Pragmatic Language Intervention for Adults With Asperger Syndrome or High-Functioning Autism: A Feasibility Study

2013 ◽  
Vol 40 (Fall) ◽  
pp. 85-97 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kimberly A. Murza ◽  
Chad Nye
Keyword(s):  
Asperger Syndrome ◽  
Feasibility Study ◽  
High Functioning Autism ◽  
Language Intervention ◽  
Pragmatic Language ◽  
High Functioning

Use of Context in Pragmatic Language Comprehension by Children with Asperger Syndrome or High-Functioning Autism

2006 ◽  
Vol 37 (6) ◽  
pp. 1049-1059 ◽  
Author(s):  
Soile Loukusa ◽  
Eeva Leinonen ◽  
Sanna Kuusikko ◽  
Katja Jussila ◽  
Marja-Leena Mattila ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Asperger Syndrome ◽  
Language Comprehension ◽  
High Functioning Autism ◽  
Pragmatic Language ◽  
High Functioning

Gaze behavior of pre-adolescent children afflicted with Asperger Syndrome

2013 ◽  
Vol 9 (2) ◽  
pp. 173-186 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mari Wiklund
Keyword(s):  
Asperger Syndrome ◽  
Conversation Analysis ◽  
High Functioning Autism ◽  
Eye Contact ◽  
Nonverbal Behaviors ◽  
Gaze Behavior ◽  
High Functioning ◽  
The Gaze ◽  
In The Beginning ◽  
Straight Ahead

Asperger syndrome (AS) is a form of high-functioning autism characterized by qualitative impairment in social interaction. People afflicted with AS typically have abnormal nonverbal behaviors which are often manifested by avoiding eye contact. Gaze constitutes an important interactional resource, and an AS person’s tendency to avoid eye contact may affect the fluidity of conversations and cause misunderstandings. For this reason, it is important to know the precise ways in which this avoidance is done, and in what ways it affects the interaction. The objective of this article is to describe the gaze behavior of preadolescent AS children in institutional multiparty conversations. Methodologically, the study is based on conversation analysis and a multimodal study of interaction. The findings show that three main patterns are used for avoiding eye contact: 1) fixing one’s gaze straight ahead; 2) letting one’s gaze wander around; and 3) looking at one’s own hands when speaking. The informants of this study do not look at the interlocutors at all in the beginning or the middle of their turn. However, sometimes they turn to look at the interlocutors at the end of their turn. This proves that these children are able to use gaze as a source of feedback. When listening, looking at the speaker also seems to be easier for them than looking at the listeners when speaking.

scholarly journals The systemizing quotient: an investigation of adults with Asperger syndrome or high–functioning autism, and normal sex differences

2003 ◽  
Vol 358 (1430) ◽  
pp. 361-374 ◽  
Author(s):  
Simon Baron-Cohen ◽  
Jennifer Richler ◽  
Dheraj Bisarya ◽  
Nhishanth Gurunathan ◽  
Sally Wheelwright
Keyword(s):  
Sex Differences ◽  
General Population ◽  
Asperger Syndrome ◽  
High Functioning Autism ◽  
Mental States ◽  
Self Report ◽  
Adult Males ◽  
High Functioning ◽  
Major Dimension ◽  
Empathy Quotient

Systemizing is the drive to analyse systems or construct systems. A recent model of psychological sex differences suggests that this is a major dimension in which the sexes differ, with males being more drawn to systemize than females. Currently, there are no self–report measures to assess this important dimension. A second major dimension of sex differences is empathizing (the drive to identify mental states and respond to these with an appropriate emotion). Previous studies find females score higher on empathy measures. We report a new self–report questionnaire, the Systemizing Quotient (SQ), for use with adults of normal intelligence. It contains 40 systemizing items and 20 control items. On each systemizing item, a person can score 2, 1 or 0, so the SQ has a maximum score of 80 and a minimum of zero. In Study 1, we measured the SQ of n = 278 adults (114 males, 164 females) from a general population, to test for predicted sex differences (male superiority) in systemizing. All subjects were also given the Empathy Quotient (EQ) to test if previous reports of female superiority would be replicated. In Study 2 we employed the SQ and the EQ with n = 47 adults (33 males, 14 females) with Asperger syndrome (AS) or high–functioning autism (HFA), who are predicted to be either normal or superior at systemizing, but impaired at empathizing. Their scores were compared with n = 47 matched adults from the general population in Study 1. In Study 1, as predicted, normal adult males scored significantly higher than females on the SQ and significantly lower on the EQ. In Study 2, again as predicted, adults with AS/HFA scored significantly higher on the SQ than matched controls, and significantly lower on the EQ than matched controls. The SQ reveals both a sex difference in systemizing in the general population and an unusually strong drive to systemize in AS/HFA. These results are discussed in relation to two linked theories: the ‘empathizing–systemizing’ (E–S) theory of sex differences and the extreme male brain (EMB) theory of autism.

Asperger syndrome and high-functioning autism

1998 ◽  
Vol 172 (3) ◽  
pp. 200-209 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christopher Gillberg
Keyword(s):  
Asperger Syndrome ◽  
High Functioning Autism ◽  
Background Factors ◽  
High Functioning ◽  
History Of

This paper reviews the history of Asperger syndrome (AS) and high-functioning autism (HFA), current diagnostic concepts and criteria, some controversial diagnostic issues, epidemiology, background factors, outcome, and intervention guidelines.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document