Abstract
This study investigates the use of structural and discourse contextual cues in the interpretation of third-person pronouns by children and adolescents with autism and their neurotypical peers. Results show that referent-biasing contextual information influences pronominal interpretation and modulates looking patterns in both groups compared to a context-neutral condition. These results go against the predictions of Weak Central Coherence and the notion that pragmatics in general is impaired in ASD, since the ASD group was able to use details in discourse context to influence the pronominal interpretation process. However, although discourse context influenced looking patterns in both groups, the groups nevertheless diverged in the nature of these patterns, suggesting that behavioral differences may emerge in more complicated discourse tasks.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
In the end, only 45 items were included for analysis (9 item types × 5 conditions) due to methodological oversight: For one of the item types, disambiguating information occurred at the final noun in the sentence (the direct object of the verb), rather than at the verb itself as it did for the other nine item types.
For the vast majority of trials in which the participant did not choose the subject, they chose the other human referent. Although "Can't tell" was also an option, this accounted for only 10 out of 324 Biasing Other trials, 3/324 Biasing Subject trials, and 1/324 Neutral trials. Participants therefore seemed confident in their interpretation choices.
It may also be possible that the repetition of the name in the subordinate clause beginning with “While” sets up some sort of expectation of a contrast in the matrix clause, resulting in surprise when a pronoun appears in subject position rather than the name of the other referent. Since we did not set out to test the RNP in this experiment, we refrain from further speculating here.
"Do not make your contribution more informative than is required" (Grice 1975, p. 45).
Since the RNP itself can be described as a Maxim of Quantity violation (Almor 1999), the lack of an RNP effect in the ASD group could be further evidence that the ASD group prioritizes syntax (a subject is a subject) over pragmatics (different anaphors tend to be used with referents of different saliency) in anaphora interpretation.
References
Almor, A. (1999). Noun-phrase anaphora and focus: The informational load hypothesis. Psychological Review, 106(4), 748–765. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.106.4.748.
Almor, A., Kempler, D., MacDonald, M. C., Andersen, E. S., & Tyler, L. K. (1999). Why do Alzheimer patients have difficulty with pronouns? Working memory, semantics, and reference in comprehension and production in Alzheimer's disease. Brain and Language, 67(3), 202–227. https://doi.org/10.1006/brln.1999.2055.
American Psychiatric Association. (2013). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders (5th ed.). Arlington, VA: American Psychiatric Publishing.
Ariel, M. (1990). Accessing noun-phrase antecedents. New York: Routledge.
Arnold, J. E., Bennetto, L., & Diehl, J. J. (2009). Reference production in young speakers with and without autism: Effects of discourse status and processing constraints. Cognition, 110(2), 131–146. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2008.10.016.
Banney, R. M., Harper-Hill, K., & Arnott, W. L. (2015). The Autism Diagnostic Observation Schedule and narrative assessment: Evidence for specific narrative impairments in autism spectrum disorders. International Journal of Speech-Language Pathology, 17(2), 159–171. https://doi.org/10.3109/17549507.2014.977348.
Bavin, E. L., Kidd, E., Prendergast, L. A., & Baker, E. K. (2016). Young children with ASD use lexical and referential information during on-line sentence processing. Frontiers in Psychology, 7, 1–12. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2016.00171.
Bates, D.M., Machler, M., & Bolker, B. (2012). lme4: Linear mixed-effects models using S4 classes. R package version 1.1–7.
Brock, J., Norbury, C., Einav, S., & Nation, K. (2008). Do individuals with autism process words in context? Evidence from language-mediated eye-movements. Cognition, 108(3), 896–904. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2008.06.007.
Brock, J., Sukenik, N., & Friedmann, N. (2017). Individual differences in autistic children’s homograph reading: Evidence from Hebrew. Autism & Developmental Language Impairments, 2, 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1177/2396941517714945.
Colle, L., Baron-Cohen, S., Wheelwright, S., & Van Der Lely, H. K. J. (2008). Narrative discourse in adults with high-functioning autism or Asperger syndrome. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 38, 28–40. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10803-007-0357-5.
Fay, W. H. (1979). Personal pronouns and the autistic child. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 9(3), 247–260. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01531739.
Filiaci, F., Sorace, A., & Carreiras, M. (2014). Anaphoric biases of null and overt subjects in Italian and Spanish: A cross-linguistic comparison. Language, Cognition and Neuroscience, 29(7), 825–843. https://doi.org/10.1080/01690965.2013.801502.
Frith, U., & Happé, F. (1994). Autism: Beyond “theory of mind”. Cognition, 50, 115–132.
Frith, U., & Snowling, M. (1983). Reading for meaning and reading for sound in autistic and dyslexic children. British Journal of Developmental Psychology, 1(4), 329–342.
