Discrepancies between explicit and implicit evaluation of aesthetic perception ability in individuals with autism: a potential way to improve social functioning.
Aesthetic perception
Autism spectrum disorder
Empathy
Eye-tracking
Social cognition
Journal
BMC psychology
ISSN: 2050-7283
Titre abrégé: BMC Psychol
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101627676
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
10 Jul 2020
10 Jul 2020
Historique:
received:
09
08
2019
accepted:
24
06
2020
entrez:
12
7
2020
pubmed:
12
7
2020
medline:
2
10
2020
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
The capacity to evaluate beauty plays a crucial role in social behaviour and social relationships. It is known that some characteristics of beauty are important social cues that can induce stereotypes or promote different behavioural expectations. Another crucial capacity for success in social interactions is empathy, i.e. the ability to understand and share others' mental and emotional states. Individuals with Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD) have an impairment of empathic ability. We showed in a previous study that empathy and aesthetic perception abilities closely related. Indeed, beauty can affect different aspects of empathic behaviour, and empathy can mediate the aesthetic perception in typically developing (TD) individuals. Thus, this study evaluates the ability of aesthetic perception in ASD individuals compared to TD individuals, using the Golden Beauty behavioural task adapted for eye-tracking in order to acquire both explicit and implicit evidences. In both groups, the relationship between empathic and aesthetic perception abilities was also evaluated. Ten ASD individuals (age ± SD:20.7 ± 4.64) and ten TD individuals (age ± SD:20.17 ± 0.98) participated in the study. Participants underwent empathy tasks and then the Golden Beauty task. To assess differences in the participants' performance, we carried out a repeated measures general linear model. At the explicit level, our behavioural results show an impairment in aesthetic perception ability in ASD individuals. This inability could have relevance for their ability to experience pleasure during social interactions. However, at the implicit level (eye-tracking results), ASD individuals conserved a good ability to feel aesthetic pleasure during the Golden Beauty task, thus indicating a discrepancy between the explicit and implicit evaluation of the beauty task. Finally, beauty perception appears to be linked to empathy when neither of these capacities is compromised, as demonstrated in the TD group. In contrast, this link is missed in ASD individuals. Overall, our results clearly show that individuals with autism are not completely blind to aesthetic pleasure: in fact, they retain an implicit ability to experience beauty. These findings could pave the way for the development of new protocols to rehabilitate ASD social functioning, exploiting their conserved implicit aesthetic perception.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
The capacity to evaluate beauty plays a crucial role in social behaviour and social relationships. It is known that some characteristics of beauty are important social cues that can induce stereotypes or promote different behavioural expectations. Another crucial capacity for success in social interactions is empathy, i.e. the ability to understand and share others' mental and emotional states. Individuals with Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD) have an impairment of empathic ability. We showed in a previous study that empathy and aesthetic perception abilities closely related. Indeed, beauty can affect different aspects of empathic behaviour, and empathy can mediate the aesthetic perception in typically developing (TD) individuals. Thus, this study evaluates the ability of aesthetic perception in ASD individuals compared to TD individuals, using the Golden Beauty behavioural task adapted for eye-tracking in order to acquire both explicit and implicit evidences. In both groups, the relationship between empathic and aesthetic perception abilities was also evaluated.
METHODS
METHODS
Ten ASD individuals (age ± SD:20.7 ± 4.64) and ten TD individuals (age ± SD:20.17 ± 0.98) participated in the study. Participants underwent empathy tasks and then the Golden Beauty task. To assess differences in the participants' performance, we carried out a repeated measures general linear model.
RESULTS
RESULTS
At the explicit level, our behavioural results show an impairment in aesthetic perception ability in ASD individuals. This inability could have relevance for their ability to experience pleasure during social interactions. However, at the implicit level (eye-tracking results), ASD individuals conserved a good ability to feel aesthetic pleasure during the Golden Beauty task, thus indicating a discrepancy between the explicit and implicit evaluation of the beauty task. Finally, beauty perception appears to be linked to empathy when neither of these capacities is compromised, as demonstrated in the TD group. In contrast, this link is missed in ASD individuals.
CONCLUSION
CONCLUSIONS
Overall, our results clearly show that individuals with autism are not completely blind to aesthetic pleasure: in fact, they retain an implicit ability to experience beauty. These findings could pave the way for the development of new protocols to rehabilitate ASD social functioning, exploiting their conserved implicit aesthetic perception.
