Back

No evidence for differential saccadic adaptation in children and adults with an Autism Spectrum diagnosis.

Tarrit, K.; Freedman, E. G.; Francisco, A. A.; Horsthuis, D. J.; Molholm, S.; Foxe, J. J.

2023-06-04 neurology
10.1101/2023.05.31.23290682
Show abstract

BackgroundAltered patterns of eye-movements during scene exploration, and atypical gaze preferences in social settings, have long been noted as features of the Autism phenotype. While these are typically attributed to differences in social engagement and interests (e.g., preferences for inanimate objects over face stimuli), there are also reports of differential saccade measures to non-social stimuli, raising the possibility that fundamental differences in visuo-sensorimotor processing may be at play. Here, we tested the plasticity of the eye-movement system using a classic saccade-adaptation paradigm to assess whether individuals with ASD make typical adjustments to their eye-movements in response to experimentally introduced errors. Saccade adaptation can be measured in infants as young as 10 months, raising the possibility that such measures could be useful as early neuromarkers of ASD risk. MethodsSaccade amplitudes were measured while children and adults with ASD (N=41) and age-matched typically developing (TD) individuals (N=68) made rapid eye-movements to peripherally presented targets. During adaptation trials, the target was relocated from 20-degrees to 15-degrees from fixation once a saccade to the original target location was initiated, a manipulation that leads to systematic reduction in saccade amplitudes in typical observers. ResultsNeither children nor adults with ASD showed any differences relative to TD peers in their abilities to appropriately adapt saccades in the face of persistently introduced errors. ConclusionsOf the three studies to date of saccade adaptation in ASD, none have shown frank deficits in saccade adaptation. Unlike prior studies, we found no evidence for a slower adaptation rate during the early adaptation phase, and no of evidence greater variance of saccade amplitudes in ASD. In post-hoc analysis, there was evidence for larger primary saccades to non-adapted targets, a finding requiring replication in future work.

Matching journals

The top 7 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
Autism Research
based on 14 papers
Top 0.1%
15.4%
2
Brain
based on 69 papers
Top 1%
10.2%
3
PLOS ONE
based on 1737 papers
Top 62%
6.4%
4
Scientific Reports
based on 701 papers
Top 34%
5.3%
5
Clinical Neurophysiology
based on 19 papers
Top 0.5%
5.1%
6
NeuroImage: Clinical
based on 77 papers
Top 2%
5.1%
7
Human Brain Mapping
based on 53 papers
Top 2%
3.0%
50% of probability mass above
8
PLOS Digital Health
based on 88 papers
Top 5%
2.8%
9
Brain Communications
based on 79 papers
Top 3%
2.8%
10
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
based on 100 papers
Top 5%
2.4%
11
Epilepsia
based on 27 papers
Top 0.9%
2.4%
12
Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders
based on 11 papers
Top 0.5%
2.4%
13
Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
based on 11 papers
Top 0.6%
1.8%
14
Cortex
based on 11 papers
Top 0.1%
1.8%
15
NeuroImage
based on 36 papers
Top 3%
1.3%
16
Translational Psychiatry
based on 94 papers
Top 7%
1.3%
17
Frontiers in Neuroscience
based on 29 papers
Top 3%
1.2%
18
Progress in Neuro-Psychopharmacology and Biological Psychiatry
based on 10 papers
Top 0.5%
1.2%
19
Molecular Autism
based on 11 papers
Top 0.7%
1.2%
20
Scientific Data
based on 30 papers
Top 3%
0.8%
21
Brain Stimulation
based on 27 papers
Top 2%
0.8%
22
Annals of Clinical and Translational Neurology
based on 22 papers
Top 4%
0.8%
23
Neurology
based on 38 papers
Top 7%
0.7%
24
Nature Communications
based on 483 papers
Top 44%
0.7%
25
Annals of Neurology
based on 43 papers
Top 6%
0.7%
26
Journal of Neural Engineering
based on 19 papers
Top 2%
0.7%
27
Neurorehabilitation and Neural Repair
based on 11 papers
Top 2%
0.7%
28
Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews
based on 19 papers
Top 4%
0.7%
29
eLife
based on 262 papers
Top 34%
0.7%
30
Cerebral Cortex
based on 15 papers
Top 2%
0.7%