Cited by 9Autism Spectrum Disorder ResearchLanguage Development and DisordersChild and Animal Learning Development

What’s in a name? A preliminary event-related potential study of response to name in preschool children with and without autism spectrum disorder

Open access
Thomas, Rebecca P., Wang, Leah A. L., Guthrie, Whitney, Cola, Meredith, McCleery, Joseph P., Pandey, Juhi, Schultz, Robert T., Miller, Judith S.·2019·PLOS ONE

Abstract

The ability to selectively respond to one's own name is important for social and language development, and is disrupted in atypically developing populations (e.g., autism spectrum disorder). Research with typically developing samples using event-related potentials (ERPs) has demonstrated that the subject's own name (SON) is differentiated from other stimuli at both early sensory and later cognitive stages of auditory processing. While neural indices of response to name have been researched extensively in adults, no such studies have been conducted with typically developing preschool children or children with autism spectrum disorder (ASD). The present study investigated ERP response to name in a sample of typically developing (TD) preschoolers (n = 19; mean age = 4.3 years) as well as a small, exploratory comparison group of preschoolers with ASD (n = 13; mean age = 4.4 years). TD preschoolers exhibited significantly greater negativity to SON over frontal regions than to an unfamiliar nonsense name, consistent with the adult SON negativity component. This component was present whether the name was spoken by a parent or an unfamiliar adult, suggesting that it reflects SON-specific processing rather than broad self-relevant information processing. Comparing preschoolers with ASD to the TD children revealed a significant SON negativity component across both groups. The amplitude of the SON negativity response was significantly correlated with social variables in the ASD group, though these correlations did not survive correction for multiple comparisons. This study is the first to demonstrate the presence of the SON component in preschool children with and without 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 · 10.1371/journal.pone.0216051

Cites

43 of 43 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?

  • Children with ASD present the ability to selectively respond to one's own name with greater negativity over frontal regions, reflecting early automatic pre-attentive detection, compared with TD peers.

    “Children with ASD present the ability to selectively respond to one’s own name with greater negativity over frontal regions, reflecting early automatic pre-attentive detection (Thomas et al. 2019), when compared with TD peers.”

    From Autism Spectrum Disorder and auditory sensory alterations: a systematic review on the integrity of cognitive and neuronal functions related to auditory processing (2023) · cites this paper as Thomas et al. 2019

    The Discussion reports that children with ASD and typically developing (TD) children both showed a stronger SON negativity response to their own name than to a nonsense name, to approximately the same degree. The Methods locate this component over midline frontal sites, and the Introduction describes it as a believed index of pre-attentive detection. The paper does not support greater negativity in children with ASD than in TD peers; its findings are also preliminary. (LLM, conf=0.88)

    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

4 of the 47 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Thomas, R. P., Wang, L. A. L., Guthrie, W., Cola, M., McCleery, J. P., Pandey, J., Schultz, R. T., & Miller, J. S.
Affiliations
Children's Hospital of Philadelphia (US)
Corresponding author
Thomas, Rebecca P.
Venue
PLOS ONE
Published
2019-05-07
Volume
14
Issue
5
Pages
e0216051
ISSN
1932-6203 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2944083249
Cited by
9
References
47
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 2
FWCI
0.73
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • PLoS ONE (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Funders
Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (U54HD086984)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Autism Spectrum Disorder Research
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Language Development and Disorders
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Child and Animal Learning Development
Keywords
autism spectrum disorder, preschool children, event-related potentials, auditory processing, self-referential processing, social development (developmental psychology), language development
MeSH terms
Autism Spectrum Disorder, Acoustic Stimulation, Auditory Perception, Child Development, Child, Preschool, Evoked Potentials, Evoked Potentials, Auditory, Female, Humans, Male, Names, Recognition, Psychology

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