View in EDS HTML Full Text PDF Full Text

Largely Typical Electrophysiological Affective Responses to Special Interest Stimuli in Adolescents with Autism Spectrum Disorder

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Title: Largely Typical Electrophysiological Affective Responses to Special Interest Stimuli in Adolescents with Autism Spectrum Disorder
Language: English
Authors: Rivard, Keelin, Protzner, Andrea B., Burles, Ford, Schuetze, Manuela, Cho, Ivy, Ten Eycke, Kayla, McCrimmon, Adam, Dewey, Deborah, Cortese, Filomeno, Bray, Signe
Source: Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders. Sep 2018 48(9):3133-3143.
Availability: Springer. Available from: Springer Nature. 233 Spring Street, New York, NY 10013. Tel: 800-777-4643; Tel: 212-460-1500; Fax: 212-348-4505; e-mail: customerservice@springernature.com; Web site: https://link.springer.com/
Peer Reviewed: Y
Page Count: 11
Publication Date: 2018
Document Type: Journal Articles
Reports - Research
Descriptors: Affective Behavior, Autism, Pervasive Developmental Disorders, Control Groups, Experimental Groups, Diagnostic Tests, Adolescents, Symptoms (Individual Disorders), Brain Hemisphere Functions, Interests
DOI: 10.1007/s10803-018-3587-9
ISSN: 0162-3257
Abstract: Circumscribed interests are a symptom of autism spectrum disorder (ASD) that may be related to exaggerated affective neural responses. However, the use of generic ASD-interest image stimuli has left an open question as to whether affective responses towards individual interests are greater in ASD compared to typically developing (TD) controls. We compared amplitudes of the late positive potential (LPP), an affective electroencephalographic response, between adolescents with ASD (N = 19) and TD adolescents (N = 20), using images tailored to individual likes and dislikes. We found an LPP response for liked and disliked images, relative to neutral, with no difference in amplitude between groups. This suggests that the LPP is not atypical in adolescents with ASD towards images of individual interests.
Abstractor: As Provided
Number of References: 58
Entry Date: 2018
Accession Number: EJ1187322
Database: ERIC
Full text is not displayed to guests.
FullText Links:
  – Type: pdflink
    Url: https://content.ebscohost.com/cds/retrieve?content=AQICAHj0k_4E0hTGH8RJwT4gCJyBsGNe_WN95AvKlDbXJGqwxwHvfnjenXlr62pDyIkmKWc8AAAA4jCB3wYJKoZIhvcNAQcGoIHRMIHOAgEAMIHIBgkqhkiG9w0BBwEwHgYJYIZIAWUDBAEuMBEEDFa89UkIo2j1GRgGfAIBEICBmu6MKrB-xNdf2m8Hfjih5-1UQRR6Zg5TuDamkL2spWgzVrl2ecZQyqFC17_jr9lfeax6JXYF774dgOKMbhJnHfQbuit75jugjQW7HhwZW0ZlD_s_JuBOM9VnbrAERcdNzBpE5EhElInWT8-jIgK4gvIgnO4DN6e8zgSCjq4ikb88LDX1mnMJQK0Dq1zBfuRWUcjtA6yJL3Let6Q=
Text:
  Availability: 1
  Value: <anid>AN0131132643;aut01sep.18;2018Aug09.09:06;v2.2.500</anid> <title id="AN0131132643-1">Largely Typical Electrophysiological Affective Responses to Special Interest Stimuli in Adolescents with Autism Spectrum Disorder </title> <p>Circumscribed interests are a symptom of autism spectrum disorder (ASD) that may be related to exaggerated affective neural responses. However, the use of generic ASD-interest image stimuli has left an open question as to whether affective responses towards individual interests are greater in ASD compared to typically developing (TD) controls. We compared amplitudes of the late positive potential (LPP), an affective electroencephalographic response, between adolescents with ASD (N = 19) and TD adolescents (N = 20), using images tailored to individual likes and dislikes. We found an LPP response for liked and disliked images, relative to neutral, with no difference in amplitude between groups. This suggests that the LPP is not atypical in adolescents with ASD towards images of individual interests.</p> <p>Autism spectrum disorder; EEG; LPP; Affective; Circumscribed interests</p> <hd id="AN0131132643-2">Introduction</hd> <p>Intense preoccupations are one of the features of autism spectrum disorder (ASD) that have been observed since the earliest case descriptions (Kanner [<reflink idref="bib32" id="ref1">32</reflink>] ) of this disorder. An estimated 60-95% of children and young adults with ASD have what their parents describe as ‘circumscribed interests’ (CIs; Lam et al. [<reflink idref="bib36" id="ref2">36</reflink>] ; South et al. [<reflink idref="bib53" id="ref3">53</reflink>] ; Turner-Brown et al. [<reflink idref="bib55" id="ref4">55</reflink>] ). CIs are a core diagnostic symptom in the repetitive and restricted behaviours and interests (RRBIs) domain (American Psychiatric Association [<reflink idref="bib3" id="ref5">3</reflink>] ), and are seen in individuals with ASD of all ages (South et al. [<reflink idref="bib53" id="ref6">53</reflink>] ) and levels of intellectual functioning (Bartak and Rutter [<reflink idref="bib4" id="ref7">4</reflink>] ; Freeman et al. [<reflink idref="bib23" id="ref8">23</reflink>] ; South et al. [<reflink idref="bib53" id="ref9">53</reflink>] ).</p> <p>Intense interests, focus and attention to detail can confer benefits to some individuals with ASD (Mottron [<reflink idref="bib45" id="ref10">45</reflink>] ). On the other hand, the intensity and pervasiveness of CIs may be associated with reduced social interaction and communication, as an individual with ASD may only desire to communicate with others who share their interest in specific topics (Boyd et al. [<reflink idref="bib7" id="ref11">7</reflink>] ; Turner-Brown et al. [<reflink idref="bib55" id="ref12">55</reflink>] ). Parents and caregivers have also noted that CIs require continuous patience and tolerance on their part (Gabriels et al. [<reflink idref="bib24" id="ref13">24</reflink>] ; South et al. [<reflink idref="bib53" id="ref14">53</reflink>] ).</p> <p>Understanding how CIs relate to other ASD symptoms, affect behaviour and engage the brain could lead to strategies to mitigate the challenges associated with this symptom, and provide insight into how they could be used in a therapeutic context (Dunst et al. [<reflink idref="bib17" id="ref15">17</reflink>] ; Mottron [<reflink idref="bib46" id="ref16">46</reflink>] ; Vismara and Lyons [<reflink idref="bib57" id="ref17">57</reflink>] ). It has been shown that the expression of CIs does not correlate with age, IQ or communication deficits, and that the strength of this symptom is correlated within sibling pairs, suggesting a genetic and biological basis for this symptom that is distinct from other aspects of the disorder (Lam et al. [<reflink idref="bib36" id="ref18">36</reflink>] ). While rituals, repetitive behaviors and restricted interests are seen in typically developing (TD) children (Evans et al. [<reflink idref="bib20" id="ref19">20</reflink>] ) and children with neurodevelopmental disorders other than ASD (Evans et al. [<reflink idref="bib19" id="ref20">19</reflink>] ; Glenn [<reflink idref="bib25" id="ref21">25</reflink>] ), the intensity of these symptoms seem to distinguish children with ASD from TD children (Turner-Brown et al. [<reflink idref="bib55" id="ref22">55</reflink>] ) and children with other disorders (Adamson et al. [<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref23">1</reflink>] ; Bodfish et al. [<reflink idref="bib6" id="ref24">6</reflink>] ; Uljarevic and Evans [<reflink idref="bib56" id="ref25">56</reflink>] ).</p> <p>Behaviourally, eye-tracking studies have been used to investigate how CIs affect the preferential allocation of attention. This approach has shown that children with ASD are more likely to perseverate on objects of interest and visually explore them in a detailed manner (Sasson et al. [<reflink idref="bib50" id="ref26">50</reflink>] , [<reflink idref="bib48" id="ref27">48</reflink>] ). Attention to social stimuli in both preschool children and adolescents with ASD is altered or reduced when an adjacent image features an object that is related to a child’s CIs (Sasson and Touchstone [<reflink idref="bib49" id="ref28">49</reflink>] ).</p> <p>Several hypotheses have been advanced regarding the neural basis of CIs. The first is that neural responses to sensory stimuli are inherently ‘noisier’ and less reliable in individuals with ASD (Milne [<reflink idref="bib44" id="ref29">44</reflink>] ), causing individuals to gravitate away from unpredictable social stimuli and towards stimuli with more predictable features (Dinstein et al. [<reflink idref="bib16" id="ref30">16</reflink>] ). A second hypothesis is that CIs engage the reward system to a greater extent, and social stimuli to a lesser extent, than in TD individuals (Chevallier et al. [<reflink idref="bib10" id="ref31">10</reflink>] ), and that this difference in engagement of the reward system is related to enhanced motivation to attend to CI stimuli (Dichter et al. [<reflink idref="bib14" id="ref32">14</reflink>] ). A functional neuroimaging study by Dichter et al. ([<reflink idref="bib14" id="ref33">14</reflink>] ) showed decreased nucleus accumbens activation while anticipating monetary rewards in participants with ASD. However, an intact response was observed when individuals were presented with a broad category of ‘typical’ CIs (e.g., trains, electronics), suggesting that reward anticipation responses are preserved somewhat specifically for CI stimuli. Enhanced responses in cingulate and insular regions known to be responsive to stimulus salience (Seeley et al. [<reflink idref="bib52" id="ref34">52</reflink>] ) have also been shown during passive viewing of pictures of CIs in children with ASD (Cascio et al. [<reflink idref="bib9" id="ref35">9</reflink>] ).