Cited by 204Embodied and Extended CognitionMental Health and PsychiatryAutism Spectrum Disorder Research

Beyond Autism: Introducing the Dialectical Misattunement Hypothesis and a Bayesian Account of Intersubjectivity

Open access
Bolis, Dimitris, Balsters, Joshua, Wenderoth, Nicole, Becchio, Cristina, Schilbach, Leonhard·2017·Psychopathology

Abstract

Drawing on sociocultural theories and Bayesian accounts of brain function, in this article we construe psychiatric conditions as disorders of social interaction to fully account for their complexity and dynamicity across levels of description and temporal scales. After an introduction of the theoretical underpinnings of our integrative approach, we take autism spectrum conditions (ASC) as a paradigm example and discuss how neurocognitive hypotheses can be translated into a Bayesian formulation, i.e., in terms of predictive processing and active inference. We then argue that consideration of individuals (even within a Bayesian framework) will not be enough for a comprehensive understanding of psychiatric conditions and consequently put forward the dialectical misattunement hypothesis, which views psychopathology not merely as disordered function within single brains but also as a dynamic interpersonal mismatch that encompasses various levels of description. Moving from a mere comparison of groups, i.e., “healthy” persons versus “patients,” to a fine-grained analysis of social interactions within dyads and groups of individuals will open new avenues and may allow to avoid an overly neurocentric scope in psychiatric research as well as help to reduce social exclusion.

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 · 10.1159/000484353

Cites

0 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?

  • Among stakeholders, preference for a biopsychosocial model emphasizing social factors' effect on functioning and wellbeing is increasing.

    “Although most people agree with this conceptualisation of neuro-biological aetiology, amongst a variety of stakeholders, the preference for a biopsychosocial model with more emphasis on how social factors affect functioning and wellbeing, is increasing (Bolis et al., 2017; Greaves-Lord et al., 2022).”

    From Innovations of the ICD-11 in the Field of Autism Spectrum Disorder: A Psychological Approach (2022) · cites this paper as Bolis et al., 2017

    In the discussion of sociocultural processes (post-print, page unavailable), Bolis et al. argue that social factors matter and that an emphasis on biology alone is incomplete. Section 1.3 proposes greater attention to interpersonal processes. The paper does not report that preference for a biopsychosocial model is increasing among stakeholders. (LLM, conf=0.84)

