SLPOtherAutism research : official journal of the International Society for Autism Research2022

Predictive language processing in young autistic children.

Kathryn E Prescott, Janine Mathée-Scott, Tracy Reuter and 3 others

PMID 35142078

WHAT IT FOUND

Autistic children aged 3 to 4 use verbs to predict upcoming nouns, but less efficiently than younger neurotypical children with similar language skills.

Stronger receptive language predicted faster looking, regardless of diagnosis. The groups did not differ in how quickly they used this information over time.

Key findings

01Both autistic and neurotypical groups used informative verbs to predict upcoming nouns, as shown by anticipatory eye movements.

02When controlling for age, the autistic group showed a smaller difference in looking between informative and neutral sentences compared to the neurotypical group.

03Children with stronger receptive language skills showed more robust time-bound differences in looking, predicting nouns sooner.

STILL TO COME

How it was doneWhat they foundWhat it means for SLPs

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.

Already have one?

What it does not show

The neurotypical group was significantly younger than the autistic group to match for language ability, confounding age and diagnosis. The sample did not include autistic children who could not perform the task, potentially excluding those with more severe delays. The groups were not matched on sex or nonverbal cognitive ability. The study design cannot determine causality or the developmental time course of the link between language ability and prediction.

Declared interests

The authors declared no conflicts of interest. The study was supported by the National Institute of Health.

The easy way to misread this

Do not conclude that autistic children have a fixed deficit in prediction. The lack of a time-by-group interaction suggests they process predictive information at a similar speed to language-matched peers once engaged, and the lower overall effect may reflect developmental delay rather than a qualitative difference.

Read it on PubMed →