Methods, Design:
The study was an eye tracking experiment that focuses on the correlational relationship between the local/global processing bias and the presence of the AQ traits in those who ae not diagnosed with an ASD condition. We seek evidence to support existing literature on the usage of the AQ questionnaire as a means of measuring autistic traits within the general.
Participants: The Participants were 60 adults, mostly undergraduate students from the University of the West of Scotland with a small minority being gather from outside this rage, at least two participants were PhD or post graduate student or were brought in from outside the University. . Ages ranged from 20 up to 60,. We mainly gathered participants by either speaking to our university friends and their friends and colleagues as well, agreeing to assist them with their studies as well in exchange for their participation and would tend to also gather participants form the library or throughout the university campus. Another means that we used to recruit our participants were posting on the Facebook page for the course year, asking our family members form outside the university to participate and poster, the last of which failed to bring in any additional participants.
Overall our participants were in total 36 female, 22 male and 2 non-binary participants,.
Procedure:
. After the study, and the Aq questionnaire was filled out, I would debrief and answer any questions the participants had. If they were in a hurry I would answer any questions they had during the task though hi w tried to avoid this as I wished not to distract them as they filled out the AQ questionnaire or perform the eye tracker task.
Measures:
For our study, the two of us settled on using the 16+ version of the AQ questionnaire, a 50 item survey that measured the level of autistic traits of our participants, allowing psychologists and non-qualified participants to get a general idea of their own and others autistic traits. Below there will be an example of the items that we asked our participants to fill out:
I don’t particularly enjoy reading fiction
Definitely Agree Slightly Agree Slight Disagree Differently Disagree
(The full AQ questionnaire will be linked her and will be included in Appendix 1 with the scoring key used in Appendix 2 so that the study is re-creatable)
We asked our participants to circle one of these answers that they most strongly feel represent themselves.
When presenting the divided and undivided attention task to our participants, we used the eye tracking booth at the university set up exclusively for studies that need to track eye moment. Other than this basic level of equipment, there was no need for any additional equipment to present our stimuli for this eye tracking study.
Treatment of the Data:
After we had managed to gather all the data that we need from both the 50-item questionnaire and the 3-part eye tracking task, we first had to properly score the AQ questionnaire. Several questions were reversed scored (meaning a negative answer would result in a point added to the total score)
After scoring the AQ questionnaire,
After sorting the raw data into a useable format, I ran a 2×2 Anova function (between the Areas of interest and the AQ scores) with our other Variables of Reaction Time, Accuracy, Time to first fixate analysed through a Pearson’s correlation to see if there is any relationship between these three variables.
Words: 1630
Appendix 1:
The Adult Autism Spectrum Quotient (AQ)
Ages 16+
SPECIMEN, FOR RESEARCH USE ONLY.
For full details, please see:
S. Baron-Cohen, S. Wheelwright, R. Skinner, J. Martin and E. Clubley, (2001)
The Autism Spectrum Quotient (AQ) : Evidence from Asperger Syndrome/High Functioning Autism, Males and Females, Scientists and Mathematicians
Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders 31:5-17
Name:……………………………………. Sex:…………………………………….
Date of birth:…………………………….. Today’s Date……………………………
How to fill out the questionnaire
Below are a list of statements. Please read each statement very carefully and rate how strongly you agree or disagree with it by circling your answer.
DO NOT MISS ANY STATEMENT OUT.
Examples
E1. I am willing to take risks.
definitely
agree slightly
agree slightly
disagree definitely
disagree
E2. I like playing board games.
