Contrasting two types of auditory distraction in autistic and neurotypical individuals: A preregistered study

Attentional control (AC) allows us to concentrate on relevant information and ignore irrelevant information. The processing of irrelevant auditory information cannot be completely suppressed, however, because of the openness of the auditory system. As a result, auditory distractors have a negative effect on a variety of different cognitive tasks. Auditory distraction in individuals with autism spectrum disorder (ASD) is of particular importance, because of differences in AC compared to neurotypical individuals. However, a systematic, adequately powered investigation has not yet been conducted. The current pre-registered study was designed to close this empirical gap using a classic and robust empirical approach. We contrasted two types of auditory distraction in adult autistic participants with at least medium intellectual and language abilities and neurotypical participants, (1) the disruptive effect of changing distractors compared to repeated distractors (i.e., the changing-state effect), and (2) the disruptive effect of a single distractor that deviates from the previous stimulus pattern (i.e., the auditory deviant effect). The weak central coherence account predicts a more pronounced changing-state effect in autistic individuals due to superior local low-level information processing, and no differences for the auditory deviant effect. The hypothesis of predictive impairment in autism predicts no differences in the changing-state effect, and a reduced auditory deviant effect due to deficits in the formation of predictions in ASD. Our results are partly consistent and partly inconsistent with these predictions. Overall, we found that autistic and neurotypical individuals are largely similar in their susceptibility to auditory distraction. • In a preregistered study, we examined auditory distraction in adult autistic participants. • Different predictions could be derived from the WCC account and the PIA hypothesis. • We found that autistic and neurotypical individuals showed equal distractibility. • There was also no association between auditory distraction and the severity of autism. • The results are partly consistent and partly inconsistent with the theoretical predictions.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Research in Autism
Published
2024-10-01
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rasd.2024.102493
Citations
1
Primary Topic
Autism Spectrum Disorder Research
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.34
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Contrasting two types of auditory distraction in autistic and neurotypical individuals: A preregistered study

Jan Philipp Röer, Lejla Alikadic
1 citations
Research in Autism
Autism Spectrum Disorder Research
0.34
article

Contrasting two types of auditory distraction in autistic and neurotypical individuals: A preregistered study

Jan Philipp Röer, Lejla Alikadic
article en
1 citations

Abstract

Attentional control (AC) allows us to concentrate on relevant information and ignore irrelevant information. The processing of irrelevant auditory information cannot be completely suppressed, however, because of the openness of the auditory system. As a result, auditory distractors have a negative effect on a variety of different cognitive tasks. Auditory distraction in individuals with autism spectrum disorder (ASD) is of particular importance, because of differences in AC compared to neurotypical individuals. However, a systematic, adequately powered investigation has not yet been conducted. The current pre-registered study was designed to close this empirical gap using a classic and robust empirical approach. We contrasted two types of auditory distraction in adult autistic participants with at least medium intellectual and language abilities and neurotypical participants, (1) the disruptive effect of changing distractors compared to repeated distractors (i.e., the changing-state effect), and (2) the disruptive effect of a single distractor that deviates from the previous stimulus pattern (i.e., the auditory deviant effect). The weak central coherence account predicts a more pronounced changing-state effect in autistic individuals due to superior local low-level information processing, and no differences for the auditory deviant effect. The hypothesis of predictive impairment in autism predicts no differences in the changing-state effect, and a reduced auditory deviant effect due to deficits in the formation of predictions in ASD. Our results are partly consistent and partly inconsistent with these predictions. Overall, we found that autistic and neurotypical individuals are largely similar in their susceptibility to auditory distraction. • In a preregistered study, we examined auditory distraction in adult autistic participants. • Different predictions could be derived from the WCC account and the PIA hypothesis. • We found that autistic and neurotypical individuals showed equal distractibility. • There was also no association between auditory distraction and the severity of autism. • The results are partly consistent and partly inconsistent with the theoretical predictions.

Research in AutismVol. 118
Witten/Herdecke University (DE)
Openalex Percentile: Top 40%
Autism Spectrum Disorder Research
0.34
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.