Event Abstract

Back to Event

Stimulus Overselectivity in Autism and its Correlation with Attention and Cognitive Flexibility

Michelle P. Kelly1* and Phil Reed2
  • 1 Emirates College for Advanced Education, United Arab Emirates
  • 2 Swansea University, United Kingdom

Introduction: Stimulus overselectivity describes a phenomenon where an individual responds only to a subset of the stimuli present in the environment, and, thus, may restrict learning regarding the range, breadth, or number of features, of a stimulus (Farber, Dickson, & Dube, 2017; Kelly, Leader, & Reed, 2015; Reed, 2017). Instances of overselective responding are found in many clinical populations that experience some assault to their levels of cognitive function, including individuals with intellectual disabilities, learning disabilities, acquired brain injury, and schizophrenia as well as typically developing individuals experiencing situations involving increased cognitive demands (Kelly, Leader, & Reed, 2016; Reed, Savile, & Truzoli, 2012; Reynolds, Watts, & Reed, 2012). Stimulus overselectivity is very often noted in individuals with autism (Kelly et al., 2015; Leader, Loughnane, McMoreland, & Reed, 2009; Reed, Broomfield, McHugh, McCausland, & Leader, 2009), and this failure to respond to all necessary or important cues in the environment may be a factor contributing to many of the problems seen in autism, including deficits during observational learning, learning with prompts or learning during matching-to-sample tasks (see reviews by Kelly, 2012 and Ploog, 2010). One well-researched theoretical perspective regarding stimulus overselectivity is the ‘attention deficit’ view, which posits that overselective responding is a product of an attentional deficit in sampling all of the component elements of a stimulus (see Dube et al., 2009). The first aim of the current study was to explore the relationship between attention and overselective responding in children with autism. Overselective stimulus control can be related to a number of aspects of cognitive function, such as levels of intellectual functioning (see Kelly et al., 2015), and levels of executive function, especially as indexed by cognitive flexibility (Gard, Hölzel, & Lazar, 2014). The second aim of the current study was to analyse the association between stimulus overselectivity and cognitive flexibility in children with autism. Method: Twenty-four children, 12 diagnosed with autism (experimental group) and 12 mental age matched typically developing children (control group), participated in the current study. Levels of stimulus overselctivity were measured using a discrete trial discrimination paradigm, as utilised by Kelly et al. (2016; 2015). Selective attention, sustained attention and attentional switching were measured using the Test of Everyday Attention for Children (TEA-Ch; Manly, Robertson, Anderson & Nimmo-Smith, 1999). Cognitive flexibility was measured using the computer-based Intra/Extra Dimensional Set Shift (IED; Cambridge Cognition, 2011), which is one of 22 neuropsychological tests in the Cambridge Neuropsychological Test Automated Battery (CANTAB) eclipse. The two dependent variables utilised in the current study were number of stages completed and number of adjusted errors. A correlation analysis was conducted to analyse the relationship between overselectivity and attention, as well as overselectivity and cognitive flexibility. Results: A significant degree of stimulus overselectivity was found in the experimental group using the visual discrimination task. The correlation analysis revealed that overselectivity did not significantly correlate with either of the TEA-Ch subtests that measured selective attention (Subtests 1 and 5), nor attentional switching (Subtests 3 and 8). Although there were no significant correlations between stimulus overselectivity and the sustained attention Subtests 2, 4, 6, and 9, there was a significant correlation with Subtest 7. This finding suggests the possibility that an individual’s ability to self-maintain an actively attentive stance to a given task is correlated with their level of overselective responding. The fact that only one of nine attention subtests was significantly associated with stimulus overselectivity may indicate that the attentional processes under investigation in the current study are not reliable correlates of overselectivity. In terms of cognitive flexibility, the correlation analysis revealed that neither of the IED dependent variables was significantly associated with levels of overselectivity in both the control and experimental groups. This result indicates that overselective responding is not related to the level of executive function, a finding that supports the findings of Kelly et al. (2016). Conclusion: This study offered further evidence of the overselectivity phenomenon by replicating the effect in the current sample of individuals with autism. The novel findings to emerge from this research were that the results from the TEA-Ch and the IED offer experimental evidence contradicting the hypothesis that overselectivity is associated with attention and cognitive flexibility. Replication of the current findings is essential for two reasons. First, the sample was too limited in size. Second, the standardised measures were possibly unsuitable measures for this clinical population as the lower functioning participants had difficulty passing the practice trials and completing the tasks assigned. Further analysis of stimulus overselectivity and its correlates is warranted given its importance when designing behavioral interventions for individuals with autism.

