Specificity, contexts, and reference groups matter when assessing autistic traits

Abstract

Many of the personality and behavioral traits (e.g., social imperviousness, directness in conversation, lack of imagination, affinity for solitude, difficulty displaying emotions) that are known to be sensitive to context (with whom?) and reference group (according to whom?) also appear in questionnaire-based assessments of autistic traits. Therefore, two experiments investigated the effects of specifying contexts and reference groups when assessing autistic traits in autistic and non-autistic participants. Experiment 1 (124 autistic and 124 non-autistic participants) demonstrated that context matters when assessing autistic traits (F(1,244) = 267.5, p < .001, η2p = .523). When the context of the Broad Autism Phenotype Questionnaire was specified as the participants' out-group (e.g., "I like being around non-autistic people" or "I like being around autistic people"), both autistic and non-autistic participants self-reported having more autistic traits; when the context was specified as the participants' in-group, participants reported having fewer autistic traits. Experiment 2 (82 autistic and 82 non-autistic participants) demonstrated that reference group matters when assessing autistic traits (F(2,160) = 94.38, p < .001, η2p = .541). When the reference group on the Social Responsiveness Scale was specified as the participants' out-group (e.g., "According to non-autistic people, I have unusual eye contact"), autistic participants reported having more autistic traits; when the reference group was their in-group, autistic participants reported having fewer autistic traits. Non-autistic participants appeared insensitive to reference group on the Social Responsiveness Scale. Exploratory analyses suggested that when neither the context nor the reference group is specified (for assessing autistic traits on the Autism-Spectrum Quotient), both autistic and non-autistic participants use the majority ("non-autistic people") as the implied context and reference group.

Fig 1. Autistic and Non-Autistic Participants’ Mean Self-Reported Difficulty Interacting and Communicating on Broad Autism Phenotype Items as a Function of Specifying the Interaction and Communication as “With Non-Autistic People” or “With Autistic People.”

Error bars are 99.9% confidence intervals of the means. The dashed line indicates an impaired level of interaction and communication.

Fig 2. Autistic and Non-Autistic Participants’ Mean Self-Reported Difficulty Interacting and Communicating on the Social Responsiveness Scale Items as a Function of Reference Group (“According to Non-Autistic People,” “According to Autistic People,” and “I Think”).

Error bars are 99.9% confidence intervals of the means. The higher dashed line indicates a severe level and the lower dashed line indicates a mild to moderate level of difficulty interacting and communicating.

Fig 3. Correlation Between Autistic and Non-Autistic Participants’ Responses to Unspecified Autism-Spectrum Quotient Items and Their Responses to Broad Autism Phenotype Items Specified with the Context “With Autistic People.”

Fig 4. Correlation Between Autistic and Non-Autistic Participants’ Responses to Unspecified Autism-Spectrum Quotient Items and Their Responses to Broad Autism Phenotype Items Specified with the Context “With Non-Autistic People.”

Fig 5. Correlation Between Autistic and Non-Autistic Participants’ Responses to Unspecified Autism-Spectrum Quotient Items and Their Responses to Social Responsiveness Items Specified with the Reference Group “According to Autistic People.”

Fig 6. Correlation Between Autistic and Non-Autistic Participants’ Responses to Unspecified Autism-Spectrum Quotient Items and Their Responses to Social Responsiveness Items Specified with the Reference Group “According to Non-Autistic People.”

Fig 7. Correlation Between Autistic and Non-Autistic Participants’ Responses to Unspecified Autism-Spectrum Quotient Items and Their Responses to Social Responsiveness Items Specified with the Reference “I Think.”

Fig 8. Non-Autistic Participants’ Mean Self-Reported Difficulty Interacting and Communicating on the Social Responsiveness Scale.

Error bars are 99.9% confidence intervals of the means. The higher dashed line indicates a severe level and the lower dashed line indicates a mild to moderate level of difficulty interacting and communicating.