Identifiants
pubmed: 32650841
doi: 10.1186/s40359-020-00437-x
pii: 10.1186/s40359-020-00437-x
pmc: PMC7350653
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
74Références
Neurosci Biobehav Rev. 2006;30(6):855-63
pubmed: 16904182
Annu Rev Psychol. 1999;50:243-71
pubmed: 10074679
Lancet. 2014 Mar 8;383(9920):896-910
pubmed: 24074734
J Sleep Res. 2019 Jun;28(3):e12664
pubmed: 29405533
J Cogn Neurosci. 2011 Jan;23(1):53-62
pubmed: 20175677
J Surg Res. 2014 Sep;191(1):169-78
pubmed: 24881471
Nature. 2015 Oct 8;526(7572):S2-3
pubmed: 26444372
Brain Cogn. 2014 Jun;87:52-6
pubmed: 24704947
Neurosci Biobehav Rev. 2009 Sep;33(8):1198-203
pubmed: 19538989
PLoS One. 2012;7(5):e37285
pubmed: 22624007
Gen Psychiatr. 2019 Aug 8;32(4):e100069
pubmed: 31552383
Psychiatry Res. 2013 Aug 15;208(3):257-64
pubmed: 23747233
Soc Neurosci. 2017 Aug;12(4):379-385
pubmed: 27108546
Neuron. 2003 Oct 30;40(3):655-64
pubmed: 14642287
J Autism Dev Disord. 2004 Apr;34(2):163-75
pubmed: 15162935
J Autism Dev Disord. 2017 Sep;47(9):2743-2756
pubmed: 28597142
Front Hum Neurosci. 2016 Jan 12;9:705
pubmed: 26793087
J Autism Dev Disord. 2008 Mar;38(3):464-73
pubmed: 17990089
PLoS One. 2014 Jul 21;9(7):e102888
pubmed: 25048813
Bioethics. 2018 Jan;32(1):43-49
pubmed: 28914977
Trends Cogn Sci. 2007 May;11(5):197-203
pubmed: 17347026
Sci Rep. 2017 May 26;7(1):2734
pubmed: 28578379
Brain Struct Funct. 2010 Jun;214(5-6):519-34
pubmed: 20512376
Neurosci Biobehav Rev. 2012 Mar;36(3):1060-84
pubmed: 22212588
PLoS One. 2007 Nov 21;2(11):e1201
pubmed: 18030335
Brain. 2000 Jun;123 ( Pt 6):1122-41
pubmed: 10825352
J Child Psychol Psychiatry. 2010 Nov;51(11):1188-97
pubmed: 20633070
J Adolesc. 2009 Apr;32(2):393-408
pubmed: 18691746
Brain Cogn. 2009 Jun;70(1):84-91
pubmed: 19223099
Brain Cogn. 2013 Feb;81(1):95-117
pubmed: 23174433
Science. 2004 Feb 20;303(5661):1157-62
pubmed: 14976305
Eur J Neurosci. 2013 May;37(9):1413-20
pubmed: 23373763
Autism Res. 2017 Jun;10(6):1120-1132
pubmed: 28296216
Curr Opin Neurobiol. 2009 Dec;19(6):682-7
pubmed: 19828312
PLoS One. 2012;7(2):e31248
pubmed: 22384006
J Adolesc. 2006 Aug;29(4):589-611
pubmed: 16198409
J Exp Child Psychol. 2016 Dec;152:92-105
pubmed: 27518811
J Autism Dev Disord. 1994 Apr;24(2):129-54
pubmed: 8040158
Psychol Bull. 2000 May;126(3):390-423
pubmed: 10825783
Front Hum Neurosci. 2011 Nov 18;5:139
pubmed: 22121344
J Autism Dev Disord. 2017 May;47(5):1369-1379
pubmed: 28213839
J Child Psychol Psychiatry. 2001 Feb;42(2):241-51
pubmed: 11280420
J Clin Exp Neuropsychol. 2010 Feb;32(2):212-8
pubmed: 19562609
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2001 Sep 25;98(20):11818-23
pubmed: 11573015
Organ Behav Hum Decis Process. 1999 Sep;79(3):199-215
pubmed: 10471361
Trends Cogn Sci. 2014 Jul;18(7):370-5
pubmed: 24768244
Nature. 2015 Oct 8;526(7572):S11
pubmed: 26444367
Soc Cogn Affect Neurosci. 2016 Jun;11(6):884-91
pubmed: 26966157
J Child Psychol Psychiatry. 2012 Jun;53(6):651-9
pubmed: 22118246
Perspect Biol Med. 2013 Summer;56(3):327-40
pubmed: 24375115
J Exp Child Psychol. 2002 Mar;81(3):320-40
pubmed: 11884093