CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 95Autism Spectrum Disorder ResearchSchizophrenia research and treatmentDevelopmental and Educational Neuropsychology

High-functioning autism and schizophrenia - A comparison of an early and late onset neurodevelopmental disorder

Open access
Goldstein, G., Minshew, N. J., Allen, D. N., Seaton, B. E.·2002·Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology
DOI 10.1093/arclin/17.5.461
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Autism and schizophrenia are separate neurodevelopmental disorders that share a number of interpersonal and cognitive deficits. The symptoms of autism first appear during early life while schizophrenic symptoms do not typically appear until adolescence at the earliest. Efforts have been made to characterize the pattern of cognitive function in both disorders, and certain resemblances have become apparent such as deficits in abstract reasoning and the more complex aspects of memory and language. The present study provided a comparison of cognitive function between the two disorders. The autistic sample consisted of well-diagnosed individuals with high-functioning autism (IQ> or =70). The schizophrenic sample was divided into four subgroups using Ward's method of cluster analysis. Participants received the Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale-Revised (WAIS-R), the Halstead Category Test, the Trail Making test, and the Wisconsin Card Sorting test (WCST). The profile of the autism sample was compared with the four schizophrenia cluster profiles. The autism group resembled only one of the schizophrenia clusters, with both showing elevations on the WAIS-R Information and Block Design subtests and depressions on Comprehension and Digit Symbol. It was concluded that individuals with high-functioning autism have a cognitive profile that resembles that of an empirically derived subgroup of schizophrenia patients but that does not resemble profiles found in other schizophrenia subgroups. The pattern itself, marked by a relatively depressed score on the Comprehension subtest among the Verbal subtests and a relatively elevated score on Block Design among the Performance subtests, has been characterized in the past as a prototypic profile for high-functioning autism.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1093/arclin/17.5.461

Cites

42 of 42 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

  • Studies using the Trail Making Test report mixed conclusions.

    “Studies using another clinical neuropsychological measure, the trail making test (TMT), report mixed conclusions [8,9,15–17,29].”

    From The paradox of cognitive flexibility in autism (2009) · cites this paper as [16]

  • 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 [16]

  • Four studies reported TMT difficulties in participants with autism.

    “By contrast, four studies reported that participants with autism did have difficulties with this task [8,15–17]”

    From The paradox of cognitive flexibility in autism (2009) · cites this paper as [16]

  • Using the >3 cutoff, no TMT study provided evidence of cognitive flexibility problems in autism (autism ratios 2.0 or 2.1; schizophrenia >3).

    “If we calculate this ratio (autism groups 2.0 [15,16] or 2.1 [8], schizophrenia groups >3 [16]), none of the studies actually showed evidence for difficulties with cognitive flexibility in autism.”

    From The paradox of cognitive flexibility in autism (2009) · cites this paper as [16]

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Goldstein, G., Minshew, N. J., Allen, D. N., & Seaton, B. E.
Affiliations
  • University of Pittsburgh (US)
  • University of Nevada, Las Vegas (US)
Corresponding author
Goldstein, G.
ORCID
Venue
Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology
Publisher
Oxford University Press (OUP)
Published
2002-07-01
Volume
17
Issue
5
Pages
461-475
ISSN
  • 0887-6177 (ISSN-L)
  • 1873-5843
DOI
10.1093/arclin/17.5.461
OpenAlex
W2168925575
Cited by
95
References
42
Citations by year
2025: 2 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 8 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 7 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 7 · 2015: 7 · 2014: 3 · 2013: 9 · 2012: 7
FWCI
0.34
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Autism Spectrum Disorder Research
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Schizophrenia research and treatment
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Neuropsychology and Physiological Psychology › Developmental and Educational Neuropsychology
Keywords
high-functioning autism, schizophrenia, cognitive profile, neurodevelopmental disorders, schizophrenia subtypes, WAIS-R, Halstead Category Test, Trail Making Test, Wisconsin Card Sorting Test, block designs, intelligence quotient

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