    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

Research works printed but not linked: 83

  1. Wong W: Understanding Dialectical Thinking from a Cultural-Historical Perspective. Philos Psychol 2006;19:239-260.
  2. Dafermos M: Rethinking the Crisis in Social Psychology: A Dialectical Perspective. Soc Personal Psychol Compass 2015;9:394-405.
  3. Bidell T: Vygotsky, Piaget and the Dialectic of Development. Hum Dev 1988;31:329-348.
  4. Lawler J: Dialectical Philosophy and Developmental Psychology: Hegel and Piaget on Contradiction. Hum Dev 1975;18:1-17.
  5. Vygotsky LS (1980).: Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Harvard University Press.
  6. Hoel EP, Albantakis L, Tononi G: Quantifying causal emergence shows that macro can beat micro. Proc Natl Acad Sci 2013;110:19790-19795.
  7. Haken H: Synergetics : introduction and advanced topics : with 266 figures 9 Vygotsky LS: Thought and language 1964;14:97-98.
  8. Stephan KE, Mathys C: Computational approaches to psychiatry. Curr Opin Neurobiol 2014;25:85-92.
  9. Huys QJM, Maia T V, Frank MJ: Computational psychiatry as a bridge from neuroscience to clinical applications. Nat Neurosci 2016;19:404-413.
  10. Bolis D, Schilbach L: Beyond one Bayesian brain: Modeling intra-and inter-personal processes during social interaction: Commentary on "Mentalizing homeostasis: The social origins of interoceptive inference" by Fotopoulou & Tsakiris. Neuropsychoanalysis 2017;19:35-38.
  11. Baron-Cohen S: Is asperger syndrome/high-functioning autism necessarily a disability? Dev Psychopathol 2000;12:489-500.
  12. Frith U: Autism : a very short introduction. Oxford University Press, 2008.
  13. Schilbach L, Eickhoff SB, Cieslik EC, Kuzmanovic B, Vogeley K: Shall we do this together? Social gaze influences action control in a comparison group, but not in individuals with high-functioning autism. Autism 2012;16:151-162.
  14. di Pellegrino G, Fadiga L, Fogassi L, Gallese V, Rizzolatti G: Understanding motor events: a neurophysiological study. Exp Brain Res 1992;91:176-180.
  15. Ramachandran VS, Oberman LM: Broken Mirrors: A Theory of Autism. Sci Am 2006;295:62-69.
  16. Perkins T, Stokes M, McGillivray J, Bittar R: Mirror neuron dysfunction in autism spectrum disorders. J Clin Neurosci 2010;17:1239-1243.
  17. Southgate V, de C. Hamilton AF: Unbroken mirrors: challenging a theory of Autism. Trends Cogn Sci 2008;12:225-229.
  18. Fan Y-T, Decety J, Yang C-Y, Liu J-L, Cheng Y: Unbroken mirror neurons in autism spectrum disorders. J Child Psychol Psychiatry 2010;51:981-988.
  19. Modahl C, Green L, Fein D, Morris M, Waterhouse L, Feinstein C, et al.: Plasma oxytocin levels in autistic children. Biol Psychiatry 1998;43:270-7.
  20. Modi ME, Young LJ: The oxytocin system in drug discovery for autism: Animal models and novel therapeutic strategies. Horm Behav 2012;61:340-350.
  21. Frith U: Autism : explaining the enigma. Blackwell Pub, 2003. 43 Happé F: Autism: cognitive deficit or cognitive style? Trends Cogn Sci 1999;3:216-222.
  22. Happé F, Frith U: The Weak Coherence Account: Detail-focused Cognitive Style in Autism Spectrum Disorders. J Autism Dev Disord 2006;36:5-25.
  23. Steel MJG, Gorman R, Flexman JE: Neuropsychiatric Testing in an Autistic Mathematical Idiot- Savant: Evidence for Nonverbal Abstract Capacity. J Am Acad Child Psychiatry 1984;23:704-707.
  24. Rumsey JM: Conceptual problem-solving in highly verbal, nonretarded autistic men. J Autism Dev Disord 1985;15:23-36.
  25. Ozonoff S, Pennington BF, Rogers SJ: Executive Function Deficits in High-Functioning Autistic Individuals: Relationship to Theory of Mind. J Child Psychol Psychiatry 1991;32:1081-1105. 50
  26. Hill EL: Executive dysfunction in autism. Trends Cogn Sci 2004;8:26-32.
  27. Happé F: Cognition in Autism: One Deficit or Many?; in : Neural Basis and Treatment Possibilities: Novartis Foundation Symposium 251. John Wiley {&} Sons, Ltd, 2003, pp 198-212.
  28. Happé F, Ronald A, Plomin R: Time to give up on a single explanation for autism. Nat Neurosci 2006;9:1218-1220.
  29. Gallagher S, Varga S: Conceptual issues in autism spectrum disorders. Curr Opin Psychiatry 2015;28:1.
  30. Bolis et al. (in press) Beyond autism: Introducing the dialectical misattunement hypothesis and a Bayesian account of intersubjectivity. ©S. Karger AG, Psychopathology; in press 54
  31. Pellicano E, Burr D: When the world becomes "too real": a Bayesian explanation of autistic perception. Trends Cogn Sci 2012;16:504-510.
  32. van Boxtel JJA, Lu H: A predictive coding perspective on autism spectrum disorders. Front Psychol 2013;4:19.
  33. Van de Cruys S, De-Wit L, Evers K, Boets B, Wagemans J: Weak Priors versus Overfitting of Predictions in Autism: Reply to Pellicano and Burr ( TICS , 2012). Iperception 2013;4:95-97.
  34. Teufel C, Subramaniam N, Fletcher PC: The role of priors in Bayesian models of perception. Front Comput Neurosci 2013;7:25.
