Metacognitive monitoring and control of eyewitness memory reports in autism 2017-2019

Providing eyewitness testimony involves monitoring one’s memory to provide a detailed and accurate account: reporting details likely to be accurate and withholding potentially inaccurate details. Autistic individuals reportedly experience difficulties in both retrieving episodic memories and monitoring their accuracy, which has important implications for eyewitness testimony. Thirty autistic and 33 IQ-matched typically developing (TD) participants viewed a video of a mock bank robbery followed by three phases of questions (with judgments of confidence). In Phase 1, participants freely generated the granularity of their responses (i.e., fine- or coarse-grained). In Phase 2, participants answered the same questions but provided both a fine- and a coarse-grained answer. In Phase 3, participants were instructed to maximise accuracy over informativeness by selecting one of their Phase 2 answers as their final answer. They either received the questions socially (from the experimenter) or answered them online. There were no group differences in accuracy or metacognitive monitoring, with both autistic and TD witnesses demonstrating: a) a strong preference for reporting fine-grained details at the expense of accuracy; b) improved, though still sub-optimal grain size reporting when instructed to maximise accuracy over informativeness; c) effective accuracy monitoring; and d) higher overall accuracy when questions were delivered socially. There was, however, a subtle difference in metacognitive control, with autistic witnesses performing more poorly than TD witnesses when questions were delivered socially, but not when they were delivered online. These findings contrast with evidence suggesting that autism is marked by impairments in episodic memory and metacognitive monitoring and control. <p>Autism spectrum disorder (ASD) is diagnosed in around 1% of the population and presents a number of challenges to the day-to-day lives of these individuals as well as their families and support services. This project will provide an evidence base and guide improvements to existing methods used by professional groups to support those with ASD. This will take place in three important information-gathering contexts in which they are currently at a disadvantage. First, only around half of young adults with ASD have worked for pay outside the home - the lowest rate among disability groups. Performance in occupational interviews is a crucial determinant of employment prospects, yet the social, cognitive and communication difficulties of ASD mean they are often unable to perform to the best of their abilities in interviews. Second, people with ASD are more likely to have certain social and health-related issues and co-occurring conditions, and may therefore be more likely to visit health and social care professionals. However, difficulties with introspection and social communication are likely to make relaying relevant information difficult, unless their specific difficulties are appropriately supported. Finally, although individuals with ASD are over-represented in the Criminal Justice System (CJS) as both witnesses (victims) and suspects, current police interviewing models are ineffective in supporting them to provide 'best evidence'.
For people with ASD and their families, research on societal issues and improving the lives of ASD individuals is vital. Yet research of this nature is currently lacking. Most services including health and social care, employment and the justice system are developed to cater for "neurotypical" people, or adapted for those with broad intellectual disability. However little consideration or support is in place for the social and cognitive difficulties that are specific to ASD. If individuals with ASD are to receive appropriate and fair access to services and justice, their difficulties must be better understood and accommodated. This begins with their reporting of relevant information to authorities and services. People with ASD show impairments in socio-cognitive domains, including a lack of insight into their own and others' intentions, as well as 'executive functions' (a set of capacities involving cognitive control, regulation, planning and flexibility). As a result, they experience problems in open-ended social situations where the desired response or type of information required from them needs to be inferred. The proposed project will compare how individuals with and without ASD perform on varying social and open-ended tasks. It builds on my existing work to test 1) how the shifting social contexts and increased task complexity inherent in information-gathering interactions in employment, healthcare and CJS contexts might heighten ASD impairments, and 2) how these can be ameliorated with appropriate support. Furthermore, people with ASD can also have areas of strength, and the research aims to determine how these strengths can be utilised to develop interviewing formats that support their difficulties whilst capitalising on their strengths.
This research will directly inform best practice in HR, health and social care and the CJS, improving access to services and justice for people with ASD. It will also advance theory by providing new insight into how the social and cognitive difficulties (and strengths) of ASD impact upon real life social interactions. Findings will have implications for national organisations, including the Department of Health, Department for Business Innovation and Skills, Home Office, as well as more local groups, for example, potential employers, police interviewers and health and social care professionals. An extensive program of dissemination to both academic and non-academic stakeholders is planned to maximise the research impact with a broad range of key users.</p>

