Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-l7hp2 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-30T15:57:48.998Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Linguistic processing in high-functioning adults with autism or Asperger's syndrome. Is global coherence impaired?

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  17 October 2000

THERESE JOLLIFFE
Affiliation:
Departments of Experimental Psychology and Psychiatry, University of Cambridge
SIMON BARON-COHEN
Affiliation:
Departments of Experimental Psychology and Psychiatry, University of Cambridge

Abstract

Background. Linguistic processing was explored in normally intelligent adults with either autism or Asperger's syndrome, to test if global coherence was impaired. Global coherence is the ability to establish causal connections and interrelate local chunks into higher-order chunks so that most linguistic elements are linked together thematically. Since individuals with autism are hypothesized to have weak central coherence then one would predict that the clinical groups would have difficulty integrating information globally so as to derive full meaning.

Methods. Two experiments were designed to test global coherence. Experiment 1 investigated whether individuals on the autism spectrum condition could arrange sentences coherently. Experiment 2 investigated whether they were less able to use context to make a global inference.

Results. The clinical groups were less able to arrange sentences coherently and use context to make a global inference.

Conclusions. The results suggest that individuals on the autism spectrum have impaired global coherence. Arranging sentences and making global inferences correlated highly, suggesting that central coherence may be a unitary force in these different tasks. Of the two clinical groups, the autism group had the greater deficit. The effect that such a deficit would have on one's daily life is discussed, along with possible explanations for the clinical groups' greater difficulty, and suggestions for future research.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
© 2000 Cambridge University Press

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)