10 years of Bayesian theories of autism: A comprehensive review.

This study reviewed 10 years of research on a theory suggesting autistic people's brains process information differently - specifically that they rely less on past experiences to interpret new information. The results were mixed, with most studies finding no clear differences. However, some studies showed autistic people may learn differently during experiments. The researchers found many studies had small sample sizes and used different methods, making it hard to draw firm conclusions.

This systematic review examined 10 years of research testing the influential Bayesian theory of autism, which proposes that autistic individuals are less influenced by their brain's prior beliefs about the environment. The review analyzed studies comparing diagnostic groups or autistic traits regarding Bayesian inference processes. Results were highly mixed, with a slight majority finding no differences in prior integration between groups. Studies showed that priors developed during experiments exhibited reduced influences more frequently than previously acquired priors, with evidence for learning differences between groups.

The review highlighted methodological concerns including low statistical power and inconsistent approaches across studies.

The mixed evidence suggests clinicians should be cautious about assuming universal differences in predictive processing in autism. Focus may be better placed on individual learning differences rather than broad Bayesian processing deficits. These findings highlight the need for more rigorous research methodologies in autism studies.

Low statistical power across included studies and inconsistent methodological approaches limit the reliability of findings. The mixed results and methodological concerns make it difficult to draw definitive conclusions about Bayesian processing differences in autism.

Ten years ago, Pellicano and Burr published one of the most influential articles in the study of autism spectrum disorders, linking them to aberrant Bayesian inference processes in the brain. In particular, they proposed that autistic individuals are less influenced by their brains' prior beliefs about the environment. In this systematic review, we investigate if this theory is supported by the experimental evidence. To that end, we collect all studies which included comparisons across diagnostic groups or autistic traits and categorise them based on the investigated priors.

Our results are highly mixed, with a slight majority of studies finding no difference in the integration of Bayesian priors. We find that priors developed during the experiments exhibited reduced influences more frequently than priors acquired previously, with various studies providing evidence for learning differences between participant groups. Finally, we focus on the methodological and computational aspects of the included studies, showing low statistical power and often inconsistent approaches. Based on our findings, we propose guidelines for future research.