Cited by 168Autism Spectrum Disorder ResearchChild and Animal Learning DevelopmentAction Observation and Synchronization

Prediction in autism spectrum disorder: A systematic review of empirical evidence

Open access
Cannon, Jonathan, O'Brien, Amanda M., Bungert, Lindsay, Sinha, Pawan·2021·Autism Research

Abstract

According to a recent influential proposal, several phenotypic features of autism spectrum disorder (ASD) may be accounted for by differences in predictive skills between individuals with ASD and neurotypical individuals. In this systematic review, we describe results from 47 studies that have empirically tested this hypothesis. We assess the results based on two observable aspects of prediction: learning a pairing between an antecedent and a consequence and responding to an antecedent in a predictive manner. Taken together, these studies suggest distinct differences in both predictive learning and predictive response. Studies documenting differences in learning predictive pairings indicate challenges in detecting such relationships especially when predictive features of an antecedent have low salience or consistency, and studies showing differences in habituation and perceptual adaptation suggest low‐level predictive processing differences in ASD. These challenges may account for the observed differences in the influence of predictive priors, in spontaneous predictive movement or gaze, and in social prediction. An important goal for future research will be to better define and constrain the broad domain‐general hypothesis by testing multiple types of prediction within the same individuals. Additional promising avenues include studying prediction within naturalistic contexts and assessing the effect of prediction‐based intervention on supporting functional outcomes for individuals with ASD. Lay Summary: Researchers have suggested that many features of autism spectrum disorder (ASD) may be explained by differences in the prediction skills of people with ASD. We review results from 47 studies. These studies suggest that ASD may be associated with differences in the learning of predictive pairings (e.g., learning cause and effect) and in low‐level predictive processing in the brain (e.g., processing repeated sounds). These findings lay the groundwork for research that can improve our understanding of ASD and inform interventions. Autism Res 2021, 14: 604–630. © 2021 International Society for Autism Research and Wiley Periodicals LLC

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/aur.2482

Cites

103 of 103 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Several theories postulate that predictive impairments underlie autism spectrum disorder, many based on the Bayesian Brain framework.

    “In the last years, several theories have postulated predictive impairments to underlie autism spectrum disorder (ASD), many of which were based on the Bayesian Brain framework”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. van Boxtel JJA, Dapretto M, & Lu H (2016b). Intact recognition, but attenuated adaptation, for biological motion in youth with autism spectrum disorder. Autism Research: Official Journal of the International Society for Autism Research, 9(10), 1103– 1113. 26808343

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Cannon, J., O'Brien, A. M., Bungert, L., & Sinha, P.
Affiliations
  • Massachusetts Institute of Technology (US)
  • Department of Brain and Cognitive Sciences Massachusetts Institute of Technology Cambridge Massachusetts USA
Venue
Autism Research
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2021-02-11
Volume
14
Issue
4
Pages
604-630
ISSN
  • 1939-3792 (ISSN-L)
  • 1939-3806
OpenAlex
W3127385572
Cited by
168
References
103
Citations by year
2026: 31 · 2025: 39 · 2024: 37 · 2023: 32 · 2022: 22 · 2021: 7
FWCI
3.60
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Autism Research (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
  • DSpace@MIT (Massachusetts Institute of Technology) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-sa)
Funders
  • Massachusetts Institute of Technology
  • Simons Foundation Autism Research Initiative
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Autism Spectrum Disorder Research
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Child and Animal Learning Development
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Action Observation and Synchronization
Keywords
autism spectrum disorder, prediction, predictive learning, habituation, perceptual adaptation, predictive processing, social forecasting
MeSH terms
Autism Spectrum Disorder, Autistic Disorder, Brain, Humans, Learning, Motivation

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review