Social attention patterns of autistic and non-autistic adults when viewing real versus reel people

Research consistently shows that autistic adults do not attend to faces as much as non-autistic adults. However, this conclusion is largely based on studies using pre-recorded videos or photographs as stimuli. In studies using real social scenarios, the evidence is not as clear. To explore the extent to which differences in findings relate to differences in the methodologies used across studies, we directly compared social attention of 32 autistic and 33 non-autistic adults when watching exactly the same video. However, half of the participants in each group were told simply to watch the video (Video condition), and the other half were led to believe they were watching a live webcam feed (‘Live’ condition). The results yielded no significant group differences in the ‘Live’ condition. However, significant group differences were found in the ‘Video’ condition. In this condition, non-autistic participants, but not autistic participants, showed a marked social bias towards faces. The findings highlight the importance of studying social attention combining different methods. Specifically, we argue that studies using pre-recorded footage and studies using real people tap into separate components contributing to social attention. One that is an innate, automatic component and one that is modulated by social norms. Lay Abstract Early research shows that autistic adults do not attend to faces as much as non-autistic adults. However, some recent studies where autistic people are placed in scenarios with real people reveal that they attend to faces as much as non-autistic people. This study compares attention to faces in two situations. In one, autistic and non-autistic adults watched a pre-recorded video. In the other, they watched what they thought were two people in a room in the same building, via a life webcam, when in fact exactly the same video in two situations. We report the results of 32 autistic adults and 33 non-autistic adults. The results showed that autistic adults do not differ in any way from non-autistic adults when they watched what they believed was people interacting in real time. However, when they thought they were watching a video, non-autistic participants showed higher levels of attention to faces than non-autistic participants. We conclude that attention to social stimuli is the result of a combination of two processes. One innate, which seems to be different in autism, and one that is influenced by social norms, which works in the same way in autistic adults without learning disabilities. The results suggest that social attention is not as different in autism as first thought. Specifically, the study contributes to dispel long-standing deficit models regarding social attention in autism as it points to subtle differences in the use of social norms rather than impairments.