  35. Sevgi M, Diaconescu AO, Tittgemeyer M, Schilbach L: Social Bayes: Using Bayesian Modeling to Study Autistic Trait-Related Differences in Social Cognition. Biol Psychiatry 2016;80:112-119.
  36. Harris H, Israeli D, Minshew N, Bonneh Y, Heeger DJ, Behrmann M, et al.: Perceptual learning in autism: over-specificity and possible remedies. Nat Neurosci 2015;18:1574-1576.
  37. Mumford D: On the computational architecture of the neocortex. Biol Cybern 1992;66:241-251.
  38. Friston K: A theory of cortical responses. Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci 2005;360:815-836.
  39. Gomot M, Wicker B: A challenging, unpredictable world for people with Autism Spectrum Disorder. Int J Psychophysiol 2012;83:240-247.
  40. Helmholtz HLF Von: Handbuch der physiologischen Optik 1867; DOI: 10.3931/E-RARA-21259 71 William James: The Principles Of Psychology. Read Books Ltd. · DOI
  41. Friston K, Kiebel S: Predictive coding under the free-energy principle. Philos Trans R Soc B Biol Sci 2009;364:1211-1221.
  42. Friston KJ, Stephan KE: Free-energy and the brain. Synthese 2007;159:417-458.
  43. Clark A: The many faces of precision (Replies to commentaries on "Whatever next? Neural prediction, situated agents, and the future of cognitive science"). Front Psychol 2013;4:270.
  44. Feldman H, Friston KJ: Attention, Uncertainty, and Free-Energy. Front Hum Neurosci 2010;4. DOI: 10.3389/fnhum.2010.00215 · DOI · Paper page
  45. Shipp S, Adams RA, Friston KJ: Reflections on agranular architecture: predictive coding in the motor cortex. Trends Neurosci 2013;36:706-716.
  46. Hohwy J: The predictive mind 84 Van de Cruys S, Wagemans J: Putting Reward in Art: A Tentative Prediction Error Account of Visual Art. Iperception 2011;2:1035-1062.
  47. Koster-Hale J, Saxe R: Theory of Mind: A Neural Prediction Problem. Neuron 2013;79:836-848.
  48. Heyes C: What's social about social learning? J Comp Psychol 2012;126:193-202.
  49. Apps MAJ, Green R, Ramnani N: Reinforcement learning signals in the anterior cingulate cortex code for others' false beliefs. Neuroimage 2013;64:1-9.
  50. Balsters JH, Apps MAJ, Bolis D, Lehner R, Gallagher L, Wenderoth N: Disrupted prediction errors index social deficits in autism spectrum disorder. Brain 2017;140:235-246.
  51. Kilner JM: More than one pathway to action understanding. Trends Cogn Sci 2011;15:352-357.
  52. Hamilton AF de C, Grafton ST: The motor hierarchy: from kinematics to goals and intentions; in : Sensorimotor Foundations of Higher Cognition. Oxford University Press, 2007, pp 381-407.
  53. Becchio C, Manera V, Sartori L, Cavallo A, Castiello U: Grasping intentions: from thought experiments to empirical evidence. Front Hum Neurosci 2012;6:117.
  54. Ansuini C, Cavallo A, Bertone C, Becchio C: Intentions in the brain: the unveiling of Mister Hyde. Neuroscientist 2015;21:126-35.
  55. Huang Y, Rao RPN: Predictive coding. Wiley Interdiscip Rev Cogn Sci 2011;2:580-593.
  56. Happé FG: Studying weak central coherence at low levels: children with autism do not succumb to visual illusions. A research note. J Child Psychol Psychiatry 1996;37:873-877. 100
  57. Badre D, D'Esposito M: Functional magnetic resonance imaging evidence for a hierarchical organization of the prefrontal cortex. J Cogn Neurosci 2007;19:2082-2099. 103
  58. Quattrocki E, Friston K: Autism, oxytocin and interoception. Neurosci Biobehav Rev 2014;47:410- 430. 105
  59. Gallagher S: The practice of mind: Theory, simulation or primary interaction? J Conscious Stud 2001;8:83-108. 106
  60. Schilbach L, Wohlschlaeger AM, Kraemer NC, Newen A, Shah NJ, Fink GR, et al.: Being with virtual others: Neural correlates of social interaction. Neuropsychologia 2006;44:718-730. 107
  61. De Jaegher H, Di Paolo E: Participatory sense-making. Phenomenol Cogn Sci 2007;6:485-507. 108
  62. Oullier O, de Guzman GC, Jantzen KJ, Lagarde J, Scott Kelso JA: Social coordination dynamics: Measuring human bonding. Soc Neurosci 2008;3:178-192. 109 Reddy V: How infants know minds. Harvard University Press, 2010. 110
  63. Hari R, Kujala M V: Brain Basis of Human Social Interaction: From Concepts to Brain Imaging. Physiol Rev 2009;89:453-479. 111
  64. De Jaegher H, Di Paolo E, Gallagher S: Can social interaction constitute social cognition? Trends Cogn Sci 2010;14:441-447.
  65. Bolis et al. (in press) Beyond autism: Introducing the dialectical misattunement hypothesis and a Bayesian account of intersubjectivity. ©S. Karger AG, Psychopathology; in press 112
  66. Schilbach L, Wilms M, Eickhoff SB, Romanzetti S, Tepest R, Bente G, et al.: Minds Made for Sharing: Initiating Joint Attention Recruits Reward-related Neurocircuitry. J Cogn Neurosci 2010;22:2702-2715. 113
  67. Froese T, Di Paolo EA: The enactive approach Theoretical sketches from cell to society*. Pragmat {&} Cogn 2011;19:1-36. 114
