Grammar in Boys With Idiopathic Autism Spectrum Disorder and Boys With Fragile X Syndrome Plus Autism Spectrum Disorder

Studies assessing domains pertaining to structural language in autism vary in reporting practices and approaches to assessment: A systematic review

LAY ABSTRACT

Under the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (5th ed.), language impairment can co-occur with autism. It is not yet clear how research defines, reports, and characterizes structural language abilities of autistic individuals eligible for school-based special education services (aged 3-21 years) in the United States. In the United States, students typically must be formally diagnosed to be eligible for services and supports. However, the quality of diagnosis is only as good as the research evidence on which diagnosis depends. To evaluate evidence quality, we examined how studies of school-aged autistic individuals report assessments of language ability. This systematic review included 57 studies using English language age-referenced assessments used to measure structural language. Findings showed many differences across studies in how language abilities were measured and reported. Also, none of the studies fully reported the variables relevant to characterizing language impairment. Outcomes were similar across versions of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders. Findings indicate that researchers and clinicians should pay attention to reporting diagnostic and grouping criteria. Carefully interpreting research evidence is critical for ensuring that diagnostic criteria and supports are representative of and accessible to autistic individuals and relevant parties.

An Exploratory Study of Pragmatic Language Use Across Contexts With the Pragmatic Rating Scale-School Age Among Autistic Boys and Boys With Fragile X Syndrome Plus Autism

PURPOSE

Autistic boys and boys with co-occurring fragile X syndrome and autism spectrum disorder (FXS + ASD) demonstrate similar pragmatic language difficulties. The Pragmatic Rating Scale-School Age (PRS-SA) captures ecologically valid metrics of pragmatic language impairments in these populations. It is traditionally scored based on the Autism Diagnostic Observation Schedule (ADOS), which may limit the use of the PRS-SA more broadly in research and clinical contexts.

METHOD

This study evaluated the feasibility of the PRS-SA based on a shorter, semistructured conversational context compared to the ADOS in school-age autistic boys (n = 16) and boys with FXS + ASD (n = 16), matched on ASD traits. Differences across ADOS and conversational contexts and associations with ASD-related social difficulties were evaluated.

RESULTS

Findings revealed differences in PRS-SA scores between ADOS and conversational contexts, but only for the FXS + ASD group. Limited associations were observed between PRS-SA scores and ASD traits.

CONCLUSIONS

Results from this study indicate the feasibility of using the PRS-SA in a shorter conversational context than the ADOS to assess pragmatic language among autistic boys. For boys with FXS + ASD, contextual differences warrant careful consideration in future work.

Studies pertaining to language impairment in school-age autistic individuals underreport participant socio-demographics: A systematic review

LAY ABSTRACT

Although exclusion of racially and ethnically minoritized autistic individuals from research is a long-standing issue, we have yet to determine how exclusion impacts areas of autism research important for identifying language impairment. Diagnosis depends on the quality of the evidence (i.e. research) and is often the pathway to gaining access to services. As a first step, we examined how research studies related to language impairment in school-age autistic individuals report participant socio-demographics. We analyzed reports using age-referenced assessments in English (n = 60), which are commonly used by both practitioners and researchers to diagnose or identify language impairment. Findings showed only 28% of studies reported any information on race and ethnicity; in these studies, most (at least 77%) of the participants were white. In addition, only 56% of studies reported gender or sex and specified what they were reporting (gender, sex, or gender identity). Just 17% reported socio-economic status using multiple indicators. Altogether, findings indicate broad issues with underreporting and exclusion of racially and ethnically minoritized individuals, which might overlay with other aspects of identity including socio-economic status. It is impossible to determine the extent and precise nature of exclusion without intersectional reporting. To ensure that language in autism research is representative of the autistic population, future research must implement reporting guidelines and broaden inclusion of who participates in research studies.