Acknowledgements

This study was completed by the first author under the supervision of the second author as partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Applied Behavior Analysis in the National University of Ireland, Galway. Funding was received for this research from the Galway Doctoral Research Fellowship Scheme of the College of Arts, Social Sciences, and Celtic Studies, National University of Ireland, Galway. Thanks to each of the participants and their families.

References

Cambridge Cognition (2011). The cambridge neuropsychological test automated battery. Cambridge, England: Cambridge Cognition Limited.

Dube, W. V. (2009). Stimulus overselectivity in discrimination learning. In P. Reed (Ed.), Behavioral theories and interventions for autism (pp. 23-46). New York, NY: Nova Science Publishers.

Farber, R.S., Dickson, C.A., & Dube, W.V. (2017). Reducing overselective stimulus control with differential observing responses. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 50, 87-105.

Gard, T., Hölzel, B.K., & Lazar, S.W. (2014). The potential effects of meditation on age-related cognitive decline: a systematic review. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 1307, 89–103.

Kelly, M.P. (2012). Stimulus over-selectivity: An investigation of extinction effects and correlates across populations (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from ARAN (Access to Research at NUI Galway), item record http://hdl.handle.net/10379/3282

Kelly, M.P., Leader, G., & Reed, P. (2015). Stimulus over-selectivity and extinction-induced recovery of performance as a product of intellectual impairment and autism severity. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 45, 3098–3106.

Kelly, M.P., Leader, G., & Reed, P. (2016). Factors producing over-selectivity in older individuals. AGE, 38, 1-10.

Leader, G., Loughnane, A., Mc Moreland, C., & Reed, P. (2009). The effect of stimulus salience on over-selectivity. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 39, 330–338.

Manly, T., Robertson, I. H., Anderson, V., & Nimmo-Smith, I. (1999). The Test of Everyday Attention for Children (TEA-Ch). Bury St. Edmunds: Thames Valley Test Company.

Ploog, B. O. (2010). Stimulus overselectivity four decades later: a review of the literature and its implications for current research in autism spectrum disorder. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disabilities, 40, 1332–1349.

Reed, P. (2017). Over-selectivity is related to autism quotient and empathizing, but not to systematizing. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, doi: 10.1007/s10803-016-2990-3. [Epub ahead of print].

Reed, P., Broomfield, L., McHugh, L., McCausland, A., & Leader, G. (2009). Extinction of overselected stimuli causes emergence of underselected cues in higher-functioning children with autistic spectrum disorders. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disabilities, 39, 290– 298.

Reed, P., Savile, A., & Truzoli, R. (2012). Event related potential analysis of stimulus over-selectivity. Research in Developmental Disabilities, 33, 655–662.

Reynolds, G., Watts, J., & Reed, P. (2012). Lack of evidence for inhibitory processes in over-selectivity. Behavioral Processes, 89, 14–22.

Keywords: stimulus overselectivity, autism, cognitive flexibility, Attention, Stimulus control

Conference: 2nd International Conference on Educational Neuroscience, Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates, 5 Mar - 6 Mar, 2017.

Presentation Type: Poster Presentation

Topic: Educational Neuroscience

Citation: Kelly MP and Reed P (2017). Stimulus Overselectivity in Autism and its Correlation with Attention and Cognitive Flexibility. Conference Abstract: 2nd International Conference on Educational Neuroscience. doi: 10.3389/conf.fnhum.2017.222.00015

Copyright: The abstracts in this collection have not been subject to any Frontiers peer review or checks, and are not endorsed by Frontiers. They are made available through the Frontiers publishing platform as a service to conference organizers and presenters.

The copyright in the individual abstracts is owned by the author of each abstract or his/her employer unless otherwise stated.

Each abstract, as well as the collection of abstracts, are published under a Creative Commons CC-BY 4.0 (attribution) licence (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) and may thus be reproduced, translated, adapted and be the subject of derivative works provided the authors and Frontiers are attributed.

For Frontiers’ terms and conditions please see https://www.frontiersin.org/legal/terms-and-conditions.

Received: 17 Feb 2017; Published Online: 11 Dec 2017.

* Correspondence: Dr. Michelle P Kelly, Emirates College for Advanced Education, Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates, michellepatriciakelly@gmail.com