definitely
agree slightly
agree slightly
disagree definitely
disagree
E3. I find learning to play musical instruments easy. definitely
agree slightly
agree slightly
disagree definitely
disagree
E4. I am fascinated by other cultures. definitely
agree slightly
agree slightly
disagree definitely
disagree
1. I prefer to do things with others rather than on my own.
definitely
agree slightly
agree slightly
disagree definitely
disagree
2. I prefer to do things the same way over and over again.
definitely
agree slightly
agree slightly
disagree definitely
disagree
3. If I try to imagine something, I find it very easy to create a picture in my mind.
definitely
agree slightly
agree slightly
disagree definitely
disagree
4. I frequently get so strongly absorbed in one thing that I lose sight of other things.
definitely
agree slightly
agree slightly
disagree definitely
disagree
5. I often notice small sounds when others do not.
definitely
agree slightly
agree slightly
disagree definitely
disagree
6. I usually notice car number plates or similar strings of information.
definitely
agree slightly
agree slightly
disagree definitely
disagree
7. Other people frequently tell me that what I’ve said is impolite, even though I think it is polite.
definitely
agree slightly
agree slightly
disagree definitely
disagree
8. When I’m reading a story, I can easily imagine what the characters might look like.
definitely
agree slightly
agree slightly
disagree definitely
disagree
9. I am fascinated by dates.
definitely
agree slightly
agree slightly
disagree definitely
disagree
10. In a social group, I can easily keep track of several different people’s conversations.
definitely
agree slightly
agree slightly
disagree definitely
disagree
11. I find social situations easy.
definitely
agree slightly
agree slightly
disagree definitely
disagree
12. I tend to notice details that others do not.
definitely
agree slightly
agree slightly
disagree definitely
disagree
13. I would rather go to a library than a party.
definitely
agree slightly
agree slightly
disagree definitely
disagree
14. I find making up stories easy.
definitely
agree slightly
agree slightly
disagree definitely
disagree
15. I find myself drawn more strongly to people than to things.
definitely
agree slightly
agree slightly
disagree definitely
disagree
16. I tend to have very strong interests which I get upset about if I can’t pursue.
definitely
agree slightly
agree slightly
disagree definitely
disagree
17. I enjoy social chit-chat.
definitely
agree slightly
agree slightly
disagree definitely
disagree
18. When I talk, it isn’t always easy for others to get a word in edgeways.
definitely
agree slightly
agree slightly
disagree definitely
disagree
19. I am fascinated by numbers.
definitely
agree slightly
agree slightly
disagree definitely
disagree
20. When I’m reading a story, I find it difficult to work out the characters’ intentions.
definitely
agree slightly
agree slightly
disagree definitely
disagree
21. I don’t particularly enjoy reading fiction.
definitely
agree slightly
agree slightly
disagree definitely
disagree
22. I find it hard to make new friends.
definitely
agree slightly
agree slightly
disagree definitely
disagree
23. I notice patterns in things all the time.
definitely
agree slightly
agree slightly
disagree definitely
disagree
24. I would rather go to the theatre than a museum.
definitely
agree slightly
agree slightly
disagree definitely
disagree
25. It does not upset me if my daily routine is disturbed.
definitely
agree slightly
agree slightly
disagree definitely
disagree
26. I frequently find that I don’t know how to keep a conversation going.
definitely
agree slightly
agree slightly
disagree definitely
disagree
27. I find it easy to “read between the lines” when someone is talking to me.
definitely
agree slightly
agree slightly
disagree definitely
disagree
28. I usually concentrate more on the whole picture, rather than the small details.
definitely
agree slightly
agree slightly
disagree definitely
disagree
29. I am not very good at remembering phone numbers.
definitely
agree slightly
agree slightly
disagree definitely
disagree
30. I don’t usually notice small changes in a situation, or a person’s appearance.
definitely
agree slightly
agree slightly
disagree definitely
disagree
31. I know how to tell if someone listening to me is getting bored.
definitely
agree slightly
agree slightly
disagree definitely
disagree
32. I find it easy to do more than one thing at once.
definitely
agree slightly
agree slightly
disagree definitely
disagree
33. When I talk on the phone, I’m not sure when it’s my turn to speak.
definitely
agree slightly
agree slightly
disagree definitely
disagree
34. I enjoy doing things spontaneously.
definitely
agree slightly
agree slightly
disagree definitely
disagree
35. I am often the last to understand the point of a joke.
definitely
agree slightly
agree slightly
disagree definitely
disagree
36. I find it easy to work out what someone is thinking or feeling just by looking at their face.
definitely
agree slightly
agree slightly
disagree definitely
disagree
37. If there is an interruption, I can switch back to what I was doing very quickly. definitely
agree slightly
agree slightly
disagree definitely
disagree
38. I am good at social chit-chat.
definitely
agree slightly
agree slightly
disagree definitely
disagree
39. People often tell me that I keep going on and on about the same thing.
definitely
agree slightly
agree slightly
disagree definitely
disagree
40. When I was young, I used to enjoy playing games involving pretending with other children.
definitely
agree slightly
agree slightly
disagree definitely
disagree
41. I like to collect information about categories of things (e.g. types of car, types of bird, types of train, types of plant, etc.).