Fukumura, K., & van Gompel, R. (2014). Effects of order of mention and grammatical role on anaphor resolution. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 41(2), 501–525. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2009.09.001.
Grace, E. J. (2013). Pronoun Problems (Asides on Self-Loathing and Gender). Retrieved July 9, 2019, from https://tinygracenotes.blogspot.com/2013/05/pronoun-problems.html
Givón, T. (1983). Topic continuity in discourse: An introduction. In T. Givón (Ed.), Topic continuity in discourse. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Co.
Grice, P. (1975). Logic and conversation. In P. Cole & J. Morgan (Eds.), Syntax and semantics 3 (pp. 41–58). New York: Academic Press.
Gordon, P. C., Grosz, B. J., & Gilliom, L. A. (1993). Pronouns, names, and the centering of attention in discourse. Cognitive Science, 17(3), 311–347.
Gundel, J., Hedberg, N., & Zacharski, R. (1993). Cognitive status and the form of referring expressions in discourse. Language, 69(2), 274–307. https://doi.org/10.2307/416535.
Happé, F. (1997). Central coherence and theory of mind in autism: Reading homographs in context. British Journal of Developmental Psychology, 15(1), 1–1.
Happé, F., & Frith, U. (2006). The weak coherence account: Detail-focused cognitive style in autism spectrum disorders. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 36(1), 5–25. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10803-005-0039-0.
Hill, E. L. (2004). Evaluating the theory of executive dysfunction in autism. Developmental Review, 24(2), 189–233.
Jolliffe, T., & Baron-Cohen, S. (1999). A test of central coherence theory: Linguistic processing in high-functioning adults with autism or Asperger syndrome: Is local coherence impaired? Cognition, 71(2), 149–185. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0010-0277(99)00022-0.
Jordan, R. (1989). An experimental comparison of the understanding and use of speaker-addressee personal pronouns in autistic children. International Journal of Language & Communication Disorders, 24(2), 169–179.
Kaiser, E., & Trueswell, J. (2008). Interpreting pronouns and demonstratives in Finnish: Evidence for a form-specific approach to reference resolution. Language and Cognitive Processes, 23(5), 709–748. https://doi.org/10.1080/01690960701771220.
Kanner, L. (1943). Autistic disturbances of affective contact. Nervous Child, 2, 217–250. https://doi.org/10.1105/tpc.11.5.949.
Karimi, H., & Ferreira, F. (2016). Informativity renders a referent more accessible: Evidence from eyetracking. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 23(2), 507–525. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13423-015-0917-1.
Kaufman, A., & Kaufman, N. (2004). Kaufman brief intelligence test (2nd ed.). Circle Pines, MN: American Guidance Service.
Kleinhans, N., Akshoomoff, N., & Delis, D. (2005). Executive functions in Autism and Asperger’s Disorder: Flexibility, fluency, and inhibition. Developmental Neuropsychology, 27(3), 379–401. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15326942dn2703_5.
Kuijper, S. J., Hartman, C. A., & Hendriks, P. (2015). Who is he? Children with ASD and ADHD take the listener into account in their production of ambiguous pronouns. PLoS ONE, 10(7), e0132408. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0132408.
Lee, A., & Hobson, R. P. (1994). I, You, Me, and Autism : An experimental study. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 24, 155–176.
Levinson, S. (2000). Presumptive meanings: The theory of generalized conversational implicature. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Lopez, B., & Leekam, S. R. (2003). Do children with autism fail to process information in context? Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 44(2), 285–300. https://doi.org/10.1111/1469-7610.00121.
Lord, C., DiLavore, P. C., Gotham, K., Guthrie, W., Luyster, R. J., Risi, S., et al. (2012). Autism Diagnostic Observation Schedule: ADOS-2. Los Angeles, CA: Western Psychological Services.
Mäkinen, L., Loukusa, S., Leinonen, E., Moilanen, I., Ebeling, H., & Kunnari, S. (2014). Characteristics of narrative language in autism spectrum disorder: Evidence from the Finnish. Research in Autism Spectrum Disorders, 8(8), 987–996. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rasd.2014.05.001.
Malkin, L., Abbot-Smith, K., & Williams, D. (2018). Is verbal reference impaired in autism spectrum disorder? A systematic review. Autism & Developmental Language Impairments, 3, 1–24. https://doi.org/10.1177/2396941518763166.
Micai, M., Joseph, H., Vulchanova, M., & Saldaña, D. (2017). Strategies of readers with autism when responding to inferential questions: An eye-movement study. Autism Research, 10(5), 888–900.
Mirman, D. (2014). Growth curve analysis and visualization using R, 168.
Mirman, D., Dixon, J. A., & Magnuson, J. S. (2008). Statistical and computational models of the visual world paradigm: Growth curves and individual differences. Journal of Memory and Language, 59(4), 475–494. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2007.11.006.