  68. Froese T, Fuchs T: The extended body: a case study in the neurophenomenology of social interaction. Phenomenol Cogn Sci 2012;11:205-235. 115
  69. Di Paolo E, De Jaegher H: The interactive brain hypothesis. Front Hum Neurosci 2012;6:163. 116
  70. Konvalinka I, Roepstorff A: The two-brain approach: how can mutually interacting brains teach us something about social interaction? Front Hum Neurosci 2012;6:215. 117 Dumas G: Towards a two-body neuroscience. Commun {&} Integr Biol 2011;4:349-352. 118
  71. Dumas G, Martinerie J, Soussignan R, Nadel J: Does the brain know who is at the origin of what in an imitative interaction? Front Hum Neurosci 2012;6:128. 119
  72. Schilbach L, Timmermans B, Reddy V, Costall A, Bente G, Schlicht T, et al.: Toward a second- person neuroscience. Behav Brain Sci 2013;36:393-414. 121
  73. Schilbach L: Towards a second-person neuropsychiatry. Philos Trans R Soc London B Biol Sci 2015;371. 124 Hyperscanning neuroimaging technique to reveal the "two-in-one" system in social interactions. Neurosci Res 2015;90:25-32. 125
  74. Gallagher S: Understanding Interpersonal Problems in Autism: Interaction Theory as An Alternative to Theory of Mind. Philos Psychiatry, {&} Psychol 2004;11:199-217. 126 Tom Froese: Overview | Dr. Tom Froese [cited 2017 Sep 9];Available from: https://froese.wordpress.com/research/overview/ 127
  75. Menary R: Introduction to the special issue on 4E cognition. Phenomenol Cogn Sci 2010;9:459- 463. 128
  76. Bolis et al. (in press) Beyond autism: Introducing the dialectical misattunement hypothesis and a Bayesian account of intersubjectivity. ©S. Karger AG, Psychopathology; in press 129
  77. Varela FJ, Thompson E, Rosch E: The embodied mind : cognitive science and human experience. MIT Press, 1991. 130 Hurley SL: Consciousness in action. Harvard University Press, 1998. 131 Thompson E: Mind in life : biology, phenomenology, and the sciences of mind. Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, 2007. 132 Haugeland J: Having thought : essays in the metaphysics of mind. Harvard University Press, 1998. 133
  78. Clark A: Being there : putting brain, body, and world together again. MIT Press, 1997. 134 Gallagher S: How the Body Shapes the Mind. Oxford University Press, 2005. DOI: 10.1093/0199271941.001.0001 135 · DOI
  79. Clark A, Chalmers D: The Extended Mind. Analysis 1998;58:7-19. 136 Colombetti G: Enactive appraisal. Phenomenol Cogn Sci 2007;6:527-546. 137
  80. Dumas G, de Guzman GC, Tognoli E, Kelso JAS: The human dynamic clamp as a paradigm for social interaction. Proc Natl Acad Sci 2014;111:E3726--E3734. 139
  81. Vittorias J, Petrantonakis P, Bolis D, Tsiligkyri A, Kosmidou V, Hadjileontiadis LJ: NOESIS: An Enhanced Educational Environment for Kids with Autism Spectrum Disorders; in : 2008 Eighth IEEE International Conference on Advanced Learning Technologies. IEEE, 2008, pp 1019-1020. 142
  82. Mathys C, Daunizeau J, Friston KJ, Stephan KE: A bayesian foundation for individual learning under uncertainty. Front Hum Neurosci 2011;5:39. 144
  83. Bolis D, Heinzle J, Mathys C, Stephan KE: Inferring cognitive traits of individual subjects through gaze controlled video games 2015 145 Pessoa L: On the relationship between emotion and cognition. Nat Rev Neurosci 2008;9:148-158.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Bolis, D., Balsters, J., Wenderoth, N., Becchio, C., & Schilbach, L.
Affiliations
Max Planck Society (DE)
Venue
Psychopathology
Publisher
S. Karger AG
Published
2017
Volume
50
Issue
6
Pages
355-372
ISSN
  • 0254-4962 (ISSN-L)
  • 1423-033X
OpenAlex
W2764030498
Cited by
204
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 20 · 2025: 16 · 2024: 28 · 2023: 39 · 2022: 33 · 2021: 20 · 2020: 20 · 2019: 22 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 1
FWCI
1.47
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Psychopathology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • MPG.PuRe (Max Planck Society) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • Max Planck Digital Library (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • Institutional Research Information System University of Turin (University of Turin) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • Trinity College Dublin
  • Eidgenössische Technische Hochschule Zürich
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Embodied and Extended Cognition
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Philosophy › Mental Health and Psychiatry
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Autism Spectrum Disorder Research
Keywords
autism spectrum disorder, Bayesian inference, predictive processing, active inference, intersubjectivity, misattunement, dyadic interaction, neurocentrism, social exclusion
MeSH terms
Autistic Disorder, Bayes Theorem, Humans, Psychopathology

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