↓ Skip to main content

The benefit of directly comparing autism and schizophrenia for revealing mechanisms of social cognitive impairment

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Neurodevelopmental Disorders, December 2010
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (76th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
10 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
120 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
165 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
connotea
1 Connotea
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
The benefit of directly comparing autism and schizophrenia for revealing mechanisms of social cognitive impairment
Published in
Journal of Neurodevelopmental Disorders, December 2010
DOI 10.1007/s11689-010-9068-x
Pubmed ID
Authors

Noah J. Sasson, Amy E. Pinkham, Kimberly L. H. Carpenter, Aysenil Belger

Abstract

Autism and schizophrenia share a history of diagnostic conflation that was not definitively resolved until the publication of the DSM-III in 1980. Though now recognized as heterogeneous disorders with distinct developmental trajectories and dissociative features, much of the early nosological confusion stemmed from apparent overlap in certain areas of social dysfunction. In more recent years, separate but substantial literatures have accumulated for autism and schizophrenia demonstrating that abnormalities in social cognition