The Error-Related Negativity (ERN) In Response to Affect and Gender Face Processing In High Functioning Autism

Background: Children with High Functioning Autism (HFA) have difficulty with error monitoring (Bogte et al., 2007). An inability to monitor errors in a social context may be associated with autistic symptomology. 

Objectives: The aim of the current study was twofold: 1) To examine developmental and diagnostic group differences on the Error-Related Negativity (ERN), an electrophysiological indicator of error monitoring. 2) To examine how individual differences in the ERN relate to Autistic Symptomology.

Methods: Thirty-eight individuals with HFA and 39 individuals with typical development, ages 9-19, participated in the study. Participants viewed a series of 312 face stimuli under two task conditions: Affect and Gender. For the Affect and Gender Tasks respectively, participants quickly indicated whether each face stimulus was angry vs. happy or male vs. female. Participants wore a 128-lead Geodesic sensor net. ERN amplitude was calculated as the mean amplitude between 25-75 ms following the participant’s response. ERN latency was calculated as the latency of the local negative peak between 25-75 ms following the participant’s response. The difference score between correct and incorrect trials was analyzed, with the amplitude/latency of incorrect trials subtracted from the amplitude/latency of correct trials. The Autism Spectrum Screening Questionnaire, the Social Responsiveness Scale, and the Social Communication Questionnaire were used to assess Autistic Symptomology.

Results: There was a main effect of age on ERN Amplitude, F(1, 74) = 15.61, p < 0.01, η²_p = 0.17, and ERN Latency, F(1, 74) = 9.25, p < 0.01, η²_p = 0.11, such that participants showed a more negative amplitude and a longer latency for incorrect responses compared to correct responses with age. There was a marginal interaction between diagnostic group and task on ERN Amplitude, F(1, 74) = 3.37, p = 0.07, η²_p = 0.04, such that individuals with typical development showed a greater amplitude difference between correct and incorrect responses than individuals with HFA, but only on the Gender Task. Controlling for age, verbal IQ, and diagnostic group, ERN Latency on the Affect Task, t(71) = -1.79, p = 0.08, and Gender Task, t(71) = 1.93, p = 0.06, marginally predicted autistic symptomology. A greater latency difference between correct and incorrect responses was associated with less autistic symptomology on the Affect Task, but more autistic symptomology on the Gender Task.

Conclusions: Regardless of task demands, development had a strong influence on error monitoring for both diagnostic groups. Group differences suggest that individuals with HFA may be impaired in monitoring their errors with respect to the gender of a face, not the affect of a face. These results are consistent with a recent literature suggesting individuals with HFA may automatically engage in face processing of affect (Magnée et al., 2007). For those individuals who automatically engage in affect processing, monitoring of gender may require executive functioning skills such as set-shifting. In contrast, individuals who engage in gender processing more automatically may be less sensitive to socially pertinent aspects of a face, such as affect. Thus, these individuals may show more severe impairments in social interaction and communication.