XBOX FOR AMELIORATING AUTISM?

HOW WE MAKE SENSE OF THE WORLD

• What we see and what we hear.

• Multisensory integration- the brain must be able to distinguish whether stimuli from different modalities come from the one source.

• Speech and social interaction depends on this ability to integrate the different modalities accurately

http://www.motherandchild.com.sg/img/content/custom_slider/homepage-slider-1.jpg

PEOPLE WITH THE LABEL AUTISM

• Previous studies suggest that multisensory temporal function may be impaired in Autism (Stevenson, Siemann, Woynaroski, Schneider, Eberly, Camarata, & Wallace, 2013)

• Inability to distinguish whether different modalities come from the same source

• Speech and social interaction lack

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2013/08/16/article-2395725-1B53D3BB000005DC-423_634x419.jpghttp://www.scarymommy.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/boy-holding-ears.jpg

WHAT IT’S LIKE TO LIVE WITH AUTISM• http://www.worldstarhiphop.com/videos/video.php?v=wshhvJYd1AeicWtP37BK

HOW DO WE VISUALIZE MULTISENSORY INTEGRATION?

• Multisensory integration crucially depends on the temporal structure of the information (Stevenson, et al., 2013).

• Largest behavioral gains occur when stimuli occur closer in proximity.

• Stimuli that occur proximate in time are likely to be integrated and perceived as arising from same event.

• The range of time an individual perceives stim from diff. modalities as synchronous is termed the individual’s temporal binding window.

The figure illustrates the expected temporal binding window (TBW) of an individual before and after adaptive training. (Donohue, Green, Woldorff, 2015).

SO HOW CAN WE BETTER THE TBW FOR THOSE WITH THE LABEL AUTISM?• Previous studies have used training paradigms to arbitrarily apply stimulus onset

asynchronies (SOA’s) regardless of an individual’s TBW to investigate plasticity of the binding windows (Stevenson, et al., 2013).

• We investigated the malleability of the TBW using Adaptive training

• If TBW can be narrowed through an individually customized task, more accurate and meaningful perceptions of the world can occur.

HOW DID WE DO THIS TRAINING?• Subjects: N=29; easy (N=9), medium

(N=10), hard (N=10)

• 2-Alternative Forced Choice Simultaneity Judgment Task:

• For baseline- Participants presented with stim at various SOA’s 20 times each and asked if the auditory and visual stim were synchronous or asynchronous

HOW DID WE DO THIS TRAINING?• Adaptive Training Task:

• After baseline, training blocks (easy, medium, hard) administered randomly.

• Presented with stim at customized SOAs based on the individual’s initial TBW.

• Participants asked to judge whether the stim were synchronous or asynchronous.

• Feedback given after each response with a green check mark or red X.

WHAT THIS MEANS

• This study investigates the malleability of an individual’s TBW using an adaptive training paradigm.

• Though results are nor statistically significant, analysis reflects previous lit and aligns with our hypothesized trends.

• Easy and Medium conditions, little change expected.

• Hard condition, significant narrowing of TBW expected. This trend was seen.

• Interaction between SOAs and training were significant where visual lead auditory.

• Findings may be skewed due to number of participants.

WHAT THIS MEANS

• Findings support the premise that adaptive training can be a candidate for an alternative and and possibly more effective paradigm for attempting to narrow the temporal window of multisensory binding.

https://cdn.psychologytoday.com/sites/default/files/blogs/4236/2011/06/66873-57273.jpg

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

Mark Wallace, Ph.D.Matthew De Niear

Ashley EaleyCamille Pham-LakeJennifer Larimore, Ph.D.

All of my work is dedicated to my brother and the rest of my family. My motivation lies with

them.