</p> <p>Few studies have used electroencephalography (EEG) to investigate CIs in ASD. However, one recent study (Benning et al. [<reflink idref="bib5" id="ref36">5</reflink>] ) examined the late positive potential (LPP), an event-related potential (ERP) sensitive to both positive and negative emotional stimuli (Liu et al. [<reflink idref="bib38" id="ref37">38</reflink>] ; Schupp et al. [<reflink idref="bib51" id="ref38">51</reflink>] ) to investigate responses to social and CI images. Benning et al. ([<reflink idref="bib5" id="ref39">5</reflink>] ) found that children and adolescents with ASD showed smaller LPP amplitudes for social stimuli, and larger LPP amplitudes for CI stimuli, relative to TD controls. While this finding supports the suggestion of enhanced emotional responses to CIs coupled with reduced response to social stimuli, this work had several limitations. Specifically, this study used generic CIs (e.g. trains), while the content of CIs are known to be idiosyncratic (Turner-Brown et al. [<reflink idref="bib55" id="ref40">55</reflink>] ). Moreover, it was unable to test whether the responses to CIs in individuals ASD were similar in magnitude or exaggerated relative to the hobbies and interests of TD individuals. fMRI studies that have examined neural responses to images tailored to an individual’s own interests have shown evidence for exaggerated responses in brain regions related to emotion (Cascio et al. [<reflink idref="bib9" id="ref41">9</reflink>] ; Kohls et al. [<reflink idref="bib33" id="ref42">33</reflink>] ) and expertise (Foss-Feig et al. [<reflink idref="bib22" id="ref43">22</reflink>] ) in participants with ASD relative to TD controls, suggesting that tailored images may have value in the study of CI symptoms.</p> <p>In the present study, we investigated whether emotional responses to pictures of high-interest stimuli in youth with ASD were similar or exaggerated relative to those of TD controls in response to pictures depicting their own interests. To accomplish this, we developed tailored picture sets reflecting high- and low-interest images for each individual, and a set of neutral control images that was consistent across the groups. As the LPP response is not sensitive to valence (Liu et al. [<reflink idref="bib38" id="ref44">38</reflink>] ), low-interest images were included as an emotional control condition, while the neutral images were included as a non-emotional image control. Images were presented to each participant in a target detection task while we recorded scalp EEG. We used the LPP to quantify emotional processing in response to these stimuli. We hypothesized that we would find an exaggerated LPP response in the participants with ASD compared to TD controls, towards high-interest stimuli, reflecting an enhanced emotional response towards these stimuli, but that the LPP for low-interest and neutral stimuli would not significantly differ between groups.</p> <hd id="AN0131132643-3">Materials and Methods</hd> <hd id="AN0131132643-4">Overview of Study Procedures</hd> <p>Participants in this study completed diagnostic and cognitive assessments in one session and the experimental tasks in a separate session. The experimental task was a visual target detection task during which high-interest, low-interest and neutral images were presented and EEG was recorded (‘Visual Target Detection EEG Task’). In order to ensure that high-interest images were in fact preferred over low-interest or neutral images, following the EEG task, participants rated or ranked the images they had seen on a set of ‘Image Validation Tasks’.</p> <hd id="AN0131132643-5">Participants</hd> <p>Twenty-two TD participants and 23 participants with a diagnosis of ASD, aged 14-20 years participated in this study. These participants were recruited from a larger group of individuals who participated in an online study (described in Cho et al. [<reflink idref="bib11" id="ref45">11</reflink>] ). Due to technical difficulties, usable EEG data were collected from 20 individuals with ASD (4 female) and 20 TD control participants (4 female). Participants with and without ASD were recruited through posters placed at schools, hospitals, university campuses, coffee shops, community centers and libraries in a large urban Canadian center. Participants with ASD were also recruited through a community-based support agency.</p> <p>The Autism Diagnostic Observation Schedule, Second Edition (ADOS-2) (Lord et al. [<reflink idref="bib39" id="ref46">39</reflink>] ) was administered by a research reliable rater to confirm each participants’ diagnosis. Nineteen participants with ASD exceeded clinical cutoffs, while one female did not and was excluded from the analyses. Therefore, a total of 19 participants with ASD and 20 TD participants were included in this study. Exclusion criteria for all participants were a history of traumatic brain injury or seizure disorders. An additional exclusion criterion for TD participants was a previous neurological or psychiatric diagnosis. As co-morbid symptoms are common in individuals with ASD (Hus et al. [<reflink idref="bib30" id="ref47">30</reflink>] ) and it is unclear whether these represent distinct disorders or secondary impairments (i.e., genetic factors may predispose individuals to both ASD and other diagnoses; Lundström et al. [<reflink idref="bib41" id="ref48">41</reflink>] ), participants with ASD were not excluded based on co-occurring diagnoses; our sample included participants with a co-occurring diagnosis of attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (<reflink idref="bib7" id="ref49">7</reflink>), major depressive disorder (<reflink idref="bib2" id="ref50">2</reflink>), anxiety disorder (<reflink idref="bib3" id="ref51">3</reflink>), obsessive compulsive disorder (<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref52">1</reflink>), and oppositional defiant disorder (<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref53">1</reflink>). Four participants were receiving treatment with one or more medications: Prozac (<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref54">1</reflink>), Strattera (<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref55">1</reflink>), Quetiapine (<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref56">1</reflink>), Sertraline (<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref57">1</reflink>), Clonidine (<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref58">1</reflink>), Vyvance (<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref59">1</reflink>), Cipralex (<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref60">1</reflink>). Two participants with ASD and one TD control reported having a learning disorder in reading, or reading and writing. All participants were right-handed, with normal or corrected-to-normal vision. Participants over 18 provided consent while participants under 18 provided assent and consent was obtained from a parent or guardian. Consent forms and procedures in this study were approved by the University of Calgary Health Research Ethics Board.</p> <p>Parents completed the Social Responsiveness Scale, Second Edition (SRS-2) (Constantino and Gruber [<reflink idref="bib12" id="ref61">12</reflink>] ) online to assess the presence and extent of social impairments in the participants with and without ASD. Intellectual ability was measured with the Wechsler Abbreviated Scale of Intelligence, Second Edition (WASI-2) (Wechsler [<reflink idref="bib58" id="ref62">58</reflink>] ). ADOS-2 and WASI-2 assessments were administered in a separate session ± 3 months of the EEG task escribed here. Participant demographics are shown in Table 1.</p> <p></p> <p>All statistical analyses were carried out using SPSS 21 (IBM Corp., Armonk, NY, USA). Two-sample t-tests were used to compare age, IQ and SRS-2 symptoms between groups. Age was not significantly different between groups [t(<reflink idref="bib37" id="ref63">37</reflink>) = − 0.04, p = 0.97]. Individuals with ASD had significantly higher SRS-2 Total scores [t(<reflink idref="bib37" id="ref64">37</reflink>) = 16.85, p < 0.001], lower Full-Scale IQ scores [t(<reflink idref="bib37" id="ref65">37</reflink>) = 3.10, p < 0.05] and non-verbal IQ scores that trended towards being lower [t(<reflink idref="bib37" id="ref66">37</reflink>) = 1.76, p = 0.09].</p> <p>Raw scores for two questions from the SRS-2 that specifically relate to CIs (“Talks about the same things over and over” and “Has an unusually narrow range of interests”) were analyzed to assess CI symptoms. These raw scores were summed for a range from 0 to 6. The groups differed significantly on this score, t(<reflink idref="bib37" id="ref67">37</reflink>) = − 7.4, p < 0.001. The majority of TD participants (14/20) scored zero on the sum of these two questions, indicating that they never show these behaviors, while none of the participants with ASD received a score of zero on both questions. Only one TD participant (out of 20) scored ≥ 3, while 15/19 participants with ASD scored ≥ 3, indicating that they show these behaviors sometimes, often or almost always.</p> <hd id="AN0131132643-6">Image Stimuli</hd> <p>Images in this study consisted of a Gabor patch (sinusoidal grating), a target image that contained a picture of a zebra, high-interest images, low-interest images and neutral images (Fig. 1a). The Gabor patch was created using MATLAB R2014a (The Mathworks, Inc., Natick, MA, USA) and presented in a leftward diagonal (45°) orientation with a spatial frequency of 8 cycles/degree. Responses to the Gabor patch and target image were not analyzed here.