目击证词的提供需要个体监控自身记忆，以给出详实且准确的陈述：报告大概率准确的细节，隐瞒潜在不准确的信息。有研究表明，自闭症个体在提取情景记忆（episodic memories）以及监控记忆准确性两方面均存在困难，这对目击证词而言具有重要影响。本研究招募了30名自闭症个体与33名智商匹配的典型发育（typically developing, TD）参与者，让他们观看一段模拟银行抢劫的视频，随后完成三个阶段的提问任务（并附带信心判断）。第一阶段：参与者自主生成回答的粒度（即细粒度或粗粒度）。第二阶段：参与者回答相同问题，但需同时提供细粒度与粗粒度两种回答。第三阶段：要求参与者从第二阶段的两种回答中选择其一作为最终答案，以最大化准确性而非信息量。提问方式分为两种：社交式（由实验者当面提问）与线上式。两组参与者在准确性与元认知监控（metacognitive monitoring）上均无显著差异，自闭症个体与典型发育者均表现出以下特征：a）强烈偏好报告细粒度细节，即便这会降低准确性；b）当被要求以准确性优先于信息量时，报告的粒度虽仍未达最优，但有所改善；c）能够有效进行准确性监控；d）以社交方式提问时，整体准确性更高。不过，两组在元认知控制上存在细微差异：当提问为社交式时，自闭症目击者的表现差于典型发育者；而在线上提问时则无此差异。上述发现与“自闭症以情景记忆、元认知监控与控制受损为特征”的现有证据相悖。

自闭症谱系障碍（Autism Spectrum Disorder, ASD）在人群中的患病率约为1%，会给患者本人、其家庭及支持服务机构带来诸多日常挑战。本项目将为现有支持自闭症个体的专业方法提供证据基础，并推动其改进。研究将聚焦于当前自闭症群体处于劣势的三类重要信息收集场景。其一，仅约半数自闭症青年曾从事带薪工作——这一比例在各类残疾群体中最低。职业面试中的表现是就业前景的关键决定因素，但自闭症个体的社交、认知与沟通障碍往往使其无法在面试中发挥最佳水平。其二，自闭症个体更易出现特定社交与健康相关问题及共病状况，因此就诊或求助社会护理专业人员的概率更高。然而，由于内省与社交沟通困难，他们往往难以准确传递相关信息，除非针对其特定障碍提供恰当支持。其三，尽管自闭症个体在刑事司法系统（Criminal Justice System, CJS）中作为证人（受害者）与嫌疑人的占比均偏高，但当前的警方访谈模式无法有效帮助他们提供“最佳证据”。

对于自闭症个体及其家庭而言，针对社会议题的研究、改善自闭症群体生活质量的研究至关重要，但目前此类研究仍较为匮乏。包括医疗与社会护理、就业服务、司法系统在内的多数服务体系，均是为“神经典型者（neurotypical）”设计，或是仅针对广泛的智力障碍群体进行了适配，但极少考虑自闭症特有的社交与认知困难，也未提供相应支持。若要让自闭症群体获得公平且恰当的服务与司法救济，我们必须更好地理解其障碍并提供适配方案。这一工作始于他们向权威机构与服务部门传递相关信息的过程。自闭症个体在社会认知领域存在障碍，包括无法洞悉自身与他人的意图，以及执行功能（executive functions，涵盖认知控制、调节、规划与灵活性的一系列能力）受损。因此，在开放式社交场景中，当需要他们推断所需的回应类型或信息类型时，他们往往会遇到困难。

本项目将对比自闭症个体与普通个体在不同社交场景及开放式任务中的表现。本研究基于我已有的工作成果，将验证两个假设：1）就业、医疗护理与刑事司法场景中信息收集互动所固有的动态社交情境与提升的任务复杂度，是否会加重自闭症个体的障碍；2）这类障碍可通过恰当的支持得到何种程度的缓解。此外，自闭症个体也存在优势领域，本研究旨在探索如何利用这些优势，开发既能适配其困难、又能发挥其长处的访谈模式。

本研究将直接为人力资源、医疗与社会护理及刑事司法系统的最佳实践提供参考，改善自闭症群体获取服务与司法救济的途径。同时，本研究将为相关理论发展提供新的洞见，揭示自闭症个体的社交与认知困难（及优势）如何影响真实社交互动。研究结果将对多个国家级机构产生影响，包括卫生部门、商业、创新与技能部、内政部，也将惠及更多地方团体，例如潜在雇主、警方访谈人员与医疗及社会护理专业人员。本项目还计划开展广泛的传播工作，覆盖学术与非学术利益相关方，以最大化研究对各类核心用户群体的影响。