This study investigated cognitive differences between autistic and non-autistic people in understanding implied meaning in conversation using a novel computerized test, the Implicature Comprehension Test. Controlling for core language ability, autistic participants (N = 66) were over twice as likely to endorse a non-normative interpretation of an implied meaning and over five times as likely to select ‘don’t know’ when asked about the presence of an implied meaning, compared to non-autistic participants (N = 118). A further experiment suggested that the selection of ‘don’t know’ reflected a cognitive preference for certainty and explicit communication, and that the normative inference could often be made when the test format was more constrained. Our research supports the hypothesis that autistic individuals can find it challenging to process language in its pragmatic context, and that cognitive preferences play a role in this.
When will bigger be (recalled) better? The influence of category size on JOLs depends on test format