</p> <p>Image viewing task. a Examples of visual stimuli used in this study. b Visual representation of the task. Participants viewed a series of images and responded by pressing a button when the image of a zebra was shown</p> <p>The high- and low-interest image sets were tailored for each participant to include images of things the participant liked or disliked. Before participants came in for the study, they, as well as their parents, were asked to submit a list of items they liked and disliked; specifically, items that could be easily pictured, such as: TV shows, movies, animals, sports, foods, etc. Five image categories were identified for both high- and low-interest groupings for each participant. A list of the suggested likes and dislikes is shown in Supplementary Table 1; this table also indicates which likes and dislikes were specific to female participants. Qualitatively, males and females in both TD and ASD groups showed broad overlap in terms of image categories. We note also that there was substantial overlap in the lists of items provided by participants with and without ASD (e.g., likes included Coca-Cola, Lego, Star Wars, Halo and soccer; dislikes included cockroaches, asparagus, crying babies, chores, etc.), and several instances where items appeared as both a like and dislike for different individuals (e.g., school, basketball). Based on these lists, a set of 100 (50 high- and 50 low-interest) images was prepared for each participant using Google image searches. The search was constrained to images that were a minimum of 640 × 480 pixels, and all images chosen were of consistent quality and featured the item in question in the center/foreground. Fifty neutral images were selected from the International Affective Picture System (IAPS) database (Lang et al. [<reflink idref="bib37" id="ref68">37</reflink>] ), from among those that were neutrally rated (4.5-5) on measures of arousal and valence. This set of 50 images was presented to all participants.</p> <p>All images were scaled to 600 × 400 pixels and shown on a 24-inch monitor (HP lp2475w) with a 60 Hz refresh rate. Participants were seated at a viewing distance of 80 cm that resulted in a visual angle subtending 11.60° × 7.75°. To ensure that there was minimal variation in low-level stimulus properties across images, the SHINE toolbox for MATLAB (<ulink href="http://www.mapageweb.umontreal.ca/gosselif/SHINE/">http://www.mapageweb.umontreal.ca/gosselif/SHINE/</ulink>) was used to adjust all images (including the Gabor patch and zebra Target) to have a mean luminance of 127 cd/m<sups>2</sups> with a standard deviation (SD) of 30 cd/m<sups>2</sups>. The luminance adjustment was verified using a photometer (X-Rite Corporate Headquarters, Grand Rapids, Michigan, USA) placed on the desktop monitor at the centre of a random set of ten images for each participant.</p> <hd id="AN0131132643-7">Visual Target Detection EEG Task</hd> <p>A visual representation of the task can be seen in Fig. 1b. We chose to use a target detection rather than a passive viewing task to maintain attention throughout the study and obtain a measure that we could use to ensure task engagement was comparable between groups. Target detection tasks have successfully been used in studies of the LPP (Horan et al. [<reflink idref="bib29" id="ref69">29</reflink>] ). Participants were shown a series of centrally presented images for 500 ms and were instructed to press a button as quickly as possible whenever they saw the target image (zebra). A jittered inter-trial interval (ITI) was sampled randomly from a uniform distribution between 500 and 1000 ms. A white fixation cross measuring 0.2° × 0.2° visual angle remained in the center of the screen for the duration of the task. Participants were asked to maintain fixation and limit blinking while completing the task. The task was structured as two runs of nine minutes each, for a total run time of approximately 18 min. Each run included 100 Gabor patch, 50 target image, 100 high-interest image, 100 low-interest image and 100 neutral image trials. The order of image presentation was randomized and each image was presented twice per run for a total of four times.</p> <p>Each participant completed an initial practice run to become familiar with task timing and ensure that instructions were understood. The practice run included two target and eight non-target images that were the same across participants and did not belong to any individual’s high- or low-interest images. The practice run took approximately 30 s to complete and was repeated until the participant achieved 100% accuracy. We assessed group differences in accuracy and reaction times for target detection using two-sample t-tests.</p> <hd id="AN0131132643-8">EEG Data Recording and Pre-processing</hd> <p>Participants were seated in an electrically shielded, soundproof chamber during EEG acquisition. EEG data was continuously recorded from 64-channels with an EasyCap configured according to the 10/20 positioning system, referenced to Cz, using the actiCHamp system (Brain Products GmbH, Gilching, Germany). Impedance levels were verified to be under 17 kΩ before recording. The data was acquired at a 500-Hz sampling rate.</p> <p>Offline, data were band-passed filtered at 0.1-55 Hz and visually inspected to determine whether the removal and interpolation of noisy channels was required. In the ASD group, six individuals required interpolation on an average of three channels, whereas four TD individuals required interpolation on an average of two channels. Data were re-referenced to the average of the two mastoid electrodes [(TP9 + TP10)/2], which is a commonly used reference for LPP studies (Hajcak et al. [<reflink idref="bib27" id="ref70">27</reflink>] ; Schupp et al. [<reflink idref="bib51" id="ref71">51</reflink>] ). The continuous data were then segmented into 1200 ms epochs, from 200 ms pre- to 1000 ms post-stimulus onset. Epoched data were visually inspected and noisy epochs were removed from the dataset. Following this, we performed noise removal using independent component analysis (ICA) on the epoched data using EEGLAB software (<ulink href="http://www.sccn.ucsd.edu/eeglab">http://www.sccn.ucsd.edu/eeglab</ulink>) (Delorme and Makeig [<reflink idref="bib13" id="ref72">13</reflink>] ). Components consisting of blinks and horizontal eye movements were removed from the dataset. Trials that included stimulus onsets followed by correct responses (target image followed by button press) and correct rejections (all other images followed by no button press) were binned according to stimulus type (high, low, neutral, Gabor and target).</p> <hd id="AN0131132643-9">LPP Analysis</hd> <p>The ERPLAB toolbox (<ulink href="http://erpinfo.org/erplab">http://erpinfo.org/erplab</ulink>) in EEGLAB software was used for calculating LPP amplitude. Epoched EEG data were averaged across trials at each electrode for each participant. LPP amplitudes were calculated as the mean between 400 and 700 ms post-stimulus onset for each condition (high, low and neutral) at selected electrode sites. Based on previous literature, we considered three midline electrode scalp sites for LPP: frontal (Fz), central (Cz), and posterior (Pz) (Schupp et al. [<reflink idref="bib51" id="ref73">51</reflink>] ). An initial repeated measures ANOVA pooling across participant groups showed a significant condition by electrode interaction effect [F(<reflink idref="bib4" id="ref74">4</reflink>, 152) = 10.3, p < 0.001]. We, therefore, focused analyses on the Pz electrode, which showed the largest mean amplitude difference between neutral- and high-/low- interest conditions.</p> <p>Analyses of LPP amplitude were conducted to determine whether there were group and condition differences for high-interest, low-interest and neutral images. A repeated measures ANOVA was run with condition (high-interest, low-interest and neutral) as a within-subject factor and group as a between-subjects factor. As correlations between amplitude and age, and between amplitude and IQ, were non-significant (all ps > 0.06). These were not included as covariates in the primary analyses; however, we note that findings did not change when these covariates were included. Where significant effects were found, post-hoc t-tests were used to determine the direction of the effect.</p> <hd id="AN0131132643-10">Image Validation Tasks</hd> <p>As high- and low-interest images were selected based on reported likes and dislikes, we included two measures to capture individual differences in the relative liking of image stimuli. These ‘stimulus validation’ tasks were administered after the EEG recording. Participants first viewed pairs of images presented side-by-side and answered the question “What do you like more?” by pressing a button to indicate the image on the left or right of the screen. There were 18 trials for each pairing with randomly selected images: high-interest images were paired with neutral images, low-interest images were paired with neutral images and high-interest images were paired with low-interest images, for a total of 54 trials. The number of choices for each image type was converted to a percentage. One-sample t-tests were performed on each of the three pairings against a chance level of 50% for the ASD and TD groups separately to assess preference for one category of image over another. Following this, choice percentage was compared between the groups using two-sample t-tests, one for each pairing. For these three comparisons, inferences were drawn at a Bonferroni corrected threshold of p < 0.0167.