| Title |
Are Children with Autism Spectrum Disorder Initially Attuned to Object Function Rather Than Shape for Word Learning?
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, December 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s10803-015-2657-5 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Charlotte Field, Melissa L. Allen, Charlie Lewis |
| Abstract |
We investigate the function bias-generalising words to objects with the same function-in typically developing (TD) children, children with autism spectrum disorder (ASD) and children with other developmental disorders. Across four trials, a novel object was named and its function was described and demonstrated. Children then selected the other referent from a shape match (same shape, different function) and function match (same function, different shape) object. TD children and children with ASD were 'function biased', although further investigation established that having a higher VMA facilitated function bias understanding in TD children, but having a lower VMA facilitated function bias understanding in children with ASD. This suggests that children with ASD are initially attuned to object function, not shape. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 | 1 | 50% |
| Ecuador | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 50% |
| Members of the public | 1 | 50% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 61 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Netherlands | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 60 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 11 | 18% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 9 | 15% |
| Researcher | 7 | 11% |
| Student > Bachelor | 5 | 8% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 4 | 7% |
| Other | 9 | 15% |
| Unknown | 16 | 26% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Psychology | 22 | 36% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 7 | 11% |
| Social Sciences | 5 | 8% |
| Linguistics | 1 | 2% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 5 | 8% |
| Unknown | 20 | 33% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 24 August 2016.
All research outputs
#14,184,606
of 23,867,274 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders
#3,497
of 5,240 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#194,731
of 396,320 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders
#56
of 72 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,867,274 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 5,240 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.2. This one is in the 31st percentile – i.e., 31% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 396,320 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 49th percentile – i.e., 49% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 72 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.