Comparison of Linguistic Error Production in Conversational Language Among Boys With Fragile X Syndrome + Autism Spectrum Disorder and Autistic Boys

PURPOSE

Expressive language impairments are common among school-age boys with fragile X syndrome (FXS) and autistic boys. Given the high co-occurrence of autism spectrum disorder (ASD) among individuals with FXS, cross-condition comparisons can elucidate the specificity of such impairments as they relate to ASD. Language samples can provide fruitful information regarding individuals' grammatical skills in less structured formats relative to standardized measures. This study examined grammatical errors produced during a conversational language sample among 20 boys with FXS and co-occurring ASD (FXS + ASD) and 19 autistic boys matched on ASD severity.

METHOD

Language samples were coded for omissions and errors at the word and utterance levels. Participants' grammatical errors were also compared to separate mental age-matched and mean length of utterance-matched boys from a reference database.

RESULTS

Boys with FXS + ASD and autistic boys produced similar rates of errors across all categories. Relative to their matched comparison groups, boys with FXS + ASD and autistic boys produced significantly more omissions during conversation.

CONCLUSIONS

These findings suggest that omissions may be a unique grammatical marker associated with the ASD phenotype. Further examination of omissions across diagnostic groups would aid in clarifying the specificity of omissions in the language phenotype of ASD.

Communication in fragile X syndrome: Patterns and implications for assessment and intervention

Fragile X syndrome (FXS) is the most common cause of inherited intellectual disability and is associated with a high rate of autism diagnosis. Language delays have been noted in the areas of overall communication and the specific areas of receptive, expressive, and pragmatic language, as well as in development of speech sounds and literacy. It has been widely noted that those individuals with a diagnosis of both FXS and autism tend to have more significant intellectual disability and language disorder. In this study, the research exploring the FXS language phenotype is presented, and the roles of cognition, autistic symptomatology, and gender are highlighted as possible. Implications for assessment and intervention approaches based on the strengths and weaknesses of the FXS language phenotype are provided.

Language Impairment in Autistic Adolescents and Young Adults

PURPOSE

Little is known about the specific nature of language abilities of autistic adolescents and young adults with language impairment (LI), limiting our knowledge of developmental trajectories and ability to develop efficacious speech/language supports. An important first step is establishing proof of concept of identification of LI in this population, with considerations for feasibility of assessment. This research note describes such a study in a sample of autistic adolescents and young adults with LI.

METHOD

Thirteen autistic adolescents and young adults completed an assessment protocol of age-referenced language and nonverbal cognitive assessments. Assessment took place once per year for 3 years; the first two assessments were conducted in person, and the final was conducted online due to the pandemic. All assessments included measures of overall language and morphosyntax; the third added measures of expressive and receptive vocabulary, verbal working memory, and nonverbal intelligence (NVIQ). Analysis included descriptives and comparison of individual performance with epidemiological criteria for LI.

RESULTS

All participants qualified for LI, with overall receptive and expressive language scores persistently in the LI range. Other outcomes were variable. Some participants had nonword repetition and vocabulary abilities within age expectations, and some consistently showed adultlike morphosyntactic performance. NVIQ was variable, with no consistent associations with language outcomes.

DISCUSSION

Our findings support the use of the current protocol, as implemented in person or online, to identify LI in autistic adolescents and young adults. This exploratory work is limited by a small sample and missing data. The findings contribute to our understanding of linguistic strengths and variability in the language skills of autistic young adults with LI.