</p> <p>We also collected ratings for 10 high- and 10 low-interest stimuli, randomly selected from the same subset of images, by asking participants “How pleasant do you find this picture from 1 (very unpleasant) to 7 (very pleasant)?”. These data were analyzed using a repeated measures ANOVA with picture type (high- and low-interest) as a within-subject factor and group as a between-subjects factor. Where significant effects were found, post-hoc t-tests were used to determine the direction of the effect.</p> <hd id="AN0131132643-11">Results</hd> <hd id="AN0131132643-12">Target Detection Accuracy</hd> <p>There was no significant difference between groups for target detection accuracy, suggesting that both groups were equally compliant with the task [ASD: mean = 88.82%, SD = 5.87, TD: mean = 89.50%, SD = 5.98; t(<reflink idref="bib37" id="ref75">37</reflink>) = − 0.328, p = 0.745], or reaction times [ASD: mean = 531.21 ms, SD = 62.50 ms; TD: mean = 528.94 ms, SD = 58.73 ms; t(<reflink idref="bib37" id="ref76">37</reflink>) = − 0.321, p = 0.821].</p> <hd id="AN0131132643-13">LPP Results</hd> <p>A repeated measures ANOVA showed a significant main effect of condition [F(<reflink idref="bib2" id="ref77">2</reflink>,<reflink idref="bib74" id="ref78">74</reflink>) = 31.40, p < 0.001], but no significant effect of group [F(<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref79">1</reflink>, 37) = 0.13, p = 0.73] or condition by group interaction [F(<reflink idref="bib2" id="ref80">2</reflink>, 74) = 0.25, p = 0.8]. The condition effect was driven by a larger LPP amplitude during the high- and low-interest conditions, relative to the neutral condition (Fig. 2). Specifically, paired t-tests showed that for both groups, high-interest amplitudes (ASD: mean = 0.027 µV; SD = 2.9 µV; TD: mean = 0.5 µV, SD = 2.7 µV) were significantly higher compared to neutral amplitudes [ASD: mean = − 1.9 µV, SD = 2.7 µV; TD: mean = − 1.8 µV, SD = 2.6 µV; ASD: t(<reflink idref="bib18" id="ref81">18</reflink>) = 5.0, p < 0.001; TD: t(<reflink idref="bib19" id="ref82">19</reflink>) = 4.6, p < 0.001], and low-interest amplitudes (ASD: mean = − 0.8 µV; SD = 2.7 µV; TD: mean = − 0.5 µV, SD = 2.4 µV) were significantly higher than neutral amplitudes [ASD: t(<reflink idref="bib18" id="ref83">18</reflink>) = 3.5, p = 0.003; TD: t(<reflink idref="bib19" id="ref84">19</reflink>) = 5.0, p < 0.001].</p> <p>LPP amplitudes at the Pz electrode for both groups. a ASD and b TD. Amplitudes between 400 and 700 ms are surrounded by the dashed rectangle and were averaged to generate LPP amplitudes for statistical analyses</p> <hd id="AN0131132643-14">Image Validation</hd> <p>Both groups showed the expected preference ranking of images with no significant differences between groups for choice allocation: high-interest > low-interest [ASD: t(<reflink idref="bib18" id="ref85">18</reflink>) = 64.27, p < 0.001; TD: t(<reflink idref="bib19" id="ref86">19</reflink>) = 57.72, p < 0.001, ASD vs. TD: t(<reflink idref="bib37" id="ref87">37</reflink>) = 0.38, p = 0.71], high-interest > neutral [ASD: t(<reflink idref="bib18" id="ref88">18</reflink>) = 25.88, p < 0.001; TD: t(<reflink idref="bib19" id="ref89">19</reflink>) = 19.03, p < 0.001, ASD vs. TD: t(<reflink idref="bib37" id="ref90">37</reflink>) = − 0.24, p = 0.81] and neutral > low-interest [ASD: t(<reflink idref="bib18" id="ref91">18</reflink>) = 6.62, p < 0.001; TD: t(<reflink idref="bib19" id="ref92">19</reflink>) = 6.57, p < 0.001; ASD vs. TD: t(<reflink idref="bib37" id="ref93">37</reflink>) = − 0.69, p = 0.50]. Two participants with ASD and three TD participants indicated preference for one ‘high-interest’ over one ‘low-interest’ image (out of 18 trials), and one participant with ASD and one TD participant preferred two ‘high-interest’ images over ‘low-interest’. The image validation task was done after the EEG task. No adjustments to the task were therefore made based on the results and due to the small number of images that were not classified as expected we did not remove any images from subsequent analyses.</p> <p>For image ratings, a repeated measures ANOVA showed a significant main effect of stimulus type [F(<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref94">1</reflink>,<reflink idref="bib37" id="ref95">37</reflink>) = 372.91, p < 0.001]; we did not find a significant effect of group [F(<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref96">1</reflink>,<reflink idref="bib37" id="ref97">37</reflink>) = 0.10, p = 0.75] or a stimulus type by group interaction [F(<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref98">1</reflink>,<reflink idref="bib37" id="ref99">37</reflink>) = 0.23, p = 0.63]. Post-hoc paired t-tests indicated that both groups rated high-interest images (ASD: mean = 6.31, SD = 0.44; TD: mean = 6.17, SD = 0.54) significantly higher than low-interest images [ASD: mean = 2.49, SD = 0.97; TD: mean = 2.54, SD = 0.77; ASD: t(<reflink idref="bib18" id="ref100">18</reflink>) = 12.40, p < 0.001; TD: t(<reflink idref="bib19" id="ref101">19</reflink>) = 16.10, p < 0.001].</p> <hd id="AN0131132643-15">Discussion</hd> <p>The LPP ERP is generated in response to both positive and negative emotional stimuli (Liu et al. [<reflink idref="bib38" id="ref102">38</reflink>] ) and has previously been shown to be enhanced for CI stimuli and reduced for social stimuli in youth with ASD relative to a TD control group (Benning et al. [<reflink idref="bib5" id="ref103">5</reflink>] ). The present study builds on this work in two important ways: the first is using images that are customized to each individual with ASD rather than a set of generic images; the second is using a similar process to identify customized images for the TD control group. Both of these are important to address the question of whether neural responses to CI stimuli is different in individuals with ASD, relative to the neural responses of TD controls to images of their own hobbies and interests. We did not find a group difference in LPP amplitude under these conditions.</p> <p>The lack of difference between groups in this affective ERP response leads to three possible interpretations: the first is that affective responses to images of items of high-interest in individuals with ASD are similar to those for images of interests and hobbies of TD youth; the second is that the LPP is not a sensitive marker for differences in affective response to picture stimuli in ASD; the third is that because not all images used here were associated with clinical CI symptoms in each individual with ASD, it is possible that the LPP would be different in an ASD group with uniformly high CI symptoms and images related to those symptoms specifically.</p> <p>We note that one recent fMRI study showed an exaggerated response to CI images in individuals with ASD compared to TD individuals, using stimuli that were related to each of the ASD and TD participant’s interests and a yoking approach in which responses to one’s own interests were contrasted with those of another participant’s (Cascio et al. [<reflink idref="bib9" id="ref104">9</reflink>] ). Another study using customized interest-related video clips in an incentive delay task found that caudate activation showed an interaction between stimulus and group that specifically distinguished CIs from social rewards (Kohls et al. [<reflink idref="bib33" id="ref105">33</reflink>] ). The results of these fMRI studies, together with the lack of group differences reported here, may suggest that the second of the two possible interpretations noted above may be the more accurate; namely that the LPP may not be sensitive to differences in affective responses to high-interest stimuli in individuals with ASD but more spatially localized measures could be.</p> <p>In counterpoint to the above interpretation, we note that one previous study has shown group differences in LPP amplitude to non-social stimuli (Benning et al. [<reflink idref="bib5" id="ref106">5</reflink>] ). Notably, this study differed in several respects from the work presented here. First, while we used three sets of images (individualized high-interest, individualized low-interest and common neutral), Benning et al. ([<reflink idref="bib5" id="ref107">5</reflink>] ) used images that have been associated with common restricted interests and social images that were similar across participants (two different image sets). They found that the LPP response was both attenuated to social stimuli and amplified to restricted interest stimuli in individuals with ASD. Unfortunately, we were not able to assess differences in processing of social stimuli, but it is interesting that this study and the fMRI study of Kohls et al. ([<reflink idref="bib33" id="ref108">33</reflink>] ) found differences in the interaction between group and social and non-social (i.e. CI), stimuli, which perhaps makes it challenging to determine if responses to CIs are exaggerated toward CI stimuli or attenuated for social stimuli. In our study, although images with social content were more common in the TD participants, not all participants had social images included in their image set, meaning that we had insufficient power to conduct such an analysis. The valence ratings in Benning et al. ([<reflink idref="bib5" id="ref109">5</reflink>] ) indicated that neither group attributed greater valence to one type of image over the other, whereas in the present study, ‘liking’ ratings showed that both TD and ASD participants significantly preferred high-interest over low-interest and neutral images. There were also notable differences between the tasks. In Benning et al. ([<reflink idref="bib5" id="ref110">5</reflink>] ), participants were shown 20 images for 6 s with a 10 s inter-stimulus interval (ISI). Here, we included 50 images in each category and each was presented twice for a total of 100 trials per condition. Trials in our study were shorter, with images presented for 500 ms and a 750 ms ISI. To maintain attention, we also included a target detection requirement while the task in Benning et al. ([<reflink idref="bib5" id="ref111">5</reflink>] ) involved passive viewing. Greater attention has been associated with larger LPP response (Egan et al. [<reflink idref="bib18" id="ref112">18</reflink>] ; MacNamara and Hajcak [<reflink idref="bib42" id="ref113">42</reflink>] ), therefore we might expect more robust responses in the present study. However, it is also possible that the target detection task was a distraction that reduced sensitivity to group differences. Overall, several factors may have influenced differences in results between studies. However, given that participants in Benning et al. ([<reflink idref="bib5" id="ref114">5</reflink>] ) did not attribute emotional value to the non-social stimuli used in that study, we would argue that our results reflect a more interpretable LPP response to emotional images.