Cited by 62Autism Spectrum Disorder ResearchVisual perception and processing mechanismsVisual Attention and Saliency Detection

Multiple object tracking in autism spectrum disorders

Open access
Koldewyn, Kami, Weigelt, Sarah, Kanwisher, Nancy, Jiang, Yuhong·2013·Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders

Abstract

Difficulties in visual attention are often implicated in autism spectrum disorders (ASD) but it remains unclear which aspects of attention are affected. Here, we used a multiple object tracking (MOT) task to quantitatively characterize dynamic attentional function in children with ASD aged 5-12. While the ASD group performed significantly worse overall, the group difference did not increase with increased object speed. This finding suggests that decreased MOT performance is not due to deficits in dynamic attention but instead to a diminished capacity to select and maintain attention on multiple targets. Further, MOT performance improved from 5 to 10 years in both typical and ASD groups with similar developmental trajectories. These results argue against a specific deficit in dynamic attention in ASD.

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 · 10.1007/s10803-012-1694-6

Cites

114 of 114 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?

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

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Koldewyn, K., Weigelt, S., Kanwisher, N., & Jiang, Y.
Affiliations
  • McGovern Institute for Brain Research (US)
  • University of Minnesota (US)
Corresponding author
Koldewyn, Kami
Venue
Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders
Published
2012-10-27
Volume
43
Issue
6
Pages
1394-1405
ISSN
  • 0162-3257 (ISSN-L)
  • 1573-3432
OpenAlex
W1975156097
Cited by
62
References
113
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 7 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 3 · 2016: 5 · 2015: 8 · 2014: 4 · 2013: 3
FWCI
2.46
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
  • DSpace@MIT (Massachusetts Institute of Technology) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-sa)
Funders
National Eye Institute (R01EY013455)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Autism Spectrum Disorder Research
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Visual perception and processing mechanisms
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Visual Attention and Saliency Detection
Keywords
autism spectrum disorder, multiple object tracking, visual attention, dynamic attention, selective attention, sustained attention, object speed, developmental trajectories, children
MeSH terms
Attention, Child, Child Development, Child Development Disorders, Pervasive, Child, Preschool, Female, Humans, Male, Motion Perception, Neuropsychological Tests, Registries, Space Perception

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