Jertberg Robert M, Begeer Sander, Geurts Hilde M, Chakrabarti Bhismadev, Van der Burg Erik
Section of Clinical Developmental Psychology, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam | The Netherlands and Amsterdam Public Health Research Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Dutch Autism and ADHD Research Center (d'Arc), Brain & Cognition, Department of Psychology, Universiteit van Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Autism Res. 2025 Apr;18(4):802-819. doi: 10.1002/aur.70015. Epub 2025 Mar 13.
Prior research has established differences between autistic and non-autistic individuals across the domains of executive function (EF). While some early theories portrayed these differences as universal to the autism spectrum, recent findings have been quite mixed. Factors like small samples, the components of EF being measured, and the age and intelligence quotient (IQ) of those being compared may contribute to this diversity in results. Moreover, research suggests performance over time might fluctuate in different patterns for autistic and non-autistic individuals. To test EF differences and the possible influence of these factors upon them, we recruited a sample of over 900 autistic and non-autistic participants (with generally average/above average IQ levels) from 18 to 77 years of age. They completed a battery of tasks measuring inhibition, cognitive flexibility, working memory, and attentional orienting to social and nonsocial cues. We found that performance was similar between groups in our primary measures of EF, although autistic participants were consistently slower, more susceptible to the effects of spatial cueing, and more prone to certain errors in the working memory task. Differences between groups were generally not influenced by participants' age, gender, or IQ. Performance over time varied only in the working memory task. While autistic adults may still face related challenges in real life, these findings suggest that being autistic does not necessarily imply executive dysfunction on a basic cognitive level, contradicting theories assuming universal impairments therein. Moreover, the lack of influence of included demographic factors suggests that explanations for discrepancies in the literature lie elsewhere.
先前的研究已经确定了自闭症个体和非自闭症个体在执行功能(EF)领域的差异。虽然一些早期理论将这些差异描述为自闭症谱系的普遍特征,但最近的研究结果却参差不齐。样本量小、所测量的EF成分以及被比较者的年龄和智商(IQ)等因素可能导致了结果的这种多样性。此外,研究表明,随着时间的推移,自闭症个体和非自闭症个体的表现可能会以不同的模式波动。为了测试EF差异以及这些因素对其可能产生的影响,我们招募了900多名年龄在18岁至77岁之间的自闭症和非自闭症参与者(智商水平一般为平均水平/高于平均水平)。他们完成了一系列任务,以测量抑制、认知灵活性、工作记忆以及对社会和非社会线索的注意力定向。我们发现,在EF的主要测量指标中,两组之间的表现相似,尽管自闭症参与者始终较慢,更容易受到空间线索的影响,并且在工作记忆任务中更容易出现某些错误。两组之间的差异一般不受参与者年龄、性别或智商的影响。随着时间的推移,表现仅在工作记忆任务中有所变化。虽然自闭症成年人在现实生活中可能仍然面临相关挑战,但这些发现表明,自闭症并不一定意味着在基本认知水平上存在执行功能障碍,这与假设其中存在普遍缺陷的理论相矛盾。此外,所纳入的人口统计学因素缺乏影响表明,文献中差异的解释在于其他方面。