definitely
agree slightly
agree slightly
disagree definitely
disagree
42. I find it difficult to imagine what it would be like to be someone else.
definitely
agree slightly
agree slightly
disagree definitely
disagree
43. I like to plan any activities I participate in carefully.
definitely
agree slightly
agree slightly
disagree definitely
disagree
44. I enjoy social occasions.
definitely
agree slightly
agree slightly
disagree definitely
disagree
45. I find it difficult to work out people’s intentions.
definitely
agree slightly
agree slightly
disagree definitely
disagree
46. New situations make me anxious.
definitely
agree slightly
agree slightly
disagree definitely
disagree
47. I enjoy meeting new people.
definitely
agree slightly
agree slightly
disagree definitely
disagree
48. I am a good diplomat.
definitely
agree slightly
agree slightly
disagree definitely
disagree
49. I am not very good at remembering people’s date of birth.
definitely
agree slightly
agree slightly
disagree definitely
disagree
50. I find it very easy to play games with children that involve pretending.
definitely
agree slightly
agree slightly
disagree definitely
disagree
Developed by:
The Autism Research Centre
University of Cambridge
MRC-SBC/SJW Feb 1998
Appendix 2:
https://www.queensu.ca/rarc/sites/webpublish.queensu.ca.rarcwww/files/files/services/ASDAssessmentTemplate/AAA/AQ_Scoring_Key.pdf
Discussion
The current study aimed to use a modified version of the Navon hierarchal task and the 16+ AQ questionnaire to test a pool of participants from the University of the West of Scotland, to investigate the global- local visual processing bias.
The first hypothesis proposed was that there would be inattentional bias towards local processing in individuals with high AQ scores, showing results that support previous studies involving the Navon task. For the second hypothesis, the researcher also expected to find a global processing bias in those with low AQ scores, supporting pervious works with the Navon task. The third and final hypothesis that was visual strategies will be changed/related to the AQ scored the participants receive and this would directly affected their performance on the Navon task.
In Summary, results from the current study do indeed support the three-hypothesis stated above, the first two hypothesis being supported means that the study falls in line with the previous research conducted regarding the global local bias whilst the third hypothesis was supported by the differences in duration.
The findings of the study do not give us any new possible implications regarding the correlation between Autism and the Global-Local processing bias. The results from analysis
Global-Local Bias and Autism/Autistic traits
As stated earlier, the relationship shown in this study between The Global-Local process and ASD conditions had already been well documented in multiple studies from different, and reliable, sources in the past. As previously mentioned, Autism Spectrum disorders (ASD) are known to have a wide variety of effects on an individual’s cognitive and behavioural development, primarily on the social and behavioural aspect of a person’s mental abilities. Often ASD can be identified by common sign amongst suffers of the disorder, who often display similar anti-social behaviour. However, these viable features appear not to have a direct correlation to the visual processing bias (Hadad & Ziv, 2014)
Navon-Task
The Navon task is often used for studies that examine the global local bias process, having been design for the very purpose of examining the global-local processing bias, such as the study by Bardely Duchian and colleges (Duchaine, Yovel & Nakayama, 2007) that used the Navon task to examine the ability of those with developmental prosopagnosics, a lifelong condition that affects a person’s ability to recognize faces and also results in visual problems and lower than normal intelligence with no clear cause . While not extremely relevant to this study, the usage of the Navon task to examine the effects of lifelong conditions on the human brain could be considered as a sign of adaptability of the Navon Task.
Judging by the numerous examples of the Navon task being used as the basis on new studies as recent as 2018, of which the most recent example of research in (Sabatino DiCriscio, Hu & Troiani, 2018) that used the Navon task to test pupil activity, the researchers choosing to base the current study on the Navon task was a wise decision, as stated earlier reliable and valid tools are an important resources within the field of psychology and choosing the correct instruments for a study help improvement the reliability of the current study by association.
Limitations
, the sample pool inadvertently being composed of many induvial with similar ages and lifestyles.
.
