Social and delay discounting in autism spectrum disorder.
Katherine Rice Warnell, Sydney Maniscalco, Sydney Baker and 2 others
PMID 30816644WHAT IT FOUND
Young people with autism valued delayed rewards and rewards given to close others less than matched peers, preferring immediate money for themselves.
This was a small cognitive task study, not a treatment finding.
Key findings
01The autism group showed greater discounting than the matched comparison group on both delay and social tasks.
02The group difference was limited to the shortest delay and closest social distances: it was significant at one day for delay, and for the closest and next closest people for social choices.
03Autism severity was not related to either delay or social discounting, and discounting on one task did not predict discounting on the other.
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 final autism group was 27, after excluding participants with verbal IQ below 70, missing IQ data, or incomplete discounting tasks. One autism participant and one typically developing participant did not complete the 25-year delay time point and were excluded from the delay analysis. The study used hypothetical money, not real rewards or clinically meaningful activities, so it may not show how people value everyday social or therapeutic rewards. It did not assess ADHD or other comorbidities, which can affect discounting. It did not ask participants to explain their reasoning or describe their relationships, so the authors could not identify why social discounting differed. The sample was too small to examine gender effects, and the authors note females with autism may show different social behaviors. It was a cross-sectional comparison, not a treatment study, so it cannot say what therapy should do or whether discounting predicts clinical outcomes. The paper tested three possible patterns rather than one pre-registered primary outcome.
Declared interests
The supplied text does not include an author conflict of interest declaration. The publication types list NIH extramural and non-U.S. government research support.
The easy way to misread this
Do not conclude that autism causes atypical reward valuation or that discounting tasks can guide therapy. The study compared two groups on hypothetical money choices, did not assess treatment outcomes, and did not identify the mechanisms behind the differences.