Who Is He? Children with ASD and ADHD Take the Listener into Account in Their Production of Ambiguous Pronouns

Sanne J M Kuijper,Catharina A Hartman,Petra Hendriks,Morton Ann Gernsbacher

doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0132408

Sanne J M Kuijper, Catharina A Hartman + Show 2 more

Open Access

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0132408

Copy DOI

Abstract

During conversation, speakers constantly make choices about how specific they wish to be in their use of referring expressions. In the present study we investigate whether speakers take the listener into account or whether they base their referential choices solely on their own representation of the discourse. We do this by examining the cognitive mechanisms that underlie the choice of referring expression at different discourse moments. Furthermore, we provide insights into how children with Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD) and Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) use referring expressions and whether their use differs from that of typically developing (TD) children. Children between 6 and 12 years old (ASD: n=46; ADHD: n=37; TD: n=38) were tested on their production of referring expressions and on Theory of Mind, response inhibition and working memory. We found support for the view that speakers take the listener into account when choosing a referring expression: Theory of Mind was related to referential choice only at those moments when speakers could not solely base their choice on their own discourse representation to be understood. Working memory appeared to be involved in keeping track of the different referents in the discourse. Furthermore, we found that TD children as well as children with ASD and children with ADHD took the listener into account in their choice of referring expression. In addition, children with ADHD were less specific than TD children in contexts with more than one referent. The previously observed problems with referential choice in children with ASD may lie in difficulties in keeping track of longer and more complex discourses, rather than in problems with taking into account the listener.

Highlights

One of the most important functions of language is reference
No differences were found between the groups at these two reference positions (Intro-1: Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD) vs. typically developing (TD) (B = -6.12, SE = 13.50, p = .65); Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) vs. TD (B = -5.64, SE = 13.51, p = .68); Intro-2: ASD vs. TD (B = .19, SE = 1.43, p = .89); ADHD vs. TD (B = -.015, SE = 1.43, p = .99))
When only one character is present in the story (Maintain-1), all three groups mainly use a pronoun to maintain reference to this character (Mean noun phrases (NPs) use: ASD: M = 15%; ADHD: M = 16%; TD: M = 14%; ASD vs. TD (B = .14, SE = .42, p = .75); ADHD vs. TD (B = .20, SE = .44, p = .65))

Summary

Introduction

One of the most important functions of language is reference. When people communicate, they refer to the world around them. In a context with two referents, the use of a pronoun may lead to an incorrect interpretation: ‘Rembrandt van Rijn had a different painting style than Vincent van Gogh. In a context with only one referent, the use of a pronoun is likely to lead to a correct interpretation: ‘Rembrandt van Rijn is a famous Dutch painter.

Objectives

Methods

Results

Discussion

Conclusion