Cited by 20Autism Spectrum Disorder ResearchMotor Control and AdaptationAction Observation and Synchronization

Investigating how Explicit Contextual Cues Affect Predictive Sensorimotor Control in Autistic Adults

Open access
Arthur, Tom, Brosnan, Mark, Harris, David, Buckingham, Gavin, Wilson, Mark, Williams, Genevieve, Vine, Sam·2023·Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders

Abstract

Research suggests that sensorimotor difficulties in autism could be reduced by providing individuals with explicit contextual information. To test this, we examined autistic visuomotor control during a virtual racquetball task, in which participants hit normal and unexpectedly-bouncy balls using a handheld controller. The probability of facing each type of ball was varied unpredictably over time. However, during cued trials, participants received explicit information about the likelihood of facing each uncertain outcome. When compared to neurotypical controls, autistic individuals displayed poorer task performance, atypical gaze profiles, and more restricted swing kinematics. These visuomotor patterns were not significantly affected by contextual cues, indicating that autistic people exhibit underlying differences in how prior information and environmental uncertainty are dynamically modulated during movement tasks.

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/s10803-022-05718-5

Cites

82 of 82 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?

  • Arthur and colleagues found decreased influence of tonic volatility based on gaze pitch angle in autistic compared to non-autistic adults when playing tennis in virtual reality.

    “However, Arthur and colleagues [17] found decreased influence of tonic volatility based on gaze pitch angle in autistic compared to non-autistic adults when playing tennis in virtual reality.”

    From Predicting emotional valence in autism: a preregistered study in the Bayesian Brain framework (2026) · cites this paper as [17]

    The Results > Gaze Responses section reports a smaller change in gaze pitch angle for autistic than neurotypical adults when explicit probabilistic cues were provided. It does not identify this difference as a decreased influence of tonic volatility; the Results > Manipulation Checks section says volatile conditions raised fixation height in both groups. The Methods describe the VR task as racquetball, not tennis (page numbers unavailable). (LLM, conf=0.86)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • The HGF workflow included extraction of empirical priors from pilot and Lawson data, parameter recovery, model identifiability, posterior predictive checks, and random-effect Bayesian model comparison.

    “The workflow includes the extraction of empirical priors from a combination of our pilot data and the data shared from Lawson et al. [17], parameter recovery and model identifiability based on simulated data, posterior predictive checks and random-effect analysis Bayesian model comparison as implemented in the VBA toolbox [41].”

    From Predicting emotional valence in autism: a preregistered study in the Bayesian Brain framework (2026) · cites this paper as [17]

    The Methods > Data Analysis passages (page unavailable) say Lawson et al. data informed a G*Power sample-size calculation and describe mixed-model ANOVAs and Bayes factors computed in JASP. Searches for HGF, empirical priors, parameter recovery, posterior predictive checks, and the VBA toolbox found no passage describing the claimed workflow. (LLM, conf=0.76)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • No differences in tonic volatility extracted from behaviour were found in the Wisconsin card-sorting task or grip force in a size weight illusion task.

    “Furthermore, no differences in tonic volatility extracted from the behaviour were found in the Wisconsin card-sorting task [16] or grip force in a size weight illusion task [17].”

    From Predicting emotional valence in autism: a preregistered study in the Bayesian Brain framework (2026) · cites this paper as [17]

    The citation [17] is attached to the claim about grip force in a size–weight illusion task. The Methods (Data Analysis; page unavailable) describe a virtual racquetball interception task and hand-controller kinematics, not grip force. Searches for the size–weight illusion and behaviourally extracted tonic volatility found no passage addressing that claim. (LLM, conf=0.76)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

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
Arthur, T., Brosnan, M., Harris, D., Buckingham, G., Wilson, M., Williams, G., & Vine, S.
Affiliations
  • University of Exeter (GB)
  • University of Bath (GB)
Corresponding author
  • Arthur, Tom
  • Vine, Sam
Venue
Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders
Published
2022-09-05
Volume
53
Issue
11
Pages
4368-4381
ISSN
  • 0162-3257 (ISSN-L)
  • 1573-3432
OpenAlex
W4294636893
Cited by
20
References
82
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 4
FWCI
2.19
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Figshare (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • Open Research Exeter (University of Exeter) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • PsyArXiv (OSF Preprints) (submittedVersion)
  • PsyArXiv (OSF Preprints) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
Funders
Economic and Social Research Council (ES/P000630/1)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Autism Spectrum Disorder Research
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Motor Control and Adaptation
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Action Observation and Synchronization
Keywords
autism spectrum disorder, sensorimotor control, visuomotor control, contextual cues, predictive control, environmental uncertainty, swing kinematics, gaze behavior, prior information
MeSH terms
Autism Spectrum Disorder, Adult, Autistic Disorder, Biomechanical Phenomena, Cues, Humans, Uncertainty

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