Template produced at the G

rap

hics S

up

po

rt Wo

rksh

op, M

edia Centre

Combining the strengths of UMIST andThe Victoria University of Manchester

ProcedureProspective participants for the AS group were recruited after consultation with NAS staff to identify suitable service users. Informal contacts and NAS staff were approached to participate as part of the control group. Measures were administered via a 45 minute interview and were presented in the order listed. Interviews were undertaken in resource centres and staffed housing for the AS group, and at the university or the first author’s home for the control group.

‘Slapstick’ sheep image taken from the jokes comprehension task (Corcoran et al., 1997)

ToM based gondola image taken from the jokescomprehension task (Corcoran et al., 1997)

ResultsTable 1: Significant within-group Spearman’s correlations for control group

Table 2: Significant within-group Spearman’s correlations for Asperger’s syndrome group

IntroductionA triad of impairments have been identified as co-occurring at an above-chance level across the autistic spectrum (Wing & Gould, 1979) comprising of abnormalities in communication and language, imaginative and symbolic abilities and social interaction (Wing, 1988). These impairments are observed in people with autism who are profoundly learning disabled through to those without a concomitant learning disability who are referred to as ‘high functioning’. Asperger’s syndrome [AS] (Wing, 1981) has been proposed as a sub-group of autism at the higher functioning end of the autistic spectrum to incorporate individuals who exhibit fewer general cognitive and language difficulties in addition to the triad of impairments (Wing, 1988). The dominant theoretical explanation in the literature posits that the triad of impairments results from an impaired Theory of Mind [ToM] mechanism (Baron-Cohen, Leslie & Frith, 1985). ToM (Premack & Woodruff, 1978) refers to the awareness of one’s own mind and the minds of others. It requires the ability to identify and take into account our own and other people’s thoughts, beliefs and intentions. Happé (1994) posits that if individuals with high functioning autism or Asperger’s syndrome are able to develop the ability to think about thoughts – a so-called ‘theory of mind’ – then this should be demonstrated

across a range of tests.

Aims(1) To explore the concurrent validity of a battery of measures previously used to measure ToM in adults with psychosis (2) To compare performances of a group of adults with Asperger’s syndrome and a neurotypical control group

MethodsParticipantsSix participants were recruited to the experimental group through a local National Autistic Society [NAS] support service in Manchester. All were adults (6 males) with diagnoses of AS or high functioning autism, ages ranged between 26-37, (mean = 30.5, SD = 4.85). Twenty-one participants were recruited to the control group (13 males, 8 females) consisting of informal contacts, plus members of staff from the NAS. Ages ranged between 20-56 (mean = 31.71, SD = 11.75). The control sample were not matched in terms of ability.

MeasuresJokes comprehension task (Corcoran et al., 1997)Twenty visual jokes: ten ‘slapstick’ jokes that could be understood in physical terms and ten jokes with a ToM component

Aha! task (Auble & Franks, 1978; Corcoran, 2003)Ten inductive reasoning scenarios based on physical and semantic properties that act as control task for the hints task

Hints task (Corcoran et al., 1995)Ten scenarios that require the ability to infer intentions behind indirect requests

True or false sentences (Corcoran, 1999)Twenty sentences that are judged as plausible or implausible, control task for metaphors task

Metaphors task (Bottini et al., 1994; Corcoran, ibid.)Twenty metaphorical sentences that are judged as plausible or implausible

Thematic selection task (Wason, 1966; Corcoran & Frith, 2005)Developed from principles of Wason selection task, uses ‘if p…, q….’ rule-based reasoning for four short scenarios: social familiar [SF], non-social familiar [NSF], social unfamiliar [SU] and non-social unfamiliar [NSU]

Projective imagination task (Blackshaw et al., 2001)Four pictured scenarios presented and cued /uncued responses generated

Table 3: Inferential statistics

DiscussionInter-correlation across the battery of tests was not observed in the results of the pilot study. However, the control group’s performances on the physical jokes, cued PIT, and the non-social familiar thematic reasoning item each correlated with three other measures (see Table 1). It seems that the tests may examine different aspects of ToM, which may draw upon different skills. On the other hand, the observed relationships may be due to conceptual similarities between some tests. There was some evidence of between group differences, but this was restricted to certain tests (see Table 3). The hints task and the ToM jokes differentiated the AS group and control group at a highly significant level (p <0.01). This could be explained in terms of either an impairment in those with AS in the cognitive mechanism used by controls to score highly; or an alternative strategy that was not as effective as that used by controls.

