Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-rdxmf Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-22T17:55:19.521Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Two sources of bias affecting the evaluation of autistic communication

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  23 July 2019

Pearl Han Li Open the ORCID record for Pearl Han Li [Opens in a new window]  and
Melissa Koenig
Pearl Han Li
Affiliation:
Institute of Child Development, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN 55436. [email protected]@umn.eduhttp://www.cehd.umn.edu/icd/people/faculty/cpsy/koenig.html
Melissa Koenig
Affiliation:
Institute of Child Development, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN 55436. [email protected]@umn.eduhttp://www.cehd.umn.edu/icd/people/faculty/cpsy/koenig.html
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

We support Jaswal & Akhtar's interrogation of social motivational accounts of autism and discuss two sources of bias that contribute to how others construe autistic people's communications: (1) an experience-based bias that limits our ability to discern the speaker's action as communicative and (2) a prejudice against the credibility of certain speakers that limits a listener's willingness to believe their testimony.

Type
Open Peer Commentary
Information
Behavioral and Brain Sciences , Volume 42 , 2019 , e98
Check for updates
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2019 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Anderson, C. & Kilduff, G. J. (2009) The pursuit of status in social groups. Current Directions in Psychological Science 18(5):295–98.Google Scholar
Bascandziev, I. & Harris, P. L. (2016) The beautiful and the accurate: Are children's selective trust decisions biased? Journal of Experimental Child Psychology 152:92–105.Google Scholar
Bernard, S., Castelain, T., Mercier, H., Kaufmann, L., Van der Henst, J. B. & Clément, F. (2016) The boss is always right: Preschoolers endorse the testimony of a dominant over that of a subordinate. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology 152:307–17.Google Scholar
Chaiken, S. (1979) Communicator physical attractiveness and persuasion. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 37(8):1387.Google Scholar
Chen, E. E., Corriveau, K. H. & Harris, P. L. (2013) Children trust a consensus composed of outgroup members – but do not retain that trust. Child Development 84(1):269–82.Google Scholar
Chudek, M., Heller, S., Birch, S. & Henrich, J. (2012) Prestige-biased cultural learning: bystander's differential attention to potential models influences children's learning. Evolution and Human Behavior 33(1):46–56.Google Scholar
Corriveau, K. H., Kinzler, K. D. & Harris, P. L. (2013) Accuracy trumps accent in children's endorsement of object labels. Developmental Psychology 49(3):470.Google Scholar
DeLoache, J. S. (2004) Becoming symbol-minded. Trends in Cognitive Sciences 8(2):66–70.Google Scholar
Fricker, M. (2003) Epistemic justice and a role for virtue in the politics of knowing. Metaphilosophy 34(1–2):154–73.Google Scholar
Henrich, J. & Gil-White, F. J. (2001) The evolution of prestige: Freely conferred deference as a mechanism for enhancing the benefits of cultural transmission. Evolution and Human Behavior 22(3):165–96.Google Scholar
Jaswal, V. K. & Malone, L. S. (2007) Turning believers into skeptics: 3-year-olds’ sensitivity to cues to speaker credibility. Journal of Cognition and Development 8(3):263–83.Google Scholar
Jones, K. (2018) The politics of credibility. In: A mind of one's own, ed. Antony, L., pp. 154–76. Routledge.Google Scholar
Kärtner, J., Keller, H., Lamm, B., Abels, M., Yovsi, R., Chaudhary, R., et al. (2008) Similarities and differences in contingency experiences of 3-month-olds across sociocultural contexts. Infant Behavior and Development 31:488–500.Google Scholar
Kärtner, J., Keller, H. & Yovsi, R. D. (2010) Mother–infant interaction during the first 3 months: The emergence of culture-specific contingency patterns. Child Development 81(2):540–54.Google Scholar
Keller, H. (2007) Cultures of infancy. Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Keller, H., Otto, H., Lamm, B., Yovsi, R. D. & Kärtner, J. (2008) The timing of verbal/vocal communications between mothers and their infants: A longitudinal cross-cultural comparison. Infant Behavior and Development 31(2):217–26.Google Scholar
Namy, L. L., Campbell, A. L. & Tomasello, M. (2004) The changing role of iconicity in non-verbal symbol learning: A U-shaped trajectory in the acquisition of arbitrary gestures. Journal of Cognition and Development 5(1):37–57.Google Scholar
Namy, L. L. & Waxman, S. R. (1998) Words and gestures: Infants’ interpretations of different forms of symbolic reference. Child Development 69(2):295–308.Google Scholar
Richman, A. L., Miller, P. M. & LeVine, R. A. (1992) Cultural and educational variations maternal responsiveness. Developmental Psychology 28:614–21. Available at: http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0012-1649.28.4.614.Google Scholar
Salomo, D. & Liszkowski, U. (2013) Sociocultural settings influence the emergence of prelinguistic deictic gestures. Child Development 84(4):1296–307.Google Scholar
Shutts, K., Banaji, M. R. & Spelke, E. S. (2010) Social categories guide young children's preferences for novel objects. Developmental Science 13(4):599–610.Google Scholar
Woodward, A. & Hoyne, K. (1999) Infants’ learning about words and sounds in relation to objects. Child Development 70(1):65–77.Google Scholar