</p> <p>As noted above it is also possible that by limiting our sample to individuals with clinical CI symptoms, and restricting our image set to items associated with these individuals’ CIs, we may have been more sensitive to a group difference. This also extends to behavior, where we did not find a group difference in terms of behavioural preference for pictures. Although interests of children with ASD have been found to differ in content, intensity and impact on daily functioning (Turner-Brown et al. [<reflink idref="bib55" id="ref115">55</reflink>] ), from TD children, behavioural paradigms sensitive to differences in value of CI stimuli remain elusive. For example, Cascio et al. ([<reflink idref="bib9" id="ref116">9</reflink>] ) used an operant task in which participants could press one button to increase display time and another button to decrease display time, as a measure of the reward value of looking at pictures (Aharon et al. [<reflink idref="bib2" id="ref117">2</reflink>] ). They found that although parents of participants with ASD indicated significantly greater interference of interests on other aspects of daily life, relative to the control group, there was no group difference in viewing time of images related to their interests. Thus, to date there are few, if any, behavioral markers sensitive to CI symptoms in ASD. This is an important area for ongoing work complementary to studies assessing neural markers of CI symptoms.</p> <p>The LPP has been shown to originate from a distributed network of cortical and sub-cortical regions involved in the processing of valence, salience and emotion, including the insula, amygdala, orbitofrontal cortex and ventral striatum (Liu et al. [<reflink idref="bib38" id="ref118">38</reflink>] ). In addition to this difference observed in the insula, relatively typical responses in ASD in the context of reward anticipation have been shown in the ventral striatum to CI stimuli (Dichter et al. [<reflink idref="bib15" id="ref119">15</reflink>] ). Thus, it is possible that differences in emotional responses to CI stimuli in ASD are task- and region-specific, and that a technique such as fMRI with higher spatial resolution may be better able to identify regional differences in affective responses in ASD. It would also be interesting in future work to examine other ERPs sensitive to valence, for example the reward positivity (Lukie et al. [<reflink idref="bib40" id="ref120">40</reflink>] ).</p> <p>The LPP response is thought to reflect attentional engagement for salient, motivationally relevant stimuli (Bradley [<reflink idref="bib8" id="ref121">8</reflink>] ). It is seen in response to a range of visually presented positive and negative emotional stimuli relative to neutral stimuli, including words, phrases (Fischler and Bradley [<reflink idref="bib21" id="ref122">21</reflink>] ), pictures (e.g., from the International Affective Picture System) (Liu et al. [<reflink idref="bib38" id="ref123">38</reflink>] ), and faces (attractive relative to less attractive) (Johnston and Oliver-Rodriguez [<reflink idref="bib31" id="ref124">31</reflink>] ). The magnitude of the LPP can be modulated by attentional focus during a task, for example, asking participants to evaluate emotional content evokes a greater response than asking them to make a lexical (word/non-word) decision (Fischler and Bradley [<reflink idref="bib21" id="ref125">21</reflink>] ). In the present study, a target detection task was used to maintain attention, requiring participants to make a decision about each image (whether it contained a zebra or not). In future work it would be interesting to determine whether the LPP response is context-dependent in ASD, perhaps an emotional decision task would be more sensitive to group differences.</p> <p>Previous studies have investigated the stability of the LPP response across development. A study by Kujawa et al. ([<reflink idref="bib34" id="ref126">34</reflink>] ) measured the LPP response during an emotional-interrupt task in 8-13-year-olds to explore the relation between emotion and attention across development. Their findings showed increased LPP amplitude at occipital scalp sites in younger children compared to older children. The same cohort completed the task approximately 2 years later (Kujawa et al. [<reflink idref="bib35" id="ref127">35</reflink>] ) and showed a decrease in LPP amplitude at occipital scalp sites at the second measurement. A study by MacNamara et al. ([<reflink idref="bib43" id="ref128">43</reflink>] ) measured the LPP during an emotional face-matching task in 7-19-year-olds to explore developmental changes in emotional processing. They also found increased LPP amplitudes in younger participants compared to older participants. Here, we did not find a significant association between age and LPP amplitude; however, a future study investigating the effect of maturation (i.e., development) on LPP amplitude in ASD could be informative.</p> <p>Many studies investigating affective ratings or neural responses to CIs have used images of common ASD interests (e.g., trains, gadgets, etc.; Dichter et al. [<reflink idref="bib14" id="ref129">14</reflink>] ; Sasson et al. [<reflink idref="bib48" id="ref130">48</reflink>] , [<reflink idref="bib47" id="ref131">47</reflink>] ). However, the image category suggestions from parents and adolescents in our study indicate that ‘likes’ and ‘dislikes’ are quite varied across adolescents with ASD and also overlap substantially with those of TD adolescents. As detailed in the Supplementary Material, we note that the interests suggested by the TD group included people (often celebrities) more often than did the suggestions of the ASD group. This is consistent with previous findings of reduced interest in social stimuli in ASD (Grelotti et al. [<reflink idref="bib26" id="ref132">26</reflink>] ). Participants with ASD also suggested relatively fewer television shows with human actors compared to the TD group, though they did suggest video/computer games, board games and animated character-based movies, television shows and books among their likes.</p> <p>While a strength of this study was the use of customized images for high- and low-interest categories for each participant, this study also had several limitations. The use of customized stimuli makes it more difficult to generalize our findings as compared to a design that uses the same stimuli across participants. As we did not find a significant difference between groups, it is possible that the sample size was insufficient to capture subtle effects. We note, however, that a robust LPP response was observed suggesting that the sample was adequate to measure this component. Our groups were not matched for IQ, though we did not find any association between IQ and LPP amplitude. Moreover, as we did not find a significant group difference, this suggests that the difference in IQ did not lead to a group difference in LPP amplitude that may be confounded with diagnosis. The low-interest images were chosen based on participants’ reported dislikes but we did not seek out negative images that were highly arousing. For example, the IAPS includes images such as ‘Mutilated Face’, which may have elicited stronger responses. Further, the use of a target detection task may not have created a context that is sensitive to differences in the LPP (Bradley [<reflink idref="bib8" id="ref133">8</reflink>] ). An interesting question for future work is whether different tasks elicit differences in response in individuals with ASD. The study also included a small number of females, which precluded investigation of sex differences due to limited power. However, given that parent reports have suggested differences in the content of restricted interests between males and females (Hiller et al. [<reflink idref="bib28" id="ref134">28</reflink>] ; Sutherland et al. [<reflink idref="bib54" id="ref135">54</reflink>] ), it would be interesting to include more females in future studies.