Reduced error monitoring in children with autism spectrum disorder: an ERP study

Although electrophysiological (electroencephalography) measures of executive functions (e.g. error monitoring) have been used to predict academic achievement in typically developing children, work investigating a link between error monitoring and academic skills in children with autism spectrum disorder is limited. In this study, we employed traditional electrophysiological and advanced time–frequency methods, combined with principal component analyses, to extract neural activity related to error monitoring and tested their relations to academic achievement in cognitively able kindergarteners with autism spectrum disorder. In total, 35 cognitively able kindergarteners with autism spectrum disorder completed academic assessments and the child-friendly “Zoo Game” Go/No-go task at school entry. The Go/No-go task successfully elicited an error-related negativity and error positivity in children with autism spectrum disorder as young as 5 years at fronto-central and posterior electrode sites, respectively. We also observed increased response-related theta power during errors relative to correct trials at fronto-central sites. Both larger error positivity and theta power significantly predicted concurrent academic achievement after controlling for behavioral performance on the Zoo Game and intelligence quotient. These results suggest that the use of time–frequency electroencephalography analyses, combined with traditional event-related potential measures, may provide new opportunities to investigate neurobiological mechanisms of executive function and academic achievement in young children with autism spectrum disorder.

Download Full-text

Effects of rTMS on Behavioral and Electrocortical Measures of Error Monitoring and Correction Function in Children with Autism Spectrum Disorder

10.1007/978-3-030-54564-2_25 ◽

2021 ◽

pp. 551-573

Author(s):

Estate M. Sokhadze ◽

Ioan Opris ◽

Lonnie Sears ◽

Ayman S. El-Baz ◽

Allan Tasman ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Autism Spectrum Disorder ◽

Children With Autism ◽

Autism Spectrum ◽

Spectrum Disorder ◽

Correction Function ◽

Error Monitoring

Download Full-text

Instruction Using Augmentative and Alternative Communication Supports: Description of Current Practices by Speech-Language Pathologists Who Work With Children With Autism Spectrum Disorder

American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology ◽

10.1044/2019_ajslp-19-00045 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 29 (2) ◽

pp. 586-596 ◽

Cited By ~ 1

Author(s):

Kaitlyn A. Clarke ◽

Diane L. Williams

Keyword(s):

Autism Spectrum Disorder ◽

Augmentative And Alternative Communication ◽

Communication Systems ◽

Diagnostic Category ◽

Children With Autism ◽

Autism Spectrum ◽

Spectrum Disorder ◽

Alternative Communication ◽

Speech Language Pathologists ◽

Processing Differences

Purpose The aim of this research study was to examine common practices of speech-language pathologists (SLPs) who work with children with autism spectrum disorder (ASD) with respect to whether or not SLPs consider processing differences in ASD or the effects of input during their instruction. Method Following a qualitative research method, how SLPs instruct and present augmentative and alternative communication systems to individuals with ASD, their rationale for method selection, and their perception of the efficacy of selected interventions were probed. Semistructured interviews were conducted as part of an in-depth case report with content analysis. Results Based on completed interviews, 4 primary themes were identified: (a) instructional method , (b) input provided , (c) decision-making process , and (d) perceived efficacy of treatment . Additionally, one secondary theme, training and education received , was identified . Conclusions Clinicians reported making decisions based on the needs of the child; however, they also reported making decisions based on the diagnostic category that characterized the child (i.e., ASD). The use of modeling when teaching augmentative and alternative communication to individuals with ASD emerged as a theme, but variations in the method of modeling were noted. SLPs did not report regularly considering processing differences in ASD, nor did they consider the effects of input during instruction.

Download Full-text