ConclusionMeasures featuring the understanding of intention differentiated the AS group and the control group, with significant differences observed between groups on tests of pragmatic language and joke comprehension. Few significant correlational relationships were found amongst the battery of measures and certain tests did not yield significant between-group differences. Further research will build upon the tentative explorations of the relationships between the measures used, as well as investigating differences between the performances of those with AS and matched neurotypical controls. Replication of the pilot study on a larger scale will prove useful in terms of providing a larger data set from which firm conclusions can be more confidently drawn.

Fleur.M.Coiffait@student.manchester.ac.uk

Concurrent validity of a battery of Theory of Mind measures within a group of adults with Asperger’s syndrome : A pilot studyFleur-Michelle Coiffait, Rhiannon Corcoran, Dougal Julian HareDivision of Clinical Psychology, School of Psychological Sciences, University of Manchester

ReferencesAuble, P.M., & Franks, J.J. (1978). The effects of effort towards comprehension on recall. Memory and Cognition, 6, 20-25.Baron-Cohen, S., Leslie, A., & Frith, U. (1985). Does the autistic child have a ‘theory of mind’? Cognition, 21, 37-46.Blackshaw, A.J., Kinderman, P., Hare, D.J., & Hatton, C. (2001). Theory of mind, causal attribution and paranoia in Asperger syndrome. Autism, 5, 2, 147-163.Bottini, G., Corcoran, R., Sterzi, R., Paulesu, E., Schenone, P., Scarpa, P., Frackowiak, R.S., & Frith, C.D. (1994). The role of the right hemisphere in the interpretation of figurative aspects of language. A positron emission tomography activation study. Brain, 117, 6, 1241-1253.Corcoran, R. (1999). Autonoetic awareness, executive social skills and the appreciation of intention: figurative reasoning in amnesia, confabulation and schizophrenia. Cognitive Neuropsychiatry, 4, 1, 55-80.Corcoran, R. (2003). Inductive reasoning and the understanding of intention in schizophrenia. Cognitive Neuropsychiatry, 8, 3, 23-235.Corcoran, R., Cahill, C. & Frith, C.D. (1997). The appreciation of visual jokes in people with schizophrenia: A study of ‘mentalizing’ ability. Schizophrenia Research, 24, 319-327.Corcoran, R., & Frith, C.D. (2005). Thematic reasoning and theory of mind: accounting for social inference difficulties in schizophrenia, Evolutionary Psychology, 3, 1-19.Corcoran, R., Mercer, G., & Frith, C.D. (1995). Schizophrenia, symptomatology and social inference: Investigating "theory of mind" in people with schizophrenia, Schizophrenia Research, 17, 5-13.Happé, F. (1994). Autism: An introduction to psychological theory. Hove: Psychology Press.Premack, D., & Woodruff, G. (1978). Does the chimpanzee have a theory of mind? Behavioural and Brain Sciences, 4, 515-526.Wason, P.C. (1966). Reasoning. In B.M. Foss (Ed.), New Horizons in Psychology, I. Harmondsworth: Penguin.Wing, L. (1981). Asperger’s syndrome: A clinical account. Psychological Medicine, 11, 1, 115-119.Wing, L. (1988). The continuum of autistic characteristics. In E. Shopler & G.B. Mesibov (Eds.), Diagnosis and assessment in autism (pp. 91-110). New York: Plenum Press.Wing, L., & Gould, J. (1979). Severe impairments of social interaction and associated abnormalities in children: Epidemiology and classification. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 9, 1, 11-29.

Correlated MeasuresCorrelated Measures Spearman's rp

(2-tailed)

Physical jokes Aha! sentences 0.67 <0.01

ToM jokes Aha! sentences 0.45 <0.05

ToM jokes PIT uncued 0.46 <0.05

Physical jokes PIT uncued 0.52 <0.05

PIT cued PIT uncued 0.61 <0.01

PIT cued Physical jokes 0.54 <0.05

PIT cued NSF TR 0.67 <0.05

SU TR NSF TR 0.54 <0.05

Correlated MeasuresCorrelated Measures Spearman's rp

(2-tailed)

Physical jokes T/F sentences 0.92 <0.05

Significant Between-Group Differences Mann-Whitney's U

p

(2-tailed)

Hints task 18.5 <0.01

Aha! Sentences 20.0 <0.05

ToM jokes 17.5 <0.01

Physical jokes 22.5 <0.05

Monday, 14 May 2012