| Title |
Reasoning on the Autism Spectrum: A Dual Process Theory Account
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, March 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s10803-016-2742-4 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Mark Brosnan, Marcus Lewton, Chris Ashwin |
| Abstract |
Dual process theory proposes two distinct reasoning processes in humans, an intuitive style that is rapid and automatic and a deliberative style that is more effortful. However, no study to date has specifically examined these reasoning styles in relation to the autism spectrum. The present studies investigated deliberative and intuitive reasoning profiles in: (1) a non-clinical sample from the general population with varying degrees of autism traits (n = 95), and (2) males diagnosed with ASD (n = 17) versus comparisons (n = 18). Taken together, the results suggest reasoning on the autism spectrum is compatible with the processes proposed by Dual Process Theory and that higher autism traits and ASD are characterised by a consistent bias towards deliberative reasoning (and potentially away from intuition). |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 21 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| France | 2 | 10% |
| Canada | 2 | 10% |
| United States | 2 | 10% |
| Brazil | 1 | 5% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 5% |
| Germany | 1 | 5% |
| Japan | 1 | 5% |
| Greece | 1 | 5% |
| Unknown | 10 | 48% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 15 | 71% |
| Scientists | 4 | 19% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 5% |
| Unknown | 1 | 5% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 144 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | <1% |
| Australia | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 142 | 99% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 24 | 17% |
| Student > Master | 24 | 17% |
| Student > Bachelor | 21 | 15% |
| Researcher | 11 | 8% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 8 | 6% |
| Other | 16 | 11% |
| Unknown | 40 | 28% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Psychology | 50 | 35% |
| Social Sciences | 12 | 8% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 10 | 7% |
| Neuroscience | 6 | 4% |
| Computer Science | 3 | 2% |
| Other | 16 | 11% |
| Unknown | 47 | 33% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 47. 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 28 February 2024.
All research outputs
#902,874
of 25,600,774 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders
#294
of 5,480 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#15,525
of 315,263 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders
#8
of 78 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,600,774 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 96th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 5,480 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.4. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% 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 315,263 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 95% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 78 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.