Using weighted communication scoring procedures in naturalistic play samples: Preliminary validation in preschool-aged boys with autism or fragile X syndrome

In the present study, we provide a preliminary evaluation of the validity and reliability of using weighting procedures to measure communication in play samples for preschool-aged boys with autism or fragile X syndrome (FXS). Because weighting procedure communication scores (WPCSs) reflect growth in both communicative frequency and complexity, establishing the psychometrics of the component scores, in addition to the overall metric, affords investigators the opportunity to describe growth within and across skills. Results, for both groups, provide support regarding the psychometric appropriateness (i.e., convergent validity, divergent validity, and internal consistency) for all WPCSs. That said, a trend was observed for reliability scores to be slightly lower or more variable in boys with autism than in boys with FXS. Finally, although significant associations were observed in the associations between WPCSs across play contexts, contexts effects were observed for all three WPCSs. Together, results from this study provide promising preliminary data indicating the utility of using WPCSs in children with neurodevelopmental disabilities. Lay Summary: Language supports long-term positive outcomes; it is important to identify accurate and flexible ways of measuring language in children over time. We considered the effectiveness of using a procedure that considers changes in the number of communication acts and the types of acts produced during a play session by preschool-aged boys with autism or fragile X syndrome. These procedures were found to be valid and reliable.

Joint attention performance in preschool-aged boys with autism or fragile X syndrome

Early development marks a period of rapid learning facilitated by children's natural curiosity about the people around them. In children with typical development, these early social attentional preferences set the foundation for learning about and from the surrounding world of people. Much of this learning happens using joint attention, the ability to coordinate attention between people and objects of mutual interest. It is well documented that decreased gaze use is commonly observed in individuals with autism and individuals with fragile X syndrome (FXS). Despite the growing body of research comparing phenotypic similarities between individuals with autism and individuals with FXS, no studies have directly compared joint attention performance between these groups. In the present study, we considered the similarities and differences in joint attention between preschool-aged boys with autism or FXS, and the relation between joint attention, language, and other phenotypic characteristics known to differ between boys with autism and boys with FXS. Although joint attention appeared similar, between-group differences emerged when controlling for the influence of age, non-verbal IQ, and autism symptom severity. Differences were also observed when considering how joint attention performance related to other aspects of the phenotype. For example, strong positive associations were observed between joint attention and language performance in boys with autism but not boys with FXS, even after controlling for non-verbal IQ. In contrast, the negative association between joint attention and anxiety symptom severity was significant and stronger in boys with FXS than in autism. These data offer preliminary insights into the similarities and differences between the autism and FXS phenotypes.

Brief Report: Linguistic Mazes and Perseverations in School-Age Boys with Fragile X Syndrome and Autism Spectrum Disorder and Relationships with Maternal Maze Use

Autism spectrum disorder (ASD) and fragile X syndrome (FXS) are neurodevelopmental disorders with overlapping pragmatic language impairments. Prior work suggests pragmatic language differences may run in families. This study examined specific pragmatic difficulties (i.e., linguistic mazes and perseverations) in boys (9-18 years) with idiopathic ASD (n = 26) and FXS+ASD (n = 29), and relationships with maternal maze use. Language samples were obtained separately for boys and mothers. Nonparametric analyses suggested that boys largely did not differ in their rates of mazes, but that boys with FXS+ASD exhibited more perseverations. Mazes were correlated between fragile X dyads. Maternal mazes were correlated with child perseverations among idiopathic ASD dyads. These findings have implications for the etiological significance of ASD-related language phenotypes.

Grammatical judgment and production in male participants with idiopathic autism spectrum disorder

This study examined grammatical judgment and production in 22 male participants with idiopathic autism spectrum disorder (ASD) who had a range of nonverbal IQ from 44 to 111 (mean = 72.23) and were between 9.42 and 16.75 years of age (mean = 13.45). Relationships between grammatical judgment and production and nonverbal IQ were examined. Participants completed the Test of Early Grammatical Impairment (TEGI) to describe relative strengths and weaknesses in their ability to judge and produce grammatical tense. Participants also completed the Leiter-R to assess the relationship between nonverbal IQ and grammatical judgment and production. Relative strengths were found across participants in judging correct use of subject-verb agreement in sentences, and correctly producing verbs that linked sentences (e.g., auxiliaries and copulas of be "Is she resting?"). Participants had the greatest difficulty judging the correctness of a sentence using a dropped verb tense marker (e.g., "He look happy now") and producing irregular verb tense markers. Nonverbal IQ did not contribute to the variance in performance on any tasks of grammaticality judgment or production. Grammatical markers that mark tense in past tense verbs as well as the production of auxiliary do may be an important focus of language intervention for boys with ASD.

