Andy Ie PSYC 190
Review and Evaluating
Freshman Seminar: Neurobiology of Autism
Defining and Quantifying the Social Phenotype in Autism The following methodology utilized eye-tracking technology in order to study the differentiation in visual perception between those individuals who do and do not have autism. The study measures the visual focus and gave precise measurements to the eye movements and focus of the subjects and tracked the viewing patterns. The technology as well gave “moment-by-moment visual traces left behind by the saccadic movements and fixations of the individual with autism” (899). The study used two individuals (autistic and normal), who watched Who’s Afraid of Virginia Woolf? This movie was chosen for its social complexities that the movie provided allowed the researchers to observe the understanding and cognition of the individuals, as well as how this may or may not aid in how the subjects eye movement may have led to atypical observations.
The author’s observations and the study found many disparities between the autistic and control individual. For one, with regard to facial observations the normal viewer followed the eyes while the autistic viewer tried to interpret the scene by following the speaker’s mouth. Since not all observations were not from the mouth the autistic viewer lost a lot of the plot and as a result had difficulty interpreting scenes. This shows that the eye is much more meaning full and that though the mouth may provide some aid in social understanding; it is less beneficial to understanding others.
Another instance is shown when the autistic viewer fails to notice the social interaction occurring in the scene, resulting in the autistic viewer to only follow the altercation in the front of the scene. Meanwhile the autistic viewer fails to notice the impact of these actions of other characters, for example Martha’s husband who is drinking in the back, as he is stressed by the flirtation by his wife. This scene and observation shows that the autistic subject was unable to ascertain the scenario and the lack of attention to social detail as a result leads to a misunderstanding to what is an actually occurring in a scenario like the one depicted in the study.
Thirdly, the autistic viewer was more attentive to the physical attention cues than the normal comparison viewer, who had a slower reaction to physical cues because he was more responsive to social cues, and it is shown in the slight back and forth delineation of his eye movement during the study. The autistic individual saw things in a much more simplified and visual sense, and because they failed to notice the social implications the individuals did not go back and try and gain social information that could have benefited their understanding of the movie, in the case of this study. Finally, nonverbal social cues are unnoticed by the autistic observer and not until they receive verbal cues will they understand what is occurring in a social situation. The normal observer on the other hand is aware of the non-verbal cues and in the example given directly follows the hand movement and facial features of the man being talked to in the other chair in the given scene example. The failure to recognize objects outside of a set event/action leaves the autistic individual confused as to the social implications of a scenario and the significance of others bodily actions.
The methodology relates to the phrase, “The eyes are the windows of the soul”, saying that the eyes which are observed by the non-autistic observer are much more beneficial to understanding people, and/or characters in a movie. On the other hand autistic individuals do not follow the eyes of other individuals interfering with their understanding of others. The eyes as shown in this study provide aid in understanding the social significance of a scenario, which is why the autistic individual who really only observe the mouth are at a disadvantages in