The final, formatted version of the article will be published soon.
REGISTERED REPORT article
Front. Psychiatry
Sec. Autism
Volume 15 - 2024 |
doi: 10.3389/fpsyt.2024.1189777
This article is part of the Research Topic Research in Social Psychology, Prevention Activities and Mental Health Promotion View all 18 articles
Spontaneous Theory of Mind in Autism: Are Anticipatory Gaze and Reaction Time Biases Consistent?
Provisionally accepted- 1 Department of Psychiatry, Medical and Dental Hospital, Niigata University, Niigata, Niigata, Japan
- 2 Department of Oral Physiology, Graduate School of Medical and Dental Sciences, Niigata University, Niigata, Japan
Background: Individuals with autism spectrum disorder (ASD) exhibit persistent deficits in social interaction and communication in adulthood. Pioneering studies have suggested that these difficulties arise from a lack of immediate, spontaneous mentalizing (i.e., theory of mind: ToM), specifically, an ability to attribute false beliefs to others, which should be usually acquired during neurotypical development. However, this view has been challenged by recent reports of nonreplications of spontaneous mentalizing, even in neurotypical adults.We aimed to evaluate (1) whether measurements of spontaneous ToM in two representative paradigms, gaze bias in the anticipatory looking (AL) test and reaction time bias in the object detection (OD) test, are correlated in neurotypical adults and (2) whether these two measurements are altered in individuals with ASD.We developed a novel hybridized spontaneous false belief test combining the AL and OD paradigms to enable within-subject comparison of different spontaneous ToM measurements.The results obtained with our hybridized test replicated the earlier positive evidence for spontaneous ToM in both AL and OD paradigms. Our results also revealed a correlation between the participants' spontaneous gaze bias in the AL paradigm and reaction time bias in the OD paradigm, indicating that the participants who had spontaneously anticipated other's false belief driven actions more quickly detected the object. We further found that spontaneous gaze and reaction time biases were altered in individuals with ASD. Finally, we ascertained those inclusions of these biases as diagnostic variables in a regression model improved the accuracy of diagnosing ASD. ASD diagnosis was best predicted by the model when variables obtained from both AL and OD methods were included in the model.Conclusions/Implications: Our hybridized paradigm not only replicated spontaneous gaze bias in early AL studies and reaction time bias in the OD paradigms, but indicated significant correlation between them, suggesting that different implicit tasks tap the same spontaneous ToM in neurotypical adults. Group differences of these indices between ASD and neurotypical adult groups indicated that our task could help diagnose ASD, which is essential for evaluating the social difficulties that individuals with ASD face in adulthood.
Keywords: autism, Theory of Mind, Spontaneous mentalizing, False Belief Test, anticipatory gaze, Reaction Time
Received: 20 Mar 2023; Accepted: 21 Nov 2024.
Copyright: © 2024 Onda, Ichwansyah, Kawasaki, Egawa, Someya and Hasegawa. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) or licensor are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
* Correspondence:
Isao Hasegawa, Department of Oral Physiology, Graduate School of Medical and Dental Sciences, Niigata University, Niigata, Japan
Disclaimer: All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.