Language Development From Early Childhood to Adolescence in Youths With Fragile X Syndrome

Purpose The aim of this study was to investigate language growth in individuals with fragile X syndrome (FXS) from early childhood to adolescence and the influence of maternal responsivity on language growth. Method We conducted a longitudinal analysis of language development in 55 youths (44 males, 11 females) with FXS. Data collection spanned the ages of 11-216 months. We measured expressive and receptive vocabulary with standardized tests. The number of different words and mean length of utterance were obtained from language sample analyses of mother-child interactions. We also measured maternal comments (responsivity indicator) produced during the language samples and child nonverbal IQ. Results Growth models indicated that rates of number of different words and receptive vocabulary were related to maternal commenting. Mean length of utterance did not change significantly over time. Expressive vocabulary measured with a standardized test grew, but the growth was not related to maternal commenting. Nonverbal IQ was related to all language outcomes at age of 10 years and to changes over time in vocabulary. Visual analysis indicated that the highest scores on standardized tests were produced by girls; however, measures derived from language sample analyses appeared similar for boys and girls. Language models for boys only were similar to the total sample models with lower scores at age of 10 years for some outcomes. Conclusion Results of persistent language impairments for most youths with FXS suggest the need for continued, focused interventions aimed at improved language productions in addition to a responsive environment. Supplemental Material https://doi.org/10.23641/asha.13022825.

"Are We Done Yet?" Question-Asking in Boys With Fragile X Syndrome and Idiopathic Autism Spectrum Disorder

Purpose Question-asking serves as a tool to learn new information and is important in both academic and social settings. Boys with idiopathic autism spectrum disorder (ASD) and boys with fragile X syndrome and comorbid ASD (FXS + ASD) have similar social communication deficits, which may have downstream effects on their question-asking ability. This study examined question-asking in school-age boys with idiopathic ASD and FXS + ASD, including the role of ASD severity, expressive grammatical complexity (measured by mean length of utterance [MLU]), and IQ. Method Twenty-five boys with FXS + ASD and 21 boys with idiopathic ASD (ages 9-16 years) were included in this study. Autism Diagnostic Observation Schedule assessments were transcribed and coded for the frequency, function, and appropriateness of spontaneous questions asked. We examined group differences in these aspects of question-asking and relationships between question-asking and ASD severity, MLU, and IQ within each group. Results Boys with FXS + ASD asked more questions than boys with idiopathic ASD, although boys with idiopathic ASD asked a higher proportion of appropriate questions. Boys with idiopathic ASD also asked the examiner more personal questions than the boys with FXS + ASD. ASD severity and MLU were related to the proportion of clarification questions in FXS + ASD, and ASD severity was also related to the proportion of personal questions in this group. For the boys with idiopathic ASD, ASD severity was related to the total number of questions asked. Conclusions Our findings highlight similarities and differences between boys with FXS + ASD and idiopathic ASD in their spontaneous question production and indicate that ASD severity and grammatical language are differentially important for question-asking. This study has implications for targeted treatment in question-asking skills for boys with FXS + ASD and ASD.

