People or Trains? Visual Preference for Social versus Non-Social Information in Genetic Syndromes and Neurodevelopmental Disorders

People or Trains? Visual Preference for Social versus Non-Social Information in Genetic Syndromes and Neurodevelopmental DisordersHayley Crawford, Joanna Moss, Natasha Elliot, Giles Anderson, Chris Oliver & Joseph McCleery

+Social Information ProcessingSocial development is critically dependent on attending to social stimuli (Dawson et al., 1998)Differences in attending to social stimuli in people with different social profiles (Riby and Hancock, 2008; 2009)

+Social Information ProcessingEye-trackingHow long someone looks at stimuli: information processingFirst thing someone looks at: attentional priorityStudy 1: ASD Study 2: Fragile X, Cornelia de Lange, Rubinstein-Taybi syndromes

+Social Information Processing in ASDPeople with ASD spend less time than TD individuals viewing people and faces in static pictures of social interactions (Kirchner et al., 2010; Riby & Hancock, 2008 & 2009)+Social Information Processing in ASDDirect side-by-side comparison:Toddlers with ASD do not allocate as much attention to social stimuli as TD toddlers

(Pierce et al., 2011) (Klin et al., 2009)

Some studies show typical looking times, butNo preference at first fixation (Fletcher-Watson et al., 2009)Increased time taken to fixate (Freeth et al., 2010)Static side-by-side photographs

+Study 1Research Questions: Do children with ASD spontaneously allocate less attention to naturalistic dynamic social and non-social scenes?Does the directedness of the stimuli affect visual preference?Two videos were presented side-by-side for 8000msOne video was social, the other was non-socialThe actor/object in both videos were either directed towards, or moved past the participant+

Example videos+ParticipantsASD (n=16)SEN (n=16)PCA mean (SD)13.33 (.62)13.06 (.90).323Male : Female15 : 115 : 11.000Verbal ability mean standard score71.94 (18.55)77.75 (15.17).340Recruited and tested at local special educational needs secondary school+Dwell Time Proportion No main effect of participant:No difference in looking time to social or non-socialMain effect of direction: both groups look more at social directed vs. social non-directedA priori t-tests:Participants with ASD look less at social directed than participants with SEN (p = .037)No difference in social non-directed+Time to FixateNo main effect of participant:No difference time taken to fixate on social or non-socialMain effect of direction: both groups look quicker to social directed vs. social non-directedA priori t-tests:No difference in speed to fixate on social directed or non-directed.+Study 1Children with ASD look less at social directed stimuli than children with SEN but fixate on the stimuli at the same speedResearch Questions: Do children with ASD spontaneously allocate less attention to naturalistic dynamic social and non-social scenes? NoDoes the directedness of the stimuli affect this?Yes

+DiscussionSimilarities in attentional priority, differences in attentional maintenanceSupports previous literature (Pierce et al., 2011; Klin et al., 2009)

Extends previous literatureMore naturalOnly when social information particularly salient (directed)

+Study 2Genetic syndromes associated with intellectual disability and unique social profilesFragile X Syndrome (FXS)1:4,000 males1:8,000 femalesSocial withdrawal and anxiety Increased prevalence of ASDSocial interest

+Study 2Genetic syndromes associated with intellectual disability and unique social profilesFragile X Syndrome (FXS)Cornelia de Lange Syndrome (CdLS)1:4,000 males1:8,000 females1: 40,000 live birthsSocial withdrawal and anxiety Social withdrawal and anxietyIncreased prevalence of ASDIncreased prevalence of ASDSocial interest

Social interest

+Study 2Genetic syndromes associated with intellectual disability and unique social profilesFragile X Syndrome (FXS)Cornelia de Lange Syndrome (CdLS)Rubinstein-Taybi Syndrome (RTS)1:4,000 males1:8,000 females1: 40,000 live births1: 100,000-125,000 live birthsSocial withdrawal and anxiety Social withdrawal and anxietyIntact social skills relative to abilityIncreased prevalence of ASDIncreased prevalence of ASDIncreased prevalence of ASD (repetitive behaviour)Social interest

Social interest

Social interest+Social Information Processing in FXS, CdLS & RTSLimited literatureFragile X Syndrome (FXS)No difference in looking to social information(Williams et al., 2013)Reduced eye looking+Social Information Processing in FXS, CdLS & RTSLimited literatureFragile X Syndrome (FXS)Cornelia de Lange Syndrome (CdLS)No difference in looking to social information(Williams et al., 2013)Reduced eye lookingTypical eye looking+Social Information Processing in FXS, CdLS & RTSLimited literatureFragile X Syndrome (FXS)Cornelia de Lange Syndrome (CdLS)Rubinstein-Taybi Syndrome (RTS)No difference in looking to social information(Williams et al., 2013)Reduced eye lookingTypical eye lookingTypical eye looking+Research QuestionsResearch Questions: Do children with FXS, RTS and CdLS spontaneously allocate similar attention to naturalistic dynamic social and non-social scenes? Does the directedness of the stimuli affect visual preference?

Same method as Study 1+ParticipantsFXS (n=15)CdLS (n=14)RTS (n=19)pCA mean (SD)24.21 (8.61)18.21 (5.59)20.94 (11.94).303Male : female15 : 06 : 8 5 : 14< .001Adaptive behaviour std. score mean (SD)47.80 (14.64)51.29 (17.42)47.89 (15.95).798SCQ mean total score (DS)17.81 (5.73)19.60 (6.56)17.71 (6.27).663

+Dwell TimeNo main effect of participant:No difference in looking time to social or non-socialMain effect of direction: All groups look more at social directed vs. social non-directed+Time to FixateSignificant direction x participant group interactionDifference in how directedness affects speed to fixate to videosCdLS fixate to social directed videos slower than FXS & RTSFXS: fixate on social directed and non-directed at similar speedCdLS: fixate on social non-directed quicker than directedRTS: fixate on social directed quicker than non-directed+Summary of resultsParticipants with FXS: look at social directed and non-directed for same time, fixate at same speedParticipants with CdLS: look at social directed and non-directed for same time, fixate on social non-directed quicker than directedParticipants with RTS: look at social directed and non-directed for same time, fixate on social directed quicker than non-directedParticipants with CdLS take longer to fixate on social directed than both other groupsNB: TD participants+DiscussionResearch Questions: Do children with FXS, RTS and CdLS spontaneously allocate similar attention to naturalistic dynamic social and non-social scenes? Yes dwell timeDoes the directedness of the stimuli affect visual preference?Yes

+DiscussionFragile X Syndrome (FXS)Cornelia de Lange Syndrome (CdLS)Rubinstein-Taybi Syndrome (RTS)Social information processingSocial withdrawal and anxiety Social withdrawal and anxietyIntact social skills relative to abilityDifferences in time to fixate on social stimuliSocial interest

Social interest

Social interestSimilar dwell time to social stimuli+General DiscussionCoarse measure of dwell time highlighted differences in those with and without typical social development (Study 1)Nuanced measure of time taken to fixate on stimuli highlighted differences in those with more subtle differences in their social presentation (Study 2)Previous studies show social processing differences in groups at polar ends of a sociability spectrum (ASD, WS; Riby and colleagues, 2008 & 2009)+Thank you for listening+