Stick with Static: Unexpected Detrimental Effects of Visual Movement in a Looking-While-Listening Task
- PMID: 39714750
- PMCID: PMC12183319
- DOI: 10.1007/s10803-024-06689-5
Stick with Static: Unexpected Detrimental Effects of Visual Movement in a Looking-While-Listening Task
Abstract
Purpose: Looking while listening (LWL) tasks track eye movements while children view images (e.g., a dog and a ball) and hear an auditory prompt (e.g., "Find the ball"), allowing researchers to measure receptive language in populations who may be difficult to test with traditional measures. However, LWL tasks often result in high levels of missing data and accurately measuring receptive language in autistic children remains a challenge.
Methods: We analyzed data from 18 autistic children ages 2-5 years and examined whether adding visual movement of the named image improved LWL accuracy compared to a static condition. This study also investigated whether receptive language abilities on a standardized assessment moderated the effect of condition (i.e., static vs. movement) on LWL accuracy.
Results: There was evidence of comprehension in both conditions, although children showed faster recognition in the static compared to the movement condition. Standardized language abilities did not moderate the effect of condition on LWL accuracy. However, as standardized receptive language scores increased, accuracy increased.
Conclusion: Findings indicate that the visual movement manipulation in the current study did not improve accuracy compared to traditional static images within the LWL task. These results also suggest a continued need to refine LWL tasks in order to improve LWL methodology and refine receptive language measures for autistic children.
Keywords: Assessment; Autism; Looking-while-listening; Receptive language; Visual salience.
© 2024. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature.
Conflict of interest statement
Declarations. Informed Consent: Written informed consent was obtained from legal guardians. Institutional Review Board: All study procedures were approved by Michigan State University’s Institutional Review Board. Conflict of Interest: The authors declare they have no relevant financial or non-financial conflicts of interest to disclose.
Similar articles
-
Eliciting adverse effects data from participants in clinical trials.Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2018 Jan 16;1(1):MR000039. doi: 10.1002/14651858.MR000039.pub2. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2018. PMID: 29372930 Free PMC article.
-
Antidepressants for pain management in adults with chronic pain: a network meta-analysis.Health Technol Assess. 2024 Oct;28(62):1-155. doi: 10.3310/MKRT2948. Health Technol Assess. 2024. PMID: 39367772 Free PMC article.
-
Interventions to improve inhaler technique for people with asthma.Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2017 Mar 13;3(3):CD012286. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD012286.pub2. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2017. PMID: 28288272 Free PMC article.
-
Systemic pharmacological treatments for chronic plaque psoriasis: a network meta-analysis.Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2021 Apr 19;4(4):CD011535. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD011535.pub4. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2021. Update in: Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2022 May 23;5:CD011535. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD011535.pub5. PMID: 33871055 Free PMC article. Updated.
-
Measures implemented in the school setting to contain the COVID-19 pandemic.Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2022 Jan 17;1(1):CD015029. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD015029. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2022. Update in: Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2024 May 2;5:CD015029. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD015029.pub2. PMID: 35037252 Free PMC article. Updated.
References
-
- Bates D, Mächler M, Bolker B, & Walker S. (2015). Fitting Linear Mixed-Effects Models Using lme4. Journal of Statistical Software, 67(1), 1–48. 10.18637/jss.v067.i01 - DOI
Grants and funding
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources