ArticleMolecular autism2026
Predicting emotional valence in autism: a preregistered study in the Bayesian Brain framework.
Article in Molecular autism, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAutism spectrum disorder (ASD) affects social interaction, communication and behavioural flexibility. Recent theories grounded in the Bayesian Brain Framework propose that autistic individuals process environmental uncertainty differently, overweighting volatility when updating predictions about the world. However, the robustness of these predictive processing differences and their relevance to core symptoms remains unclear.
methodsLawson and colleagues [1] reported a tendency to overestimate environmental volatility in autistic adults based on belief states extracted using a Hierarchical Gaussian Filter. We extended their paradigm to a domain central to the autistic experience: rather than distinguishing houses from faces, participants detected valence in emotional facial expressions. Preregistered hypotheses were evaluated using Bayesian linear mixed models based on data of 22 autistic and 22 non-autistic participants.
resultsDespite using an identical computational model to extract belief states, we did not find robust differences between autistic and non-autistic adults, though autistic participants showed a non-credible trend towards increased processing of phasic volatility. Largely comparable probabilistic associative learning was also reflected in response times and pupil sizes. LIMITATIONS: While participants reacted faster to expected than unexpected trials in the beginning, this effect decreased over the course of the experiment; thus, possibly indicating that the individual blocks of stable cue-outcome associations were too short.
conclusionsWe were unable to find credible differences in environmental volatility and learning rate updates using a task designed to probe a key autistic difficulty, facial emotion recognition. The current results call into question the generalisability and clinical relevance of prior findings.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.