</p> <p>In summary, this study used EEG to measure the LPP in adolescents with and without ASD as they viewed images related to their individual likes and dislikes. We found that in this task, adolescents with ASD showed an LPP response that was not different from TD adolescents. Our findings suggest that the LPP response may not be exaggerated in individuals with ASD in response to images related to their interests, when considered against the responses of a control group to their own hobbies and interests. However, this work leaves open the possibility that in a more refined design that included only individuals with ASD with clinical CI symptoms, and images of those specific interests, an atypical LPP response may be found. While identifying robust behavioral and neural markers sensitive to CIs is an ongoing challenge for the field, this work adds to a growing literature exploring affective responses to CI-related stimuli in ASD using measurements of neural responses, and suggests that consideration of individually varying interests is important to accurately assess and interpret group differences in affective responses to high-interest stimuli.</p> <p>Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.</p> <hd id="AN0131132643-16">Electronic supplementary material</hd> <p>The online version of this article (10.1007/s10803-018-3587-9) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.</p> <hd id="AN0131132643-17">Funding</hd> <p>This work was supported by a SickKids Foundation and CIHR-IHDCYH award to SB (NI14-021), the Sinneave Family Foundation (SB), the Alberta Children’s Hospital Foundation (SB), the Canadian Foundation for Innovation Leaders Opportunity Fund (30320;ABP), and the Alberta Enterprise and Advanced Education Research Capacity Program, Alberta Alignment Grant (RCP-13-38-SEG,ABP).</p> <hd id="AN0131132643-18">Acknowledgments</hd> <p>We would like to acknowledge the support of a SickKids Foundation and CIHR-IHDCYH New Investigator Award to SB (NI14-021), the Sinneave Family Foundation, the Alberta Chlidren’s Hospital Foundation, a Canadian Foundation for Innovation Leaders Opportunity Fund (30320, https://<ulink href="http://www.innovation.ca/">www.innovation.ca/</ulink>) award to AP, an Alberta Enterprise and Advanced Education Research Capacity Program, Alberta Alignment Grant (RCP-13-38SEG; <ulink href="http://economic.alberta.ca/Research-Capacity-Program.asp">http://economic.alberta.ca/Research-Capacity-Program.asp</ulink>). We would like to thank all of the families who took the time to participate in this study. Data included in this manuscript were collected as part of Keelin Rivard’s MSc thesis, and findings were previously presented at the Society for Neuroscience 2016 annual meeting.</p> <hd id="AN0131132643-19">Author Contributions</hd> <p>The authors KR, DD, AWM, ABP and SB have designed the research. KR, FB, KE, IC, FC and MS have performed research. KR, ABP and SB have wrote the first draft of the manuscript. All authors contributed to revising the manuscript.</p> <hd id="AN0131132643-20">Compliance with Ethical Standards</hd> <hd id="AN0131132643-21">Conflict of interest</hd> <p>All authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest.</p> <hd id="AN0131132643-22">References</hd> <hd id="AN0131132643-23">Citations</hd> <p>1 Adamson LB, Deckner DF, Bakeman R, Early interests and joint engagement in typical development, autism, and Down syndrome, Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 2010, 40, 6, 665, 6762873143, 10.1007/s10803-009-0914-1</p> <ulist> <item>2 Aharon I, Etcoff N, Ariely D, Chabris CF, O’Connor E, Breiter HC, Beautiful faces have variable reward value: fMRI and behavioral evidence, Neuron, 2001, 32, 3, 537, 551, 10.1016/S0896-6273(01)00491-3</item> <item>3 Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders, 2013, Arlington, American Psychiatric Publishing</item> <item>4 Bartak L, Rutter M, Differences between mentally retarded and normally intelligent autistic children, Journal of Autism and Childhood Schizophrenia, 1976, 6, 2, 109, 120, 10.1007/BF01538054</item> <item>5 Benning SD, Kovac M, Campbell A, Miller S, Hanna EK, Damiano CR, Late positive potential ERP responses to social and nonsocial stimuli in youth with autism spectrum disorder, Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 2016, 46, 9, 3068, 30774988236, 10.1007/s10803-016-2845-y</item> <item>6 Bodfish JW, Symons FJ, Parker DE, Lewis MH, Varieties of repetitive behavior in autism: Comparisons to mental retardation, Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 2000, 30, 3, 237, 243, 10.1023/A:1005596502855</item> <item>7 Boyd BA, Conroy MA, Mancil GR, Nakao T, Alter PJ, Effects of circumscribed interests on the social behaviors of children with autism spectrum disorders, Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 2007, 37, 8, 1550, 1561, 10.1007/s10803-006-0286-8</item> <item>8 Bradley MM, Natural selective attention: Orienting and emotion, Psychophysiology, 2009, 46, 1, 1, 11, 10.1111/j.1469-8986.2008.00702.x</item> <item>9 Cascio CJ, Foss-Feig JH, Heacock J, Schauder KB, Loring WA, Rogers BP, Affective neural response to restricted interests in autism spectrum disorders, Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 2014, 55, 2, 162, 171, 10.1111/jcpp.12147</item> <item>10 Chevallier C, Kohls G, Troiani V, Brodkin ES, The social motivation theory of autism, Trends in Cognitive, 2012, 16, 231, 239, 10.1016/j.tics.2012.02.007</item> <item>11 Cho IYK, Jelinkova K, Schuetze M, Vinette SA, Rahman S, McCrimmon A, Circumscribed interests in adolescents with autism spectrum disorder: A look beyond trains, planes, and clocks, PLoS ONE, 2017, 12, 11, e01874145667845, 10.1371/journal.pone.0187414</item> <item>12 Constantino JN, Gruber CP, The social responsiveness scale, 2002, Los Angeles, Western Psychological</item> <item>13 Delorme A, Makeig S, EEGLAB: An open source toolbox for analysis of single-trial EEG dynamics including independent component analysis, Journal of Neuroscience Methods, 2004, 134, 1, 9, 21, 10.1016/j.jneumeth.2003.10.009</item> <item>14 Dichter GS, Damiano CA, Allen JA, Reward circuitry dysfunction in psychiatric and neurodevelopmental disorders and genetic syndromes: Animal models and clinical findings, Journal of Neurodevelopmental Disorders, 2012, 4, 1, 193464940</item> <item>15 Dichter GS, Felder JN, Green SR, Rittenberg AM, Sasson NJ, Bodfish JW, Reward circuitry function in autism spectrum disorders, Social Cognitive and Affective Neuroscience, 2012, 7, 2, 160, 172, 10.1093/scan/nsq095</item> <item>16 Dinstein I, Heeger DJ, Lorenzi L, Minshew NJ, Malach R, Behrmann M, Unreliable evoked responses in autism, Neuron, 2012, 75, 6, 981, 9913457023, 10.1016/j.neuron.2012.07.026</item> <item>17 Dunst CJ, Trivette CM, Hamby DW, Meta-analysis of studies incorporating the interests of young children with autism spectrum disorders into early intervention practices, Autism Research and Treatment, 20123420674</item> <item>18 Egan RP, Hill KE, Foti D, Differential effects of state and trait mindfulness on the late positive potential, Emotion, 2017</item> <item>19 Evans DW, Kleinpeter FL, Slane MM, Boomer KB, Adaptive and maladaptive correlates of repetitive behavior and restricted interests in persons with down syndrome and developmentally-matched typical children: A two-year longitudinal sequential design, PLoS ONE, 2014, 9, 4, e939513977953, 10.1371/journal.pone.0093951</item> <item>20 Evans DW, Leckman JF, Carter A, Reznick JS, Henshaw D, King RA, Pauls D, Ritual, habit, and perfectionism: The prevalence and development of compulsive-like behavior in normal young children, Child Development, 1997, 68, 1, 58, 68, 10.2307/1131925</item> <item>21 Fischler I, Bradley M, Event-related potential studies of language and emotion: Words, phrases, and task effects, Progress in Brain Research, 2006, 156, 185, 203, 10.1016/S0079-6123(06)56009-1</item> <item>22 Foss-Feig JH, McGugin RW, Gauthier I, Mash LE, Ventola P, Cascio CJ, A functional neuroimaging study of fusiform response to restricted interests in children and adolescents with autism spectrum disorder, Journal of Neurodevelopmental Disorders, 2016, 8, 154831124, 10.1186/s11689-016-9149-6</item> <item>23 Freeman BJ, Ritvo ER, Schroth PC, Tonick I, Guthrie D, Wake L, Behavioral characteristics of high- and low-IQ autistic children, The American Journal of Psychiatry, 1981, 138, 1, 25, 29, 10.1176/ajp.138.1.25</item> <item>24 Gabriels RL, Cuccaro ML, Hill DE, Ivers BJ, Goldson E, Repetitive behaviors in autism: Relationships with associated clinical features, Research in Developmental Disabilities, 2005, 26, 2, 169, 181, 10.1016/j.ridd.2004.05.003</item> <item>25 Glenn S, Repetitive behaviours and restricted interests in individuals with down syndrome-one way of managing their world?, Brain Sciences, 2017, 7, 6, 665483639, 10.3390/brainsci7060066</item> <item>26 Grelotti DJ, Gauthier I, Schultz RT, Social interest and the development of cortical face specialization: What autism teaches us about face processing, Developmental Psychobiology, 2002, 40, 3, 213, 225, 10.1002/dev.10028</item> <item>27 Hajcak G, Dunning JP, Foti D, Motivated and controlled attention to emotion: Time-course of the late positive potential, Clinical Neurophysiology, 2009, 120, 3, 505, 510, 10.1016/j.clinph.2008.11.028</item> <item>28 Hiller RM, Young RL, Weber N, Sex differences in pre-diagnosis concerns for children later diagnosed with autism spectrum disorder, Autism, 2016, 20, 1, 75, 84, 10.1177/1362361314568899</item> <item>29 Horan WP, Foti D, Hajcak G, Wynn JK, Green MF, Intact motivated attention in schizophrenia: Evidence from event-related potentials, Schizophrenia