Informational and Normative Influence on Conformity in Autism.
Akiko Kobayashi, Takuya Makino, Yuka Mizuno and 2 others
Adults with ASD conformed to others' opinions on a subjective preference task just as much as controls.
On an objective estimation task, they conformed less, but this was driven by a subgroup who never changed their answers at all.
Key findings
1In the preference rating task, there was no significant difference in how much the ASD group and the control group shifted their ratings after seeing others' opinions.
2In the dot-counting task, the ASD group showed significantly weaker conformity than controls. Nine of the 30 ASD participants never changed their initial estimate, compared with one of 30 controls.
3When the participants who never revised their answers were removed from the analysis, the remaining ASD participants and controls showed comparable conformity in both tasks.
Still to come
How it was doneWhat they found
Read the rest of this summary
You get three full summaries a month, free, and we do not ask for a card. Search, the TL;DRs and your library stay unlimited either way.
What it does not show
The two tasks differed in structure: the preference task had a delay between seeing the group rating and re-rating, while the dot-counting task allowed immediate revision. This means the two tasks tap different cognitive processes (memory-based reconstruction versus deliberate updating), so the comparison is not a clean test of one variable. The 'others' ratings were simulated by the computer, not provided by real people. Participants were told they were real, but the social context was minimal. The sample was 30 per group, all from two Japanese universities, all with full-scale IQ of at least 70, and the key finding in the dot-counting task was driven by a subgroup of nine people. The dot-counting task presented the participant's own estimate and the group average on the same visual scale, which may have encouraged adjustment based on visual distance rather than on a genuine weighting of reliability.
Declared interests
Funded by the Japan Society for the Promotion of Science (grant 19K24680). The authors declare no conflicts of interest.
The easy way to misread this
Do not read the reduced conformity in the dot-counting task as a universal trait of autism. It was driven by a subgroup of nine participants who never changed a single answer. When they are excluded, the remaining participants with ASD conform at the same rate as controls. Also, the preference-task null does not prove that autistic adults conform for the same reasons as controls. The authors note it may reflect strategic self-presentation rather than genuine belief change, and this study did not measure whether opinions actually shifted.
Summarised by AI from the full paper, without a clinician reviewing it. Check it against the source before it changes what you do. Read it on PubMed →