Limits...
Face and emotion recognition in MCDD versus PDD-NOS.

Herba CM, de Bruin E, Althaus M, Verheij F, Ferdinand RF - J Autism Dev Disord (2007)

Bottom Line: Few significant group differences emerged.Children with PDD-NOS demonstrated a more attention-demanding strategy of face processing, and processed neutral faces more similarly to complex patterns whereas children with MCDD showed an advantage for face recognition compared to complex patterns.No significant group differences emerged for identifying facial expressions.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Department of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, Erasmus Medical Center-Sophia Children's Hospital Rotterdam, Rotterdam, The Netherlands. c.herba@erasmusmc.nl

ABSTRACT
Previous studies indicate that Multiple Complex Developmental Disorder (MCDD) children differ from PDD-NOS and autistic children on a symptom level and on psychophysiological functioning. Children with MCDD (n = 21) and PDD-NOS (n = 62) were compared on two facets of social-cognitive functioning: identification of neutral faces and facial expressions. Few significant group differences emerged. Children with PDD-NOS demonstrated a more attention-demanding strategy of face processing, and processed neutral faces more similarly to complex patterns whereas children with MCDD showed an advantage for face recognition compared to complex patterns. Results further suggested that any disadvantage in face recognition was related more to the autistic features of the PDD-NOS group rather than characteristics specific to MCDD. No significant group differences emerged for identifying facial expressions.

Show MeSH

Related in: MedlinePlus

Accuracy of PDD-NOS versus MCDD children for face recognition (FR) and complex pattern recognition (PR). This figure is based on raw (untransformed) error rates, without covarying for MA. Error bars represent standard error of the mean
© Copyright Policy
Related In: Results  -  Collection


getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC2268724&req=5

Fig3: Accuracy of PDD-NOS versus MCDD children for face recognition (FR) and complex pattern recognition (PR). This figure is based on raw (untransformed) error rates, without covarying for MA. Error bars represent standard error of the mean

Mentions: Comparison of the complex condition of the PR task with face recognition revealed a significant interaction between group, task (PR versus FR), and response type (target versus non-target) (Wilk’s lambda = 0.94, F(1, 80) = 5.07, p = 0.03; ηp2 = 0.06). Children with PDD-NOS were less accurate in recognizing the presence of a target face in the response set compared to children with MCDD, whereas this difference was not evident when children had to recognize a target pattern amongst hardly distinguishable other patterns (see Fig. 3). This interaction bordered on significance after controlling for MA (p = 0.05; ηp2 = 0.05). Such results did not emerge for speed of processing: there were no significant interactions; group*task*target (p = 0.91; ηp2 < 0.01) or group*task (p = 0.73; ηp2 < 0.01), nor was there a significant main effect of group (p = 0.23; ηp2 = 0.02). Irrespective of group, children processed faces faster than complex patterns (Wilk’s lambda = 0.64, F(1, 80) = 44.85, p < 0.001; ηp2 = 0.36).Fig. 3


Face and emotion recognition in MCDD versus PDD-NOS.

Herba CM, de Bruin E, Althaus M, Verheij F, Ferdinand RF - J Autism Dev Disord (2007)

Accuracy of PDD-NOS versus MCDD children for face recognition (FR) and complex pattern recognition (PR). This figure is based on raw (untransformed) error rates, without covarying for MA. Error bars represent standard error of the mean
© Copyright Policy
Related In: Results  -  Collection

Show All Figures
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC2268724&req=5

Fig3: Accuracy of PDD-NOS versus MCDD children for face recognition (FR) and complex pattern recognition (PR). This figure is based on raw (untransformed) error rates, without covarying for MA. Error bars represent standard error of the mean
Mentions: Comparison of the complex condition of the PR task with face recognition revealed a significant interaction between group, task (PR versus FR), and response type (target versus non-target) (Wilk’s lambda = 0.94, F(1, 80) = 5.07, p = 0.03; ηp2 = 0.06). Children with PDD-NOS were less accurate in recognizing the presence of a target face in the response set compared to children with MCDD, whereas this difference was not evident when children had to recognize a target pattern amongst hardly distinguishable other patterns (see Fig. 3). This interaction bordered on significance after controlling for MA (p = 0.05; ηp2 = 0.05). Such results did not emerge for speed of processing: there were no significant interactions; group*task*target (p = 0.91; ηp2 < 0.01) or group*task (p = 0.73; ηp2 < 0.01), nor was there a significant main effect of group (p = 0.23; ηp2 = 0.02). Irrespective of group, children processed faces faster than complex patterns (Wilk’s lambda = 0.64, F(1, 80) = 44.85, p < 0.001; ηp2 = 0.36).Fig. 3

Bottom Line: Few significant group differences emerged.Children with PDD-NOS demonstrated a more attention-demanding strategy of face processing, and processed neutral faces more similarly to complex patterns whereas children with MCDD showed an advantage for face recognition compared to complex patterns.No significant group differences emerged for identifying facial expressions.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Department of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, Erasmus Medical Center-Sophia Children's Hospital Rotterdam, Rotterdam, The Netherlands. c.herba@erasmusmc.nl

ABSTRACT
Previous studies indicate that Multiple Complex Developmental Disorder (MCDD) children differ from PDD-NOS and autistic children on a symptom level and on psychophysiological functioning. Children with MCDD (n = 21) and PDD-NOS (n = 62) were compared on two facets of social-cognitive functioning: identification of neutral faces and facial expressions. Few significant group differences emerged. Children with PDD-NOS demonstrated a more attention-demanding strategy of face processing, and processed neutral faces more similarly to complex patterns whereas children with MCDD showed an advantage for face recognition compared to complex patterns. Results further suggested that any disadvantage in face recognition was related more to the autistic features of the PDD-NOS group rather than characteristics specific to MCDD. No significant group differences emerged for identifying facial expressions.

Show MeSH
Related in: MedlinePlus