Research, 2012, 135, 1-3, 95, 99, 10.1016/j.schres.2011.11.005</item> <item>30 Hus V, Bishop S, Gotham K, Huerta M, Lord C, Factors influencing scores on the social responsiveness scale, Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 2013, 54, 2, 216, 224, 10.1111/j.1469-7610.2012.02589.x</item> <item>31 Johnston VS, Oliver-Rodriguez JC, Facial beauty and the late positive component of event-related potentials, Journal of Sex Research, 1997, 34, 188, 198, 10.1080/00224499709551884</item> <item>32 Kanner L, Autistic disturbances of affective contact, Nervous Child, 1943, 2, 3, 217, 250</item> <item>33 Kohls G, Antezana L, Moser M, Schultz R, Yerys B, Altered reward system reactivity for personalized circumscribed interests in autism, Molecular Autism, 2018, 9, 95791309, 10.1186/s13229-018-0195-7</item> <item>34 Kujawa A, Klein DN, Hajcak G, Electrocortical reactivity to emotional images and faces in middle childhood to early adolescence, Developmental Cognitive Neuroscience, 2012, 2, 4, 458, 4673404214, 10.1016/j.dcn.2012.03.005</item> <item>35 Kujawa A, Klein DN, Proudfit GH, Two-year stability of the late positive potential across middle childhood and adolescence, Biological Psychology, 2013, 94, 2, 290, 2963797196, 10.1016/j.biopsycho.2013.07.002</item> <item>36 Lam KS, Bodfish JW, Piven J, Evidence for three subtypes of repetitive behavior in autism that differ in familiality and association with other symptoms, Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 2008, 49, 11, 1193, 1200, 10.1111/j.1469-7610.2008.01944.x</item> <item>37 Lang, P. J., Bradley, M. M., & Cuthbert, B. N. (2008). International affective picture system (IAPS): Affective ratings of pictures and instruction manual. Technical report A-8.</item> <item>38 Liu Y, Huang H, McGinnis-Deweese M, Keil A, Ding M, Neural substrate of the late positive potential in emotional processing, Journal of Neuroscience, 2012, 32, 42, 14563, 14572, 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.3109-12.2012</item> <item>39 Lord C, Rutter M, DiLavore P, Risi S, Gotham K, Bishop S, Autism diagnostic observation schedule, 2nd edition (ADOS-2), 2012, Torrance, Western Psychological Services</item> <item>40 Lukie CN, Montazer-Hojat S, Holroyd CB, Developmental changes in the reward positivity: An electrophysiological trajectory of reward processing, Developmental Cognitive Neuroscience, 2014, 9, 191, 199, 10.1016/j.dcn.2014.04.003</item> <item>41 Lundström S, Chang Z, Kerekes N, Gumpert CH, Råstam M, Gillberg C, Autistic-like traits and their association with mental health problems in two nationwide twin cohorts of children and adults, Psychological Medicine, 2011, 41, 11, 2423, 2433, 10.1017/S0033291711000377</item> <item>42 MacNamara A, Hajcak G, Anxiety and spatial attention moderate the electrocortical response to aversive pictures, Neuropsychologia, 2009, 47, 13, 2975, 2980, 10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2009.06.026</item> <item>43 MacNamara A, Vergés A, Kujawa A, Fitzgerald KD, Monk CS, Phan KL, Age-related changes in emotional face processing across childhood and into young adulthood: Evidence from event-related potentials, Developmental Psychobiology, 2016, 58, 1, 27, 38, 10.1002/dev.21341</item> <item>44 Milne E, Increased intra-participant variability in children with autistic spectrum disorders: Evidence from single-trial analysis of evoked EEG, Frontiers in Psychology, 2011, 2, 513110871, 10.3389/fpsyg.2011.00051</item> <item>45 Mottron L, Changing perceptions: The power of autism, Nature, 2011, 479, 7371, 33, 35, 10.1038/479033a</item> <item>46 Mottron L, Should we change targets and methods of early intervention in autism, in favor of a strengths-based education?, European Child & Adolescent Psychiatry, 2017, 26, 7, 815, 825, 10.1007/s00787-017-0955-5</item> <item>47 Sasson NJ, Dichter GS, Bodfish JW, Affective responses by adults with autism are reduced to social images but elevated to images related to circumscribed interests, PLoS ONE, 2012, 7, 8, e424573411654, 10.1371/journal.pone.0042457</item> <item>48 Sasson NJ, Elison JT, Turner-Brown LM, Dichter GS, Bodfish JW, Brief report: Circumscribed attention in young children with autism, Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 2011, 41, 2, 242, 2473709851, 10.1007/s10803-010-1038-3</item> <item>49 Sasson NJ, Touchstone EW, Visual attention to competing social and object images by preschool children with autism spectrum disorder, Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 2014, 44, 3, 584, 592, 10.1007/s10803-013-1910-z</item> <item>50 Sasson NJ, Turner-Brown LM, Holtzclaw TN, Lam KS, Bodfish JW, Children with autism demonstrate circumscribed attention during passive viewing of complex social and nonsocial picture arrays, Autism Research, 2008, 1, 1, 31, 42, 10.1002/aur.4</item> <item>51 Schupp HT, Cuthbert BN, Bradley MM, Cacioppo JT, Ito T, Lang PJ, Affective picture processing: The late positive potential is modulated by motivational relevance, Psychophysiology, 2000, 37, 2, 257, 261, 10.1111/1469-8986.3720257</item> <item>52 Seeley WW, Menon V, Schatzberg AF, Keller J, Glover GH, Kenna H, Dissociable intrinsic connectivity networks for salience processing and executive control, Journal of Neuroscience, 2007, 27, 9, 2349, 2356, 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.5587-06.2007</item> <item>53 South M, Ozonoff S, McMahon WM, Repetitive behavior profiles in Asperger syndrome and high-functioning autism, Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 2005, 35, 2, 145, 158, 10.1007/s10803-004-1992-8</item> <item>54 Sutherland R, Hodge A, Bruck S, Costley D, Klieve H, Parent-reported differences between school-aged girls and boys on the autism spectrum, Autism, 2017, 21, 6, 785, 794, 10.1177/1362361316668653</item> <item>55 Turner-Brown LM, Lam KS, Holtzclaw TN, Dichter GS, Bodfish JW, Phenomenology and measurement of circumscribed interests in autism spectrum disorders, Autism, 2011, 15, 4, 437, 4563709861, 10.1177/1362361310386507</item> <item>56 Uljarevic M, Evans DW, Relationship between repetitive behaviour and fear across normative development, autism spectrum disorder, and down syndrome, Autism Research, 2017, 10, 3, 502, 507, 10.1002/aur.1674</item> <item>57 Vismara LA, Lyons GL, Using perseverative interests to elicit joint attention behaviors in young children with autism theoretical and clinical implications for understanding motivation, Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 2007, 9, 214, 228, 10.1177/10983007070090040401</item> <item>58 Wechsler D, Wechsler abbreviated scale of intelligence—Second edition manual, 2012, Bloomington, MN, Pearson</item> </ulist> <p>PHOTO (COLOR)</p> <p>PHOTO (COLOR)</p> <p>PHOTO (COLOR): Supplementary material 1 (DOCX 27 KB)</p> <p>PHOTO (COLOR): Supplementary material 2 (CSV 4 KB)</p> <aug> <p>By Keelin Rivard; Andrea B. Protzner; Ford Burles; Manuela Schuetze; Ivy Cho; Kayla Ten Eycke; Adam McCrimmon; Deborah Dewey; Filomeno Cortese and Signe Bray</p> </aug> <nolink nlid="nl1" bibid="bib32" firstref="ref1"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl2" bibid="bib36" firstref="ref2"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl3" bibid="bib53" firstref="ref3"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl4" bibid="bib55" firstref="ref4"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl5" bibid="bib3" firstref="ref5"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl6" bibid="bib4" firstref="ref7"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl7" bibid="bib23" firstref="ref8"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl8" bibid="bib45" firstref="ref10"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl9" bibid="bib7" firstref="ref11"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl10" bibid="bib24" firstref="ref13"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl11" bibid="bib17" firstref="ref15"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl12" bibid="bib46" firstref="ref16"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl13" bibid="bib57" firstref="ref17"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl14" bibid="bib20" firstref="ref19"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl15" bibid="bib19" firstref="ref20"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl16" bibid="bib25" firstref="ref21"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl17" bibid="bib1" firstref="ref23"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl18" bibid="bib6" firstref="ref24"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl19" bibid="bib56" firstref="ref25"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl20" bibid="bib50" firstref="ref26"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl21" bibid="bib48" firstref="ref27"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl22" bibid="bib49" firstref="ref28"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl23" bibid="bib44" firstref="ref29"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl24" bibid="bib16" firstref="ref30"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl25" bibid="bib10" firstref="ref31"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl26" bibid="bib14" firstref="ref32"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl27" bibid="bib52" firstref="ref34"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl28" bibid="bib9" firstref="ref35"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl29" bibid="bib5" firstref="ref36"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl30" bibid="bib38" firstref="ref37"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl31" bibid="bib51" firstref="ref38"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl32" bibid="bib33" firstref="ref42"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl33" bibid="bib22" firstref="ref43"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl34" bibid="bib11" firstref="ref45"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl35" bibid="bib39" firstref="ref46"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl36" bibid="bib30" firstref="ref47"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl37" bibid="bib41" firstref="ref48"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl38" bibid="bib2" firstref="ref50"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl39" bibid="bib12" firstref="ref61"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl40" bibid="bib58" firstref="ref62"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl41" bibid="bib37" firstref="ref63"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl42" bibid="bib29" firstref="ref69"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl43" bibid="bib27" firstref="ref70"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl44" bibid="bib13" firstref="ref72"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl45" bibid="bib74" firstref="ref78"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl46" bibid="bib18" firstref="ref81"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl47" bibid="bib42" firstref="ref113"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl48" bibid="bib15" firstref="ref119"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl49" bibid="bib40" firstref="ref120"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl50" bibid="bib8" firstref="ref121"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl51" bibid="bib21" firstref="ref122"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl52" bibid="bib31" firstref="ref124"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl53" bibid="bib34" firstref="ref126"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl54" bibid="bib35" firstref="ref127"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl55" bibid="bib43" firstref="ref128"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl56" bibid="bib47" firstref="ref131"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl57" bibid="bib26" firstref="ref132"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl58" bibid="bib28" firstref="ref134"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl59" bibid="bib54" firstref="ref135"></nolink>
Header DbId: eric
DbLabel: ERIC
An: EJ1187322
AccessLevel: 3
PubType: Academic Journal
PubTypeId: academicJournal
PreciseRelevancyScore: 0
IllustrationInfo
Items – Name: Title
  Label: Title
  Group: Ti
  Data: Largely Typical Electrophysiological Affective Responses to Special Interest Stimuli in Adolescents with Autism Spectrum Disorder
– Name: Language
  Label: Language
  Group: Lang
  Data: English
– Name: Author
  Label: Authors
  Group: Au
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Rivard%2C+Keelin%22">Rivard, Keelin</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Protzner%2C+Andrea+B%2E%22">Protzner, Andrea B.</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Burles%2C+Ford%22">Burles, Ford</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Schuetze%2C+Manuela%22">Schuetze, Manuela</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Cho%2C+Ivy%22">Cho, Ivy</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Ten+Eycke%2C+Kayla%22">Ten Eycke, Kayla</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22McCrimmon%2C+Adam%22">McCrimmon, Adam</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Dewey%2C+Deborah%22">Dewey, Deborah</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Cortese%2C+Filomeno%22">Cortese, Filomeno</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Bray%2C+Signe%22">Bray, Signe</searchLink>
– Name: TitleSource
  Label: Source
  Group: Src
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="SO" term="%22Journal+of+Autism+and+Developmental+Disorders%22"><i>Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders</i></searchLink>. Sep 2018 48(9):3133-3143.
– Name: Avail
  Label: Availability
  Group: Avail
  Data: Springer. Available from: Springer Nature. 233 Spring Street, New York, NY 10013. Tel: 800-777-4643; Tel: 212-460-1500; Fax: 212-348-4505; e-mail: customerservice@springernature.com; Web site: https://link.springer.com/
– Name: PeerReviewed
  Label: Peer Reviewed
  Group: SrcInfo
  Data: Y
– Name: Pages
  Label: Page Count
  Group: Src
  Data: 11
– Name: DatePubCY
  Label: Publication Date
  Group: Date
  Data: 2018
– Name: TypeDocument
  Label: Document Type
  Group: TypDoc
  Data: Journal Articles<br />Reports - Research
– Name: Subject
  Label: Descriptors
  Group: Su
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Affective+Behavior%22">Affective Behavior</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Autism%22">Autism</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Pervasive+Developmental+Disorders%22">Pervasive Developmental Disorders</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Control+Groups%22">Control Groups</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Experimental+Groups%22">Experimental Groups</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Diagnostic+Tests%22">Diagnostic Tests</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Adolescents%22">Adolescents</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Symptoms+%28Individual+Disorders%29%22">Symptoms (Individual Disorders)</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Brain+Hemisphere+Functions%22">Brain Hemisphere Functions</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Interests%22">Interests</searchLink>
– Name: DOI
  Label: DOI
  Group: ID
  Data: 10.1007/s10803-018-3587-9
– Name: ISSN
  Label: ISSN
  Group: ISSN
  Data: 0162-3257
– Name: Abstract
  Label: Abstract
  Group: Ab
  Data: Circumscribed interests are a symptom of autism spectrum disorder (ASD) that may be related to exaggerated affective neural responses. However, the use of generic ASD-interest image stimuli has left an open question as to whether affective responses towards individual interests are greater in ASD compared to typically developing (TD) controls. We compared amplitudes of the late positive potential (LPP), an affective electroencephalographic response, between adolescents with ASD (N = 19) and TD adolescents (N = 20), using images tailored to individual likes and dislikes. We found an LPP response for liked and disliked images, relative to neutral, with no difference in amplitude between groups. This suggests that the LPP is not atypical in adolescents with ASD towards images of individual interests.
– Name: AbstractInfo
  Label: Abstractor
  Group: Ab
  Data: As Provided
– Name: Ref
  Label: Number of References
  Group: RefInfo
  Data: 58
– Name: DateEntry
  Label: Entry Date
  Group: Date
  Data: 2018
– Name: AN
  Label: Accession Number
  Group: ID
  Data: EJ1187322
PLink https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&site=eds-live&db=eric&AN=EJ1187322
RecordInfo BibRecord:
  BibEntity:
    Identifiers:
      – Type: doi
        Value: 10.1007/s10803-018-3587-9
    Languages:
      – Text: English
    PhysicalDescription:
      Pagination:
        PageCount: 11
        StartPage: 3133
    Subjects:
      – SubjectFull: Affective Behavior
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Autism
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Pervasive Developmental Disorders
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Control Groups
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Experimental Groups
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Diagnostic Tests
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Adolescents
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Symptoms (Individual Disorders)
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Brain Hemisphere Functions
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Interests
        Type: general
    Titles:
      – TitleFull: Largely Typical Electrophysiological Affective Responses to Special Interest Stimuli in Adolescents with Autism Spectrum Disorder
        Type: main
  BibRelationships:
    HasContributorRelationships:
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Rivard, Keelin
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Protzner, Andrea B.
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Burles, Ford
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Schuetze, Manuela
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Cho, Ivy
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Ten Eycke, Kayla
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: McCrimmon, Adam
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Dewey, Deborah
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Cortese, Filomeno
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Bray, Signe
    IsPartOfRelationships:
      – BibEntity:
          Dates:
            – D: 01
              M: 09
              Type: published
              Y: 2018
          Identifiers:
            – Type: issn-print
              Value: 0162-3257
          Numbering:
            – Type: volume
              Value: 48
            – Type: issue
              Value: 9
          Titles:
            – TitleFull: Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders
              Type: main
ResultId 1