CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 253Autism Spectrum Disorder ResearchChild and Animal Learning DevelopmentDevelopmental and Educational Neuropsychology

Multiple cognitive capabilities/deficits in children with an autism spectrum disorder: “Weak” central coherence and its relationship to theory of mind and executive control

Open access
PELLICANO, ELIZABETH, MAYBERY, MURRAY, DURKIN, KEVIN, MALEY, ALANA·2006·Development and Psychopathology
DOI 10.1017/s0954579406060056
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

This study examined the validity of “weak” central coherence (CC) in the context of multiple cognitive capabilities/deficits in autism. Children with an autism spectrum disorder (ASD) and matched typically developing children were administered tasks tapping visuospatial coherence, false-belief understanding and aspects of executive control. Significant group differences were found in all three cognitive domains. Evidence of local processing on coherence tasks was widespread in the ASD group, but difficulties in attributing false beliefs and in components of executive functioning were present in fewer of the children with ASD. This cognitive profile was generally similar for younger and older children with ASD. Furthermore, weak CC was unrelated to false-belief understanding, but aspects of coherence (related to integration) were associated with aspects of executive control. Few associations were found between cognitive variables and indices of autistic symptomatology. Implications for CC theory are discussed. The authors thank all of the children, families, and teachers for their generous support and participation in this study. Invaluable help with recruitment was provided by Sue Luscombe, Emma Glasson, Kathy Ziatas, various speech pathologists, ISADD, the Autism Association, Therapy Focus, FOCAS, and the Asperger's Syndrome and Second Step support groups. We are also grateful to Western Psychological Services for providing prepublication copies of the SCQ and to the Apex Foundation Trust for Autism for awarding a grant to the first (E.P.) and third authors (K.D.), which funded administration of the Autism Diagnostic Interview—Revised. The second author (M.M.) was supported by Australian Research Council Grant DP0452312.

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 · 10.1017/s0954579406060056

Cites

66 of 66 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?

  • Recent WCST studies demonstrate deficits in changing sorting strategy across autism subtypes, ages, and cognitive levels.

    “Recent studies using this measure in autism also demonstrate deficits in changing sorting strategy across populations of various autism subtypes, ages and cognitive levels ([9,13–22], but see Ref. [23]).”

    From The paradox of cognitive flexibility in autism (2009) · cites this paper as [18]

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: 12

  1. American Psychiatric Association (1994). Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-IV, 4th ed.). Washington, D.C: APA.
  2. Bailey, A., & Parr, J. (2003). Implications of the broader phenotype for concepts of autism. In G. Bock & J. Goode (Eds.), Autism: Neural basis and treatment possibilities. Novartis Foundation Symposium 251 (pp. 26-47). Chichester: John Wiley & Sons Ltd.
  3. Beery, K. E. (1997). Manual for the Beery-Buktenica Developmental Test of Visual-Motor Integration. Parsippany, NJ: Modern Curriculum Press.
  4. Coates, S. W. (1972). Manual for the Preschool Embedded Figures Test. Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press, Inc.
  5. Dunn, L. M., & Dunn, L. M. (1997). Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test -Third Edition. Circle Pines, Minnesota: American Guidance Service.
  6. Frith, U. (2003). Autism: Explaining the Enigma. Second edition. Oxford, UK: Blackwell Publishers.
  7. Hammill, D. D., Pearson, N. A., & Voress, J. K. (1993). Developmental test of visual perception. Austin, Texas: Pro-Ed.
  8. Happé, F. (2003). Cognition in autism: one deficit or many? In G. Bock & J. Goode (Eds.), Autism: Neural basis and treatment possibilities. Novartis Foundation Symposium 251 (pp. 198-212). Chichester: John Wiley & Sons Ltd.
  9. Lord, C., Rutter, M., & Le Couteur, A. (1994). Autism Diagnostic Interview -Revised. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 24, 659-685.
  10. In J. Russell (Ed.), Autism as an Executive Disorder (pp. 57-100). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
  11. Witkin, H. A., Oltman, P. K., Raskin, E., & Karp, S. (1971). A manual for the Embedded Figures Test. Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press.
  12. World Health Organization (WHO) (1993). International Classification of Disease, 10 th edition. Geneva: WHO.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
PELLICANO, E., MAYBERY, M., DURKIN, K., & MALEY, A.
Affiliations
  • University of Oxford (GB)
  • The University of Western Australia (AU)
  • University of Strathclyde (GB)
ORCID
Venue
Development and Psychopathology
Publisher
Cambridge University Press (CUP)
Published
2006-02-10
Volume
18
Issue
1
Pages
77-98
ISSN
  • 0954-5794 (ISSN-L)
  • 1469-2198
DOI
10.1017/s0954579406060056
OpenAlex
W2051372586
Cited by
253
References
66
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 12 · 2023: 13 · 2022: 11 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 8 · 2019: 14 · 2018: 21 · 2017: 17 · 2016: 11 · 2015: 22 · 2014: 17 · 2013: 13 · 2012: 15
FWCI
4.83
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
www.cambridge.org/core/terms (unspecified)
Locations
  • Development and Psychopathology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • UCL Discovery (University College London) (submittedVersion)
  • UWA Profiles and Research Repository (UWA) (submittedVersion)
  • Explore Bristol Research (submittedVersion)
Funders
Australian Research Council (DP0452312)
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 › Neuropsychology and Physiological Psychology › Developmental and Educational Neuropsychology
Keywords
autism spectrum disorder, weak central coherence, theory of mind, false belief understanding, executive function, local processing, cognitive profile, autistic symptomatology, children
MeSH terms
Autistic Disorder, Behavior, Child, Child, Preschool, Cognition Disorders, Communication, Fingers, Humans, Intelligence Tests, Interpersonal Relations, Models, Psychological, Problem Solving, Psychomotor Performance, Cumulative Trauma Disorders, Severity of Illness Index, Speech, Maze Learning

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