Irony Comprehension in Children with ASD: Does Modality make a difference?

Abstract

The ability to comprehend irony is often impaired in children with Autism Spectrum Disorders (ASD), due to deficient perspective taking skills. This study explored irony comprehension in children with ASD, ages eight to eleven years, using the graded salience hypothesis and differing modalities of stimuli presentation. Both conventional and situation-specific ironic remarks were presented in either auditory or written form, following each story context. Following presentation of each short vignette and corresponding ironic statement, the participant’s comprehension was measured based on their response to a series of auditory questions. Questions were designed to assess each child’s ability to interpret speaker meaning, affect and intent. Due to their difficulty with integration of information across modalities, it was hypothesized that when presented with an ironic statement and corresponding questions in a single modality (e.g. only auditory), children with ASD would have increased comprehension, as compared to those statements presented across multiple modalities (e.g. written and auditory). Results indicated that no significant differences were found based on the modality of presentation or conventionality of a statement, as it relates to irony comprehension in the given population.