Understanding of Intentions in Action by High Functioning Children with Autism Spectrum Disorder

Background:

The ability to attribute intentions to others is essential for successfully interpreting and participating in social interaction. Research examining the recognition and understanding of intentions in others by children with Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD) has produced mixed results (e.g., Russell & Hill, 2001; Williams & Happé, 2010). Previous work involved task paradigms designed to investigate children’s awareness of whether an action was carried out intentionally or by accident, but many core components that underlie the understanding of intention in others have yet to be examined in children with ASD.

Objectives:

Investigate whether children with high-functioning ASD (HFASD) understand two core components that underlie intention attribution in others:  (A) distinguishing desires and intentions; (B) understanding that different intentions may motivate one and the same action.

Methods:

Participants were recruited through the Autism Instructional Methods Survey (AIMS) study (Mandell et al., 2010), a recently completed randomized field trial. Inclusion criteria for participation included verbal mental age within the normal range (≥ 80), assessed using the Differential Ability Scales (DAS-II). Preliminary data are presented for 12 children with HFASD (11 boys, mean age 8:1). Children completed two measures of intention understanding that examined the ability to differentiate between (A) intentions and desires (Schult, 2002), and (B) two intentions for an identical action (Baird & Moses, 2001). In the intention-desire distinction measure (A), children heard stories in which the character’s intention or desire either was or was not satisfied. For the same action-two intentions measure (B), participants were told stories in which two characters performed an identical action motivated by substantially different desires and intentions. Multiple control conditions were included for both measures. Enrollment is ongoing.

Results:

For the intention-desire distinction measure (A), 55% of participants correctly distinguished between an intention and a desire when there was a conflict between the two, whereas 92% were correct on the control task. In the same action-two intention measure (B), 58% of participants correctly answered the target intention question, whereas 75% were correct on the control task. These preliminary results are similar to the pattern of responses observed in the original data from typically developing (TD) 4-year-olds (Baird & Moses, 2001; Schult, 2002). Compared to TD preschoolers, participants in this study performed more poorly on the intention-fulfilled/desire-unsatisfied task (Schult, 2002) slightly better on the intention-unfulfilled/desire-satisfied task (Schult, 2002), and more poorly in the same-action different intention task (Baird & Moses, 2001). Data collection is ongoing and will include a comparison group of TD children individually matched on VMA.     

Conclusions:

These preliminary findings suggest that children with HFASD are delayed in understanding two core components that underlie intention attribution in others: (A) the difference between intentions and desires, and (B) the fact that identical actions may be motivated by different intentions. Clarifying our knowledge of how children with ASD understand the intentions of others may inform theories of social competence, moral reasoning, and academic development.