Assessment of Language Abilities in Minority Adolescents and Young Adults With Autism Spectrum Disorder and Extensive Special Education Needs: A Pilot Study

Purpose Little is known about the language abilities of adolescents and young adults with autism spectrum disorder (ASD) despite the importance of language in their other life outcomes. Even less is known about the language abilities of racial/ethnic minorities with ASD and extensive special education needs. These gaps limit our understanding of adolescents and young adults with ASD. Method A pilot study evaluated the efficacy of individualized age-referenced language assessment for minority adolescents and young adults with ASD in self-contained special education settings. Participants (n = 10) completed the Clinical Evaluation of Language Fundamentals-Third Edition, Test for Early Grammatical Impairment (TEGI), Columbia Mental Maturity Scale, and Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children-Third Edition Digit Span. Results Clinical Evaluation of Language Fundamentals-Third Edition scores showed little variation, with most participants showing a floor effect. TEGI, Columbia Mental Maturity Scale, and Digit Span scores showed greater variation. Some participants had ceiling TEGI scores, and some had variable assessment profiles. Conclusion Assessment was sensitive to variability across some measures. The pilot study outcomes support the feasibility and potential informativeness of additional investigation of conventional language assessments and change over time.

Language Performance in Preschool-Aged Boys with Nonsyndromic Autism Spectrum Disorder or Fragile X Syndrome

In the present study, language performance on standardized assessments (e.g., overall verbal performance, receptive and expressive vocabulary) and spontaneous language produced in play was compared between preschool-aged boys with autism spectrum disorder (nASD, n = 25) and boys with fragile X syndrome (FXS, n = 16). At the group-level, we observed weaknesses in the language skills of boys with nASD relative to those with FXS (e.g., when considering raw score performance, standard score performance relative to nonverbal cognitive skills, frequency of talk in play), after controlling for nonverbal IQ and ASD symptom severity. Moreover, although individually most children in both groups demonstrated language delays relative to CA-expectations, language delays relative to nonverbal level-expectations were more common in boys with nASD.

Comparing Tense and Agreement Productivity in Boys With Fragile X Syndrome, Children With Developmental Language Disorder, and Children With Typical Development

Purpose This study compared and characterized the tense and agreement productivity of boys with fragile X syndrome (FXS), children with developmental language disorder (DLD), and children with typical development (TD) matched on mean length of utterance. Method Twenty-two boys with FXS (M age = 12.22 years), 19 children with DLD (M age = 4.81 years), and 20 children with TD (M age = 3.23 years) produced language samples that were coded for their productive use of five tense markers (i.e., third-person singular, past tense -ed, copula BE, auxiliary BE, and auxiliary DO) using the tense and agreement productivity score. Children also completed norm-referenced cognitive and linguistic assessments. Results Children with DLD generally used tense and agreement markers less productively than children with TD, particularly third-person singular and auxiliary BE. However, boys with FXS demonstrated a more complicated pattern of productivity, where they were similar to children with DLD and TD, depending on the tense marker examined. Results revealed that children with DLD and TD showed a specific developmental sequence of the individual tense markers that aligns with patterns documented by previous studies, whereas boys with FXS demonstrated a more even profile of productivity. Conclusions These findings help to further clarify areas of overlap and discrepancy in tense and agreement productivity among boys with FXS and children with DLD. Additional clinical implications of these results are discussed.

Expressive language abilities of boys with idiopathic autism spectrum disorder and boys with fragile X syndrome + autism spectrum disorder: Cross-context comparisons

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Understanding the unique expressive language profiles of children with phenotypically similar, but distinct neurodevelopmental disorders, such as idiopathic autism spectrum disorder and fragile X syndrome with a co-diagnosis of autism spectrum disorder (fragile X syndrome + autism spectrum disorder), has both clinical and theoretical implications. However, comparative studies of these two clinical groups have been limited, and results have been inconsistent, partially as a result of different assessment methods being utilized. Thus, the current study compared the expressive language profiles of boys with idiopathic autism spectrum disorder and boys with fragile X syndrome + autism spectrum disorder and examined whether a similar linguistic profile emerged across different language sampling contexts: a semi-structured conversation and the Autism Diagnostic Observation Schedule.