The most unexpected part of this study was discovering just how little the populace that I had recruited fell into the High AQ group. As we used the ranges originally defined to Baron – Cohen, who defined scores of 20+ as intermediate whilst any score that was 30+ is considered high while those under 20 were the AQ group. As the study was focused on comparing only two groups, the High and Low AQ groups, the researchers was advised by supervisor to treat all the score 20+ as one high group and all the scores that were under 20 to be considered as the low group. Using this modified grouping the researcher’s sorts had a far more balanced ratio (19 participants in group 1, the high AQ group with 35 participants were sorted into group 2, the low AQ score group) allowing for proper data analysis. However, this change to the grouping parameters may result in some questions of validity of the results, as it could be argued that the current study did not have enough participants naturally to accurately analysis the results.
Future Directions
Future research could aim to develop the methodology of the study and aim to expand the methodology of this study. As noted in this study, there was a very limited pool of participants that would naturally qualify for the High AQ group. Either ensuring that there is an even split between the two groups or expanding the size of the participant pool to ensure a greater presence of High AQ Participants. Also ensuring that the study was conducted in a more orderly fashion to decrease the likely hood of human errors.
Future researchers could consider the possible benefits of using another tool other than the AQ Questionnaire to determine the qualities of the participants. A possible future study could see how a group of adults fill out The Sensory Perception Quotient (SPQ) and compare the correct key responses for the eye tracker task (Tavassoli, Hoekstra & Baron-Cohen, 2014) as well as any desired version of the AQ questionnaire.
Another possible future avenue of research that explores a similar concept to the previous idea, is that of using a different version of the AQ Study to repeat the current study, hoping to find further evidence to support previous research. For the current study, the research used the 16+ AQ questionnaire as the tool to determine the groupings for the present study. Another valid version of the AQ questionnaire that could be used in further research is the abridged version of the AQ questionnaire, a version of the AQ questionnaire that was contracted with the intent to both reduce the number of items resent in the document while maintaining the validity and the factorial structure of the standard 50 item AQ Questionnaire (Hoekstra et al., 2010). A possible future study could see participants filling out both the abridged version and the 16+ version of the AQ questionnaire, or future researchers could have two sperate groups that repeated the experiment while filling out either one of the AQ questionnaires.
Also, future research could investigate using an online questionnaire format, similar to the online version of the original AQ questionnaire that is available (“Autism Spectrum Quotient”, 2020), as a means of testing. It would not only save a large amount of time, but it would also ensure that no information is left out by making the data fields all mandatory. The main issue would be requiring a certain level of expertise with online forums that the current researchers do not possess and, if the future studies keep ensuring that the results are anonymous, making sure that the online questionnaire does not display the results of the AQ score.
Researchers might also wish to evaluated other age groups, as this study primarily focused on participants aged between 19-29, with only a few of the participants being older than 30 with the oldest participants being 55 years old. It is possible that those with high AQ scores would have lost the local bias present in those with high Autistic traits at younger ages, as they may have developed coping methods to deal with the local visual bias often present in those with high AQ traits or might have developed a stand global-local visual bias as the aged further, however this is just conjecture at the moment.
Finally, further research could consider using the original model of grouping presented by SimonBaron- Cohen (DATE)could examined in the paradigm of the present study, by expanding the sample pool to accommodate a third and maintaining the intermediate grouping that was subsidized into the high group within this study.
Conclusion
The present study aimed to examine the relationship between ASD traits and the Local-Global processing bias through the usage of a divided attention Navon hierarchical task. By using a divided attention methodology, the researcher had manged to support the three hypothesises. The first hypothesis was supported as an inattentional bias towards local processing in individuals with high AQ scores was observed showing results that support previous studies involving the Navon task, The second hypothesis was also supported as the researcher found a global processing bias in those with low AQ scores, and thirdly It was observed that visual strategies were related to AQ scores on the divided attention task as the
Overall, the researcher was able to find evidence to support the three hypothesis they had before beginning the study.
