Abstract
Reading monitoring is poorly explored, but it may have an impact on well-documented reading comprehension difficulties in autism. This study explores reading monitoring through the impact of instructions and different error types on reading behavior. Individuals with autism and matched controls read correct sentences and sentences containing orthographic and semantic errors. Prior to the task, participants were given instructions either to focus on semantic or orthographic errors. Analysis of eye-movements showed that the group with autism, differently from controls, were less influenced by the error’s type in the regression-out to-error measure, showing less change in eye-movements behavior between error types. Individuals with autism might find it more difficult to adapt their reading strategies to various reading materials and task demands.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Baker, L. (1984). Children’s effective use of multiple standards for evaluating their comprehension. Journal of Educational Psychology, 76, 588–597. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.76.4.588.
Bishop, D. V. M. (1983). The test for reception of grammar (TROG). Manchester: Age and Cognitive Performance Research Centre, University of Manchester.
Brown, H. M., Oram-Cardy, J., & Johnson, A. (2013). A meta-analysis of the reading comprehension skills of individuals on the autism spectrum. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 43, 932–955. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10803-012-1638-1.
Cain, K., Oakhill, J., & Bryant, P. (2004). Children’s reading comprehension ability: Concurrent prediction by working memory, verbal ability, and component skills. Journal of Educational Psychology, 96, 31–42. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.96.1.31.
Castles, A., Crichton, A., & Prior, M. (2010). Developmental dissociations between lexical reading and comprehension: Evidence from two cases of hyperlexia. Cortex; A Journal Devoted to the Study of the Nervous System and Behavior, 46, 1238–1247. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cortex.2010.06.016.
Cataldo, M. G., & Cornoldi, C. (1998). Self-monitoring in poor and good reading comprehenders and their use of strategy. British Journal of Developmental Psychology, 16, 155–165. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2044-835X.1998.tb00915.x.
Dunn, L. I., Dunn, L. M., & Arribas, D. (2006). PPVT-III Peabody, test de vocabulario en imágenes. Madrid: TEA.
Ehrlich, M. F. (1996). Metacognitive monitoring in the processing of anaphoric devices in skilled and less skilled comprehenders. In C. Cornoldi & J. V. Oakhill (Eds.), Reading comprehension difficulties: Processes and remediation (pp. 221–249). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Inc.
Ehrlich, M. F., Rémond, M., & Tardieu, H. (1999). Processing of anaphoric devices in young skilled and less skilled comprehenders: Differences in metacognitive monitoring. Reading and Writing, 11, 29–63. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1007996502372.
Flores, M. M., & Ganz, J. B. (2009). Effects of direct instruction on the reading comprehension of students with autism and developmental disabilities. Education and Training in Developmental Disabilities, 44, 39–53.
Florit, E., & Cain, K. (2011). The simple view of reading: Is it valid for different types of alphabetic orthographies? Educational Psychology Review, 23, 553–576. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-011-9175-6.
Forrest-Pressley, D. L., & Waller, T. G. (1984). Knowledge and monitoring abilities of poor readers. Topics in Learning & Learning Disabilities, 3, 73–79.
Frazier, L., & Rayner, K. (1982). Making and correcting errors during sentence comprehension: Eye movements in the analysis of structurally ambiguous sentences. Cognitive Psychology, 14, 178–210. https://doi.org/10.1016/0010-0285(82)90008-1.
Grice, H. P., Cole, P., & Morgan, J. L. (1975). Syntax and semantics. Logic and Conversation, 3, 41–58.
Howard, P. L., Liversedge, S. P., & Benson, V. (2017). Benchmark eye movement effects during natural reading in Autism Spectrum Disorder. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 43, 109–127. https://doi.org/10.1037/xlm0000289.
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, 149–185. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0010-0277(99)00022-0.
Kirk, S. A., McCarthy, J. J., & Kirk, W. D. (1968). Illinois test of psycholinguistic abilities. Urbana: University of Illinois Press.
Knight, V. F., Spooner, F., Browder, D. M., Smith, B. R., & Wood, C. L. (2013). Using systematic instruction and graphic organizers to teach science concepts to students with autism spectrum disorders and intellectual disability. Focus on Autism and Other Developmental Disabilities, 28, 115–126. https://doi.org/10.1177/1088357612475301.
Kolk, H. H., Chwilla, D. J., Van Herten, M., & Oor, P. J. (2003). Structure and limited capacity in verbal working memory: A study with event-related potentials. Brain and Language, 85, 1–36. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0093-934X(02)00548-5.
Koolen, S., Vissers, C. T. W., Egger, J. I., & Verhoeven, L. (2013). Can monitoring in language comprehension in Autism Spectrum Disorder be modulated? Evidence from event-related potentials. Biological Psychology, 94, 354–368. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biopsycho.2013.07.008.
Koolen, S., Vissers, C. T. W., Egger, J. I. M., & Verhoeven, L. (2014). Monitoring in language perception in high-functioning adults with autism spectrum disorder: Evidence from event-related potentials. Clinical Neurophysiology, 125, 108–123. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clinph.2013.06.021.
Koolen, S., Vissers, C. T. W., Hendriks, A. W., Egger, J. I., & Verhoeven, L. (2012). The interplay between attentional strategies and language processing in high-functioning adults with autism spectrum disorder. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 42, 805–814. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10803-011-1310-1.
Kuperberg, G. R., Caplan, D., Sitnikova, T., Eddy, M., & Holcomb, P. J. (2006). Neural correlates of processing syntactic, semantic, and thematic relationships in sentences. Language and Cognitive Processes, 21, 489–530. https://doi.org/10.1080/01690960500094279.