METHODS

Eighteen boys with autism spectrum disorder (M_age  = 13.25 years) and 19 boys with fragile X syndrome + autism spectrum disorder (M_age  = 12.19 years), matched on autism spectrum disorder symptom severity and similar in terms of chronological age and mean length of utterance, participated in this study. Boys produced two language samples: one semi-structured conversation and one taken from the Autism Diagnostic Observation Schedule. Language samples were coded for talkativeness, lexical diversity, mean length of utterance, intelligibility, and repetitive or perseverative language.

RESULTS

Analyses revealed that boys with autism spectrum disorder produced language samples that were more lexically diverse and intelligible, and that included less topic perseveration compared to boys with fragile X syndrome + autism spectrum disorder. With regards to sampling context, boys in both groups were more talkative and produced longer and more intelligible utterances in their conversation sample compared to their Autism Diagnostic Observation Schedule sample. However, boys with autism spectrum disorder and fragile X syndrome + autism spectrum disorder used a higher proportion of topic perseveration during the conversation sample.

CONCLUSIONS

Overall, we found similarities as well as distinctions in the expressive language profiles of boys with fragile X syndrome + autism spectrum disorder and boys with idiopathic autism spectrum disorder. Moreover, the Autism Diagnostic Observation Schedule sample elicited a relatively different language profile than the conversation sample for boys in both groups.

IMPLICATIONS

These findings help to further elucidate the unique language phenotypes of boys with idiopathic autism spectrum disorder and boys with fragile X syndrome + autism spectrum disorder. Moreover, our findings indicate that multiple language samples may be needed to obtain a comprehensive account of a child's expressive language ability.

Rates and Predictors of Co-occurring Autism Spectrum Disorder in Boys with Fragile X Syndrome

Background and aims

Males with fragile X syndrome display many behavioral features of autism spectrum disorder. Despite this overlap, our understanding of autism spectrum disorder symptoms and severity in fragile X syndrome is limited due to variation in assessment methods in the literature. Furthermore, the relationship between autism spectrum disorder symptoms and child characteristics, like age, language, and cognitive abilities, are not well understood in individuals with fragile X syndrome. Therefore, the first research aim was to compare the rates of autism spectrum disorder classifications from three commonly reported autism spectrum disorder assessments in the literature. Our second research aim was to examine the relationship between autism spectrum disorder characteristics and other child characteristics.

Methods

The present study compared autism spectrum disorder classifications and symptoms using the Autism Diagnostic Observation Schedule, Autism Diagnostic Interview, Revised, and Childhood Autism Rating Scale, second edition in a sample of 33 school-age and adolescent boys with fragile X syndrome. In addition, the participants completed nonverbal IQ testing, expressive vocabulary and grammar tests, and a conversation language sample.

Results

The majority of the participants met criteria for autism spectrum disorder on the Autism Diagnostic Observation Schedule (96.97%) and Autism Diagnostic Interview, Revised (90.91%), while only half met criteria for autism spectrum disorder on the Childhood Autism Rating Scale, second edition. Sixteen boys (48.48%) met criteria for autism spectrum disorder on all three measures, and all participants met criteria for autism spectrum disorder on at least one measure. Expressive vocabulary accounted for a unique amount of variance in Childhood Autism Rating Scale, second edition and Autism Diagnostic Observation Schedule scores. Additionally, grammatical complexity accounted for a unique amount of variance in Childhood Autism Rating Scale, second edition scores. None of the child variables accounted for the variance found in Autism Diagnostic Interview, Revised scores. Although nonverbal IQ scores did not account for a significant amount of variance on the Autism Diagnostic Observation Schedule, Autism Diagnostic Interview, Revised, and Childhood Autism Rating Scale, Second Edition, boys who met criteria for autism spectrum disorder on all three measures had lower nonverbal IQ compared to the boys who did not. Additionally, mean length of utterance and expressive vocabulary scores were lower in the boys who met criteria for autism spectrum disorder on all three measures than those who did not.

