Abstract Spatial Reasoning as an Autistic Strength

Jennifer L Stevenson,Morton Ann Gernsbacher,Tiziana Zalla

doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0059329

Jennifer L Stevenson, Morton Ann Gernsbacher + Show 1 more

Open Access

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0059329

Copy DOI

Journal: PloS one	Publication Date: Mar 22, 2013
Citations: 52	License type: CC BY 4.0

Affiliation: Ursinus College, University of Wisconsin–Madison

Abstract

Autistic individuals typically excel on spatial tests that measure abstract reasoning, such as the Block Design subtest on intelligence test batteries and the Raven’s Progressive Matrices nonverbal test of intelligence. Such well-replicated findings suggest that abstract spatial processing is a relative and perhaps absolute strength of autistic individuals. However, previous studies have not systematically varied reasoning level – concrete vs. abstract – and test domain – spatial vs. numerical vs. verbal, which the current study did. Autistic participants (N = 72) and non-autistic participants (N = 72) completed a battery of 12 tests that varied by reasoning level (concrete vs. abstract) and domain (spatial vs. numerical vs. verbal). Autistic participants outperformed non-autistic participants on abstract spatial tests. Non-autistic participants did not outperform autistic participants on any of the three domains (spatial, numerical, and verbal) or at either of the two reasoning levels (concrete and abstract), suggesting similarity in abilities between autistic and non-autistic individuals, with abstract spatial reasoning as an autistic strength.

Highlights

Enhanced spatial perception is a signature characteristic of autistic individuals (e.g., [1]; see Sinclair’s (1999) essay, ‘‘Why I dislike person first language’’ [51], for why we have chosen to use the term ‘‘autistic person(s)’’ rather than ‘‘person(s) with autism’’)
To explore further the significant three-way interaction between group, test domain, and reasoning level, post-hoc domain x reasoning level repeated-measures ANOVAs were conducted within each group to assess relative strengths, and post-hoc group x reasoning level mixed-design ANOVAs were conducted across the three domains to assess absolute strengths
The interaction between group and reasoning level was significant in the spatial domain (F(1, 142) = 20.86, p,.001), with autistic participants exhibiting an absolute strength over non-autistic participants on abstract spatial tests (F(1, 142) = 9.11, p = .003), but not on concrete spatial tests (F(1, 142) = 0.28, p = .60)

Summary

Introduction

Enhanced spatial perception is a signature characteristic of autistic individuals (e.g., [1]; see Sinclair’s (1999) essay, ‘‘Why I dislike person first language’’ [51], for why we have chosen to use the term ‘‘autistic person(s)’’ rather than ‘‘person(s) with autism’’). A highly replicated relative strength for many autistic individuals is their performance on Block Design subtests, which occur on various intelligence tests [9,10,11]. Autistic participants perform better on Wechsler subtests that assess abstract reasoning (e.g., Vocabulary, Arithmetic, Block Design) than on subtests that assess concrete reasoning (e.g., Comprehension, Digit Symbol/ Coding, Picture Completion). This analysis of Wechsler subtest performance does not systematically vary reasoning level, abstract versus concrete, and domain, spatial versus non-spatial. Was the purpose of the present study, which examined relative and absolute strengths in autistic and non-autistic individuals’ performance on 12 tests that varied by reasoning level (concrete vs abstract) and domain (spatial vs numerical vs verbal)

Methods

Results

Discussion