Lord, C., Risi, S., Lambrecht, L., Cook, E. H. J., Leventhal, B. L., DiLavore, P. C., … & Rutter, M. (2000). The autism diagnostic schedule—Generic: A standard measures of social and communication deficits associated with the spectrum of autism. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 30, 205–223. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1005592401947
Lucangeli, D., Galderisi, D., & Cornoldi, C. (1995). Specific and general transfer effects following metamemory training. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 10, 11–21.
Mendoza, E., Carballo, G., Muñoz, J., & Fresneda, M. D. (2005). Test de Comprensión de Estructuras Gramaticales (CEG) [Test of grammatical structures understanding]. Madrid: TEA.
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, 888–900. https://doi.org/10.1002/aur.1731.
Myles, B. S., Hilgenfeld, T. D., Barnhill, G., Griswold, D., Hagiwara, T., & Simpson, R. L. (2002). Analysis of reading skills in individuals with Asperger’s syndrome. Focus on Autism and Other Developmental Disabilities, 17, 44–47. https://doi.org/10.1177/108835760201700104.
Oakhill, J. V., & Yuill, N. (1996). Higher order factors in comprehensive disability: Processes and remediation. In C. Cornoldi & J. V. Oakhill (Eds.), Reading comprehension difficulties: Processes and remediation (pp. 69–72). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Inc.
Perfetti, C. A., Marron, M. A., & Foltz, P. W. (1996). Sources of comprehension failure: Perspectives and case studies. In C. Cornoldi & J. V. Oakhill (Eds.), Reading comprehension difficulties: Processes and remediation. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Inc.
Rayner, K. (1998). Eye movements in reading and information processing: 20 years of research. Psychological Bulletin, 124, 372–422. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.124.3.372.
Rayner, K. (2009). Eye movements and attention in reading, scene perception, and visual search. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 62, 1457–1506. https://doi.org/10.1080/17470210902816461.
Rayner, K., Warren, T., Juhasz, B. J., & Liversedge, S. P. (2004). The effect of plausibility on eye movements in reading. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 30, 1290–1301. https://doi.org/10.1037/0278-7393.30.6.1290.
Real Académica Española: Banco de datos (CORDE) [online]. Corpus diacrónico del español. Retrieved January 9, 2015, from http://www.rae.es.
Ruffman, T. (1996). Reassessing children’s comprehension-monitoring skills. In C. Cornoldi & J. V. Oakhill (Eds.), Reading comprehension difficulties: Processes and remediation. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Inc.
Schenning, H., Knight, V., & Spooner, F. (2013). Effects of structured inquiry and graphic organizers on social studies comprehension by students with autism spectrum disorders. Research in Autism Spectrum Disorders, 7, 526–540. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rasd.2012.12.007.
Sheridan, H., & Reingold, E. M. (2012). The time course of predictability effects in reading: Evidence from a survival analysis of fixation durations. Visual Cognition, 20, 733–745. https://doi.org/10.1080/13506285.2012.693548.
Snowling, M., & Frith, U. (1986). Comprehension in «hyperlexic» readers. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 42, 392–415. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-0965(86)90033-0.
Toro, J., Cervera, M., & Urío, C. (2002). Escala Magallanes de Lectura y Escritura. TALE-2000. Vizcaya: Albor-COHS.
Van de Meerendonk, N., Kolk, H. H., Chwilla, D. J., & Vissers, C. T. W. M. (2009). Monitoring in language perception. Language and Linguistics Compass, 3, 1211–1224. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1749-818X.2009.00163.x.
Vasishth, S., von der Malsburg, T., & Engelmann, F. (2012). What eye movement can tell us about sentence comprehension. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Cognitive Science, 4, 125–134. https://doi.org/10.1002/wcs.1209.
Wechsler, D. (1993). WISC-R: Escala de Inteligencia de Wechsler para Niños-Revisada. Madrid: TEA Editores (Original work published in 1974: WISC-R, Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children—Revised).
Wechsler, D. (2005). WISC-IV: Escala Wechsler de Inteligencia para Niños-IV [Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children-IV]. San Antonio, TX: Psychological Corporation.
Wechsler, D. (2012). WAIS-IV: Escala de Inteligencia Wechsler para Adultos-IV. Madrid: Pearson Clinical & Talent Assessment.
Yuill, N., & Joscelyne, T. (1988). Effect of organizational cues and strategies on good and poor comprehenders’ story understanding. Journal of Educational Psychology, 80, 152–158. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.80.2.152.
Yuill, N., & Oakhill, J. (1988). Understanding of anaphoric relations in skilled and less skilled comprehenders. British Journal of Psychology, 79, 173–186. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2044-8295.1988.tb02282.x.
Yuill, N., & Oakhill, J. (1991). Children’s problems in text comprehension: An experimental investigation. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Zabrucky, K., & Moore, D. (1989). Children’s ability to use three standards to evaluate their comprehension of text. Reading Research Quarterly, 24, 336–352. https://doi.org/10.2307/747773.
Acknowledgments
This research has received funding from the European Union’s Seventh Framework Program for research, technological development and demonstration under grant agreement n° 316748. We thank the participants, families, Dr Sam Hutton from SR Research, Sobh Chahboun and the Asociación Malagueña Síndrome de Asperger.
Funding
This study was funded by the European Union’s Seventh Framework Program for research, technological development and demonstration under grant agreement n° 316748.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Contributions
All authors conceived of the study, participated in its design and coordination, participated in the interpretation of the data and drafted the manuscript. MM collected the data and performed the statistical analysis. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
Ethical Approval
All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.
Informed Consent
Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.
Additional information
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Electronic supplementary material
Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Micai, M., Vulchanova, M. & Saldaña, D. Do Individuals with Autism Change Their Reading Behavior to Adapt to Errors in the Text?. J Autism Dev Disord 49, 4232–4243 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10803-019-04108-8
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10803-019-04108-8