Naigles, L. R., & Tek, S. (2017). ‘Form is easy, meaning is hard’ revisited: (re) characterizing the strengths and weaknesses of language in children with autism spectrum disorder. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Cognitive Science, 8(4), 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1002/wcs.1438.
Norbury, C. F. (2005). Barking up the wrong tree? Lexical ambiguity resolution in children with language impairments and autistic spectrum disorders. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 90(2), 142–171. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jecp.2004.11.003.
Norbury, C. F., & Bishop, D. V. (2003). Narrative skills of children with communication impairments. International Journal of Language & Communication Disorders, 38(3), 287–313. https://doi.org/10.1080/136820310000108133.
Norbury, C. F., Gemmell, T., & Paul, R. (2014). Pragmatics abilities in narrative production: A cross-disorder comparison. Journal of Child Language, 41(3), 485–510. https://doi.org/10.1017/S030500091300007X.
Novogrodsky, R. (2013). Subject pronoun use by children with autism spectrum disorders (ASD). Clinical Linguistics & Phonetics. https://doi.org/10.3109/02699206.2012.742567.
Novogrodsky, R., & Edelson, L. R. (2016). Ambiguous pronoun use in narratives of children with Autism Spectrum Disorders. Child Language Teaching and Therapy. https://doi.org/10.1177/0265659015602935.
Perovic, A., Modyanova, N., & Wexler, K. (2013). Comparison of grammar in neurodevelopmental disorders: The case of binding in Williams syndrome and autism with and without language impairment. Language Acquisition, 20(2), 133–154. https://doi.org/10.1080/10489223.2013.766742.
R Core Team. (2017). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria. https://www.R-project.org/.
Rooryck, J., & Wyngaerd, G. V. (2015). Morphological transparency and the Delay of Principle B Effect. Lingua, 155, 121–139.
Rutter, M., Bailey, A., & Lord, C. (2003). Social Communication Questionnaire (SCQ). Los Angeles, CA: Western Psychological Services.
Rumpf, A. L., Kamp-Becker, I., Becker, K., & Kauschke, C. (2012). Narrative competence and internal state language of children with Asperger Syndrome and ADHD. Research in Developmental Disabilities, 33(5), 1395–1407. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ridd.2012.03.007.
Saldaña, D., & Frith, U. (2007). Do readers with autism make bridging inferences from world knowledge? Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 96(4), 310–319.
Sansosti, F. J., Was, C., Rawson, K. A., & Remaklus, B. L. (2013). Eye movements during processing of text requiring bridging inferences in adolescents with higher functioning autism spectrum disorders: A preliminary investigation. Research in Autism Spectrum Disorders, 7(12), 1535–1542.
Semel, E., Wiig, E. H., & Secord, W. A. (2003). Clinical evaluation of language fundamentals, fourth edition (CELF-4) (4th ed.). Toronto, Canada: The Psychological Corporation/A Harcourt Assessment Company.
Snowling, M., & Frith, U. (1986). Comprehension in “hyperlexic” readers. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 42(3), 392–415. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-0965(86)90033-0.
Suh, J., Eigsti, I. M., Naigles, L., Barton, M., Kelley, E., & Fein, D. (2014). Narrative performance of optimal outcome children and adolescents with a history of an autism spectrum disorder (ASD). Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 44(7), 1681–1694. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10803-014-2042-9.
Tager-Flusberg, H. (1995). ‘Once upon a ribbit’: Stories narrated by autistic children. British Journal of Developmental Psychology, 13(1), 45–59.
Thornton, R., & Wexler, K. (1999). Principle B, VP ellipsis, and interpretation in child grammar. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Wang, Y., Zhang, Y. B., Liu, L. L., Cui, J. F., Wang, J., Shum, D. H., et al. (2017). A meta-analysis of working memory impairments in autism spectrum disorders. Neuropsychology Review, 27(1), 46–61.
Acknowledgment
This research was supported by grant from the National Institutes of Health (NIH-NIDCD R01 DC012774-01; Grossman, PI).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Contributions
Drs. MN and EZ developed the original idea for this paper. Dr. MN developed the experimental design and items, helped edit the audio recordings and visual stimuli, conducted data analysis on the interpretation data, and drafted the manuscript. Dr. EZ created the audio recordings and visual stimuli, conducted data collection, was responsible for the primary eye-tracking data analysis, and provided feedback on the manuscript. Dr. RBG oversaw data collection in her laboratory and provided feedback on the manuscript.
Corresponding author
Additional information
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Appendix
Appendix
See Table 6
.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Nagano, M., Zane, E. & Grossman, R.B. Structural and Contextual Cues in Third-Person Pronoun Interpretation by Children with Autism Spectrum Disorder and Their Neurotypical Peers. J Autism Dev Disord 51, 1562–1583 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10803-020-04645-7
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10803-020-04645-7