| Title |
Brief Report: Reduced Optimism Bias in Self-Referential Belief Updating in High-Functioning Autism
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, October 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s10803-016-2940-0 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Bojana Kuzmanovic, Lionel Rigoux, Kai Vogeley |
| Abstract |
Previous research has demonstrated irrational asymmetry in belief updating: people tend to take into account good news and neglect bad news. Contradicting formal learning principles, belief updates were on average larger after better-than-expected information than after worse-than-expected information. In the present study, typically developing subjects demonstrated this optimism bias in self-referential judgments. In contrast, adults with high-functioning autism spectrum disorder (ASD) were significantly less biased when updating self-referential beliefs (each group n = 21, matched for age, gender and IQ). These findings indicate a weaker influence of self-enhancing motives on prospective judgments in ASD. Reduced susceptibility to emotional and motivational biases in reasoning in ASD could elucidate impairments of social cognition, but may also confer important cognitive benefits. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 108 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 23 | 21% |
| United Kingdom | 8 | 7% |
| Canada | 4 | 4% |
| Germany | 2 | 2% |
| Netherlands | 1 | <1% |
| Australia | 1 | <1% |
| Comoros | 1 | <1% |
| India | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 67 | 62% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 92 | 85% |
| Scientists | 8 | 7% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 4 | 4% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 4 | 4% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 107 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 107 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 17 | 16% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 14 | 13% |
| Researcher | 12 | 11% |
| Student > Bachelor | 10 | 9% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 6 | 6% |
| Other | 17 | 16% |
| Unknown | 31 | 29% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Psychology | 32 | 30% |
| Neuroscience | 9 | 8% |
| Social Sciences | 6 | 6% |
| Engineering | 4 | 4% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 3 | 3% |
| Other | 18 | 17% |
| Unknown | 35 | 33% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 71. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 07 April 2024.
All research outputs
#616,550
of 25,750,437 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders
#180
of 5,440 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#11,718
of 325,099 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders
#6
of 70 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,750,437 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 97th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 5,440 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.5. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 325,099 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 70 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% of its contemporaries.