Date Presented 04/04/19
This study evaluated the relationship between sensory processing and social responsiveness in young adults with ASD and age-matched neurotypical controls. Compared to controls, young adults with ASD had significant differences on all four quadrants of the sensory profile. However, low registration and sensory gating (the ability to filter irrelevant information) appear to be key predictors of social responsiveness.
Primary Author and Speaker: Jewel Crasta
Additional Authors and Speakers: Patricia Davies
Contributing Authors: William Gavin
PURPOSE: This study evaluated the relationship between sensory processing and social responsiveness in young adults with high-functioning autism spectrum disorders (ASD) and age-matched neurotypical controls.
RATIONALE: Sensory processing challenges in autism have been shown to persist into adulthood (Crane, Goddard, & Pring, 2009). In children with ASD, sensory processing challenges have been predictive of social responsiveness (Hilton et al., 2010). However, there is limited research examining sensory processing and its impact on social responsiveness in young adults with ASD.
DESIGN: Cross-sectional, quasi-experimental quantitative design, with convenience sampling.
PARTICIPANTS: Participants included 24 young adults (M age=23.3 years, SD=3.77; 17-30 years) with ASD, and 24 age-matched neurotypical adults (M age=23.7 years, SD=3.5).
METHODS: All participants completed the self-report adult form, Social Responsiveness Scale 2 (SRS-2), the Adolescent/Adult Sensory Profile (AASP), and the Sensory Gating Inventory (SGI) – a measure of perceptual experiences related to filtering out irrelevant information.
ANALYSIS: Social responsiveness was measured by the SRS-2, while the AASP and SGI served as measures of sensory processing. Multivariate regression was used to predict SRS-2 total scores using AASP quadrant scores and SGI total score.
RESULTS: On the AASP, there were significant group differences on low registration (t
(46) =4.46, p < .0005), sensation seeking (t
(46) =3.59, p< .0005), sensory sensitivity (t
(46) =3.4, p < .0005), and sensation avoiding (t
(46) =4.35, p< .0005). The ASD group had significantly greater sensory gating issues than controls on the SGI, (t
(46) =5.22, p < .0005), and significantly more social impairment on the SRS-2 than controls, (t
(46) = 6.92, p < .0005). Multiple regression predicting SRS-2 scores using the quadrant scores and SGI total score indicated that the model explained 85.9% of the variance (F
(40)= 55.62, p< .0005; R
2= .874, R
2
adj = .859). While low registration (β= 1.66, p< .0005), sensation seeking (β= -.67, p =.03), sensation avoiding (β= .96, p =.005), and SGI total (β= .35, p=.001) significantly contributed to the model, sensory sensitivity did not (β= .36, p =.39). When the ASD group was examined separately, this model accounted for 76% of the variance (F
(18) =15.64, p < .0005; R
2= .81, R
2
adj =.76). Here, only low registration (β= 1.5, p = .012) and SGI total (β= .34, p =.033) significantly contributed to the model. Across all participants, greater sensory gating issues strongly correlated with low registration scores, (r =.75, p < .0005).
CONCLUSION: Sensory processing challenges persisting into adulthood negatively impact social responsiveness in ASD. Moreover, the pattern of sensory challenges predicting social responsiveness is different in children and adults with ASD. While sensory sensitivity has been a strong predictor of social behavior in children with ASD (Hilton, Graver, & LaVesser, 2007), in adults in this sample, low registration and sensory gating appear to be key predictors of social responsiveness. Individuals with difficulties in gating or filtering information may experience sensory overload, which may, in turn, lead to low registration such that individuals may not notice their surrounding and may miss social cues. Together, these traits explain the social participation difficulties faced by those with ASD.
IMPACT STATEMENT: There is limited research examining sensory processing and its impact on functioning in young adults with ASD. Specific sensory processing challenges such as the sensory gating abilities might still impact social participation and quality of life for transitioning youth/young adults with ASD as they advance to post-secondary education and supportive/independent employment.
References
Crane, L., Goddard, L., & Pring, L. (2009). Sensory processing in adults with autism spectrum disorders. Autism, 13(3), 215-228. DOI 10.1177/1362361309103794
Hilton, C. L., Harper, J. D., Kueker, R. H., Lang, A. R., Abbacchi, A. M., Todorov, A., & LaVesser, P. D. (2010). Sensory responsiveness as a predictor of social severity in children with high functioning autism spectrum disorders. Journal of autism and developmental disorders, 40(8), 937-945. DOI 10.1007/s10803-010-0944-8
Hilton, C., Graver, K., & LaVesser, P. (2007). Relationship between social competence and sensory processing in children with high functioning autism spectrum disorders. Research in Autism Spectrum Disorders, 1(2), 164-173. DOI 10.1016/j.rasd.2006.10.002
