Asperger s Syndrome facts What is wrong with our current understanding of AS Current research project Where to go from here

Transcription

1

2 Asperger s Syndrome facts What is wrong with our current understanding of AS Current research project Where to go from here

3 What do we know about AS?

4 Severe and pervasive impairment in social interactions Restricted, repetitive patterns of behaviour Perseverative tendencies No lag in early language development Intact cognitive abilities Clumsy Diminished humour Lack of empathy and understanding Lacking affect or normal affective responses Mental health difficulties If often viewed as mild autism

5 What do all of these have in common? Focus on deficits and on things that are done more poorly than typical

6 Here s what I know There is a definite lack of research and findings on strengths that these individuals posses. Essentially, what kinds of things can individuals with Asperger s do well or better than typicals?

7 The focus on my work and the work of a colleague has been in this vein. Investigate areas that have been poorly or improperly identified as deficits to provide more specific information Focus on the strengths of these individuals Focus on Asperger s as opposed to Autism More specifically understand the skills and abilities of these individuals.

8 My work has focused primarily on executive functions and related cognitive abilities Improving our understanding of the nature of cognitive functioning and the relationship to social skills and positive outcome in this population.

9

10 Defined as higher order cognitive abilities 1. Mental operations enabling individuals to guide behaviour by reference to future goals.

11 Allow for planning, flexible strategy employment, impulse control, and organized search. Emphasis is on the role of inhibition, working memory, temporal organization, and use of strategies in the attainment of goal-directed behaviours.

12 Inhibitory Control Behavioural Initiation Inability to Sustain Behaviour Problems in Self-Monitoring Disorganization Planning Difficulties

13 There are three primary problems with the current state of EF research and information 1. Mixture of individuals with Asperger s and Autism 2. Comparative approach to research 3. Focus on solitary components of EF

14 1. Many researchers combine individuals with Asperger s and Autism into one group 1. The conclusions from this approach are not really representative of individuals with Asperger s There is a well-documented difference in cognitive abilities between AS and other non-as Pervasive Developmental Disorders 2, 3.

15 2. Many researchers make groups of participants and compare performance. 2. However, they don t ensure that people in each group should be in that group. Lack of diagnostic clarity 4.

16 3. Research on executive functions has primarily investigated performance on specific measures. 3. Tasks of mental flexibility/set shifting (Tower of London/Hanoi, WCST, ID/ED task) have proven challenging for this population 1, 2, 5, 6. It is believed that individuals with Asperger s have a deficit in executive functions.

17 However, performance on specific measures does not provide an appropriate context by which to understand EF in this population Challenges on one specific task does not fully explain the difficulties that individuals with AS experience Is there another framework that can better explain the social and behavioural difficulties?

18 EF has also been explored in terms of modality of functioning (verbal/nonverbal) 7. This investigation utilized the DKEFS. Results indicated a modality-specific (verbal) EF deficit. However, the sample used in this study was mixed AS/HFA. Thus, this finding may not be truly representative of AS.

19

20 Investigate the possibility of modality- specific EF abilities in individuals with AS

21 66 participants (33 with AS and 33 age- and gender- matched controls). Age: M = / Gender: 78.8% male VIQ: M = / PIQ: M = / FSIQ: M = / No significant differences between groups on VIQ, PIA, or FSIQ

22 7 subtests from the DKEFS were administered (3 verbal, 4 nonverbal) Cluster analysis was used to derive subgroups of participants based upon performance on the EF tasks

23 1. Trail Making 4 Set shifting/mental flexibility 2. Verbal Fluency 3 Set shifting/mental flexibility 3. Design Fluency 3 (Nonverbal) Set shifting/mental flexibility (Nonverbal) (Verbal) 4. Color-Word Interference 4 (Nonverbal) Inhibition

24 5. Word Context (Verbal) Deductive reasoning/mental flexibility 6. Tower Planning/inhibition 7. Proverbs Verbal abstraction (Nonverbal) (Verbal)