References
4, C. (2020). AQ Autism Test | Health | channel4.com/bodies. Retrieved 6 April 2020, from https://web.archive.org/web/20140328180823/http://www.channel4embarrassingillnesses.com/features/take-the-autism-test/
Autism Spectrum Quotient. (2020). Retrieved 5 April 2020, from https://psychology-tools.com/test/autism-spectrum-quotient
Booth, R., & Happé, F. (2016). Evidence of Reduced Global Processing in Autism Spectrum Disorder. Journal Of Autism And Developmental Disorders, 48(4), 1397-1408. doi: 10.1007/s10803-016-2724-6
Duchaine, B., Yovel, G., & Nakayama, K. (2007). No global processing deficit in the Navon task in 14 developmental prosopagnosics. Social Cognitive And Affective Neuroscience, 2(2), 104-113. doi: 10.1093/scan/nsm003
Estimating the reproducibility of psychological science. (2015). Science, 349(6251), aac4716-aac4716. doi: 10.1126/science.aac4716
Hadad, B., & Ziv, Y. (2014). Strong Bias Towards Analytic Perception in ASD Does not Necessarily Come at the Price of Impaired Integration Skills. Journal Of Autism And Developmental Disorders, 45(6), 1499-1512. doi: 10.1007/s10803-014-2293-5
Hayward, D., Fenerci, C., & Ristic, J. (2018). An investigation of global-local processing bias in a large sample of typical individuals varying in autism traits. Consciousness And Cognition, 65, 271-279. doi: 10.1016/j.concog.2018.09.002
Hoekstra, R., Bartels, M., Cath, D., & Boomsma, D. (2008). Factor Structure, Reliability and Criterion Validity of the Autism-Spectrum Quotient (AQ): A Study in Dutch Population and Patient Groups. Journal Of Autism And Developmental Disorders, 38(8), 1555-1566. doi: 10.1007/s10803-008-0538-x
Hoekstra, R., Vinkhuyzen, A., Wheelwright, S., Bartels, M., Boomsma, D., & Baron-Cohen, S. et al. (2010). The Construction and Validation of an Abridged Version of the Autism-Spectrum Quotient (AQ-Short). Journal Of Autism And Developmental Disorders, 41(5), 589-596. doi: 10.1007/s10803-010-1073-0
Koldewyn, K., Jiang, Y., Weigelt, S., & Kanwisher, N. (2012). Global/Local Visual Processing in Autism: Not a Disability, but a Disinclination. Journal Of Vision, 12(9), 1355-1355. doi: 10.1167/12.9.1355
Parsons, S., Kruijt, A., & Fox, E. (2019). Psychological Science Needs a Standard Practice of Reporting the Reliability of Cognitive-Behavioral Measurements. Advances In Methods And Practices In Psychological Science, 2(4), 378-395. doi: 10.1177/2515245919879695
Ruta, L., Mazzone, D., Mazzone, L., Wheelwright, S., & Baron-Cohen, S. (2011). The Autism-Spectrum Quotient—Italian Version: A Cross-Cultural Confirmation of the Broader Autism Phenotype. Journal Of Autism And Developmental Disorders, 42(4), 625-633. doi: 10.1007/s10803-011-1290-1
Sabatino DiCriscio, A., Hu, Y., & Troiani, V. (2018). Task-induced pupil response and visual perception in adults. PLOS ONE, 13(12), e0209556. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0209556
Sapey-Triomphe, L., Moulin, A., Sonié, S., & Schmitz, C. (2017). The Glasgow Sensory Questionnaire: Validation of a French Language Version and Refinement of Sensory Profiles of People with High Autism-Spectrum Quotient. Journal Of Autism And Developmental Disorders, 48(5), 1549-1565. doi: 10.1007/s10803-017-3422-8
Tavassoli, T., Hoekstra, R., & Baron-Cohen, S. (2014). The Sensory Perception Quotient (SPQ): development and validation of a new sensory questionnaire for adults with and without autism. Molecular Autism, 5(1), 29. doi: 10.1186/2040-2392-5-29
What is a Developmental Milestone?. (2020). Retrieved 3 April 2020, from https://www.cdc.gov/ncbddd/actearly/milestones/index.html
————————————————————————-
The results of the Two Way Independent ANOVA showed that there was no significant main effect of AQ Score (F(1,52) =2.837, p > 0.05) with High AQ (mean = 27.57; SD = 6.46) and Low AQ (mean = 12.31; SD = 4.48) producing similar change detection scores.
In addition, there was a significant main effect of High AQ scores on Duration Global length (F(1,52) =1.550, p > 0.05) and Duration Local Length (F(1,52)= 2.837, p>. Participants in the Duration Local condition performed significantly better (Mean: Low=34.085, High= 19.224, SD: Low=33.412 , High=6.769) than those in the Duration Global (Mean: Low= 7.818, High= 4.950 , SD: Low= 6.076 , High=1.985). In addition, no significant interaction was found between the two variables (F(1,52) = 3.077 , p > 0.05,).