4.5 Article

Discrepancy between high non-verbal intelligence and low accuracy at reading emotional expressions in the eyes reflects the magnitude of social-emotional difficulties in autism

Journal

Publisher

SPRINGER HEIDELBERG
DOI: 10.1007/s00406-022-01471-z

Keywords

Autism; Social understanding; Eye contact

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Many high functioning autistic individuals face challenges in daily living skills and have poor outcomes in employment, relationships, and quality of life. The difference between non-verbal intelligence and emotional processing in autism is significant, and this gap is related to self-perceived emotional/social difficulties.
Many so-called high functioning autistic individuals struggle with daily living skills, and have poorer than expected adult outcomes in employment, relationships, and quality of life. Significant discrepancies between non-verbal intelligence and emotional processing can be observed in autism, but the role of the magnitude of this gap in achieving potential psychosocial outcome is not known. Here, we show in a large group of participants (n = 107), that only among those with an autism diagnosis (n = 33), the gap between non-verbal intelligence (as measured by Raven's matrices) and the ability to perform the Reading the Mind in the Eyes test significantly predicts self-perceived emotional/social difficulties as assessed by the Empathy Quotient. Our results suggest that it is specifically the magnitude of the gap between (high) levels of abstract reasoning skills and poor proficiency in reading emotions expressed by the eyes that predicts self-perceived difficulties in emotional and social interactions among adults with autism. A better understanding of the underlying causes of the discrepancy between potential and actual psychosocial outcomes is the first step toward developing the most appropriate support for this vulnerable population, and our study offers some potentially important insights in this regard.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available