences and behaviors. Auditory and somatosensory event-related potentials (ERPs) were recorded as part of a multisensory ERP task. Auditory detection, tactile static detection, and tactile spatial resolution psychophysical thresholds were measured.
Sensory questionnaires strongly differentiated between autistic and typically developing individuals, while little evidence of group differences was observed in psychophysical thresholds. Crucially, the different types of measures (neurophysiological, psychophysical, questionnaire) appeared to be largely independent of one another. However, we unexpectedly found autistic participants with auditory Tb ERP amplitudes had hearing acuity, even though all participants had hearing acuity in the non-clinical range.
The autistic and typically developing groups were not matched on cognitive ability, although this limitation does not affect our main analyses regarding convergence of measures within autism.
Overall, based on these results, measures in different sensory modalities appear to capture distinct aspects of sensory processing in autism, with relatively limited convergence between questionnaires and laboratory-based tasks. Generally, this might reflect the reality that laboratory tasks are often carried out in controlled environments without background stimuli to compete for attention, a context which may not closely resemble the busier and more complex environments in which autistic people's atypical sensory experiences commonly occur. Sensory questionnaires and more naturalistic laboratory tasks may be better suited to explore autistic people's real-world sensory challenges. Further research is needed to replicate and investigate the drivers of the unexpected association we observed between auditory Tb ERP amplitudes and hearing acuity, which could represent an important confound for ERP researchers to consider in their studies.
协调使用不同类型感官测量方法所获得的结果,是自闭症感官研究面临的一项挑战。本研究采用问卷调查、心理物理学和神经生理学测量方法,以刻画不同测量方式下的自闭症感官加工特征。
参与者为46名患有自闭症的11至14岁儿童以及21名发育正常的同龄人。参与者及其照料者完成了关于感官体验和行为的问卷调查。作为多感官事件相关电位(ERP)任务的一部分,记录了听觉和躯体感觉ERP。测量了听觉检测、触觉静态检测和触觉空间分辨率的心理物理学阈值。
感官问卷能够显著区分自闭症患者和发育正常的个体,而心理物理学阈值方面几乎没有观察到组间差异。至关重要的是,不同类型的测量方法(神经生理学、心理物理学、问卷调查)似乎在很大程度上相互独立。然而,我们意外地发现,尽管所有参与者的听力都在非临床范围内,但听觉Tb ERP波幅较高的自闭症参与者听力敏锐度更高。
自闭症组和发育正常组在认知能力上不匹配,尽管这一局限性并不影响我们关于自闭症患者测量方法趋同性的主要分析。
总体而言,基于这些结果,不同感官方式的测量似乎捕捉到了自闭症感官加工的不同方面,问卷调查和基于实验室的任务之间的趋同性相对有限。一般来说,这可能反映了这样一个现实,即实验室任务通常在没有背景刺激争夺注意力的受控环境中进行,这种环境可能与自闭症患者非典型感官体验通常发生的更繁忙、更复杂的环境不太相似。感官问卷和更自然的实验室任务可能更适合探索自闭症患者在现实世界中的感官挑战。需要进一步的研究来重复并调查我们观察到的听觉Tb ERP波幅与听力敏锐度之间意外关联的驱动因素,这可能是ERP研究人员在其研究中需要考虑的一个重要混杂因素。