Conclusions

Our findings identify areas of overlap and difference in the Autism Diagnostic Observation Schedule, Autism Diagnostic Interview, Revised, and Childhood Autism Rating Scale, second edition when used with males with fragile X syndrome. Variation in assessments may differentially identify the phenotypic behaviors of boys with fragile X syndrome that lead to a co-diagnosis of autism spectrum disorder, which contributes to the variation in reported co-morbidity of fragile X syndrome and autism spectrum disorder. Also, expressive language abilities, especially expressive vocabulary, are associated with autism spectrum disorder symptomatology.

Implications: When interpreting comorbid fragile X syndrome and autism spectrum disorder rates in the literature, it is important to consider the assessment tool that was used. Although the assessments that we used in the present study yielded scores that were highly correlated (i.e. Autism Diagnostic Observation Schedule and Childhood Autism Rating Scale, second edition), their categorical classifications did not align perfectly. Our findings also highlight the importance of considering language skills when assessing autism spectrum disorder severity in fragile X syndrome.

Verbal Interactional Synchronization between Therapist and Children with Autism Spectrum Disorder during Dolphin Assisted Therapy: Five Case Studies

Synchronizing behaviors in interactions, such as during turn-taking, are often impaired in children with Autism Spectrum Disorder. Therapies that focus on turn-taking generally lead to increased social skills, less interruptions, and silent pauses, however a positive non-demanding environment is therefore thought to be beneficial. Such an environment can be achieved by incorporating animals into therapy. Our study was guided by the following research questions: (1) How can we characterize the interaction between child and therapist during dolphin-assisted therapy, with regard to synchrony in verbalizations (turn-taking) and (2) does synchrony change over the course of six sessions of therapy? To answer these questions, we performed a cross-recurrence quantification analysis on behavioral data of five children, to give a detailed view of the interaction between therapist and child in the context of dolphin-assisted therapy. We were able to detect synchrony (i.e., adequate turn-taking) in all dyads, although not all children improved equally. The differences might be explained by a delayed reaction time of some children, and their level of language development.

The use of demonstratives and personal pronouns in fragile X syndrome and autism spectrum disorder

Demonstratives (e.g. here, that, these) and personal pronouns are early developing components of language, which are often impaired in young children with autism spectrum disorder (ASD). Additionally, demonstrative and personal pronoun use are linked to joint attention and language ability early in life for individuals with ASD. Fragile X syndrome (FXS) is a genetic disorder with a significant amount of overlap in its behavioural phenotype with ASD. The present study examined demonstrative and personal pronoun production during a conversation sample in adolescent boys with ASD and adolescent boys with FXS with a co-diagnosis of ASD (FXS+ASD). Findings indicated that grammatical complexity was related to both qualitative and quantitative aspects of demonstrative and personal pronoun production in boys with ASD, while grammatical complexity was related to the total number of demonstratives and personal pronouns produced in the boys with FXS+ASD. ASD severity was not related to demonstrative or personal pronoun production in ASD, although it was negatively correlated with the total number of personal pronouns produced by the boys with FXS. Additionally, groups did not differ significantly in production of personal pronouns, but they did differ significantly in multiple aspects of demonstrative use. Findings suggest that these groups produce similar rates of personal pronouns in the school-age years, while production of demonstratives differentiates these groups. This study contributes to the knowledge of the language phenotypes of idiopathic ASD and FXS+ASD, and provides implications for intervention targets for school-age children with these disorders.

Gaze avoidance and perseverative language in fragile X syndrome and autism spectrum disorder: brief report

Gaze avoidance and perseverative language impact pragmatics in autism spectrum disorder (ASD) and fragile X syndrome (FXS). We examined these features during conversation samples in boys with ASD (n = 10) and boys with FXS and ASD (FXS+ASD; n = 10). Both groups had similar high rates of gaze avoidance and topic and conversation device perseverations, yet these features were not correlated with one another. Boys with FXS+ASD produced a higher proportion of single utterance perseverations. Results from this study highlight the need for future research to identify potential mechanisms influencing the presence of language perseverations and gaze avoidance.