↓ Skip to main content

A Learning-Style Theory for Understanding Autistic Behaviors

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, January 2011
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (96th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (88th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
3 news outlets
twitter
3 X users
facebook
4 Facebook pages

Readers on

mendeley
205 Mendeley
citeulike
6 CiteULike
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
A Learning-Style Theory for Understanding Autistic Behaviors
Published in
Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, January 2011
DOI 10.3389/fnhum.2011.00077
Pubmed ID
Authors

Ning Qian, Richard M. Lipkin

Abstract

Understanding autism's ever-expanding array of behaviors, from sensation to cognition, is a major challenge. We posit that autistic and typically developing brains implement different algorithms that are better suited to learn, represent, and process different tasks; consequently, they develop different interests and behaviors. Computationally, a continuum of algorithms exists, from lookup table (LUT) learning, which aims to store experiences precisely, to interpolation (INT) learning, which focuses on extracting underlying statistical structure (regularities) from experiences. We hypothesize that autistic and typical brains, respectively, are biased toward LUT and INT learning, in low- and high-dimensional feature spaces, possibly because of their narrow and broad tuning functions. The LUT style is good at learning relationships that are local, precise, rigid, and contain little regularity for generalization (e.g., the name-number association in a phonebook). However, it is poor at learning relationships that are context dependent, noisy, flexible, and do contain regularities for generalization (e.g., associations between gaze direction and intention, language and meaning, sensory input and interpretation, motor-control signal and movement, and social situation and proper response). The LUT style poorly compresses information, resulting in inefficiency, sensory overload (overwhelm), restricted interests, and resistance to change. It also leads to poor prediction and anticipation, frequent surprises and over-reaction (hyper-sensitivity), impaired attentional selection and switching, concreteness, strong local focus, weak adaptation, and superior and inferior performances on simple and complex tasks. The spectrum nature of autism can be explained by different degrees of LUT learning among different individuals, and in different systems of the same individual. Our theory suggests that therapy should focus on training autistic LUT algorithm to learn regularities.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 205 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 4 2%
France 2 <1%
Australia 2 <1%
Switzerland 1 <1%
Germany 1 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Portugal 1 <1%
China 1 <1%
Canada 1 <1%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 191 93%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 39 19%
Student > Ph. D. Student 36 18%
Researcher 29 14%
Student > Bachelor 18 9%
Professor 15 7%
Other 44 21%
Unknown 24 12%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 59 29%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 21 10%
Social Sciences 21 10%
Medicine and Dentistry 13 6%
Neuroscience 11 5%
Other 44 21%
Unknown 36 18%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 27. 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 14 June 2019.
All research outputs
#1,218,141
of 22,651,245 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#593
of 7,108 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#6,514
of 180,239 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#13
of 118 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,651,245 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 94th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,108 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.5. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% 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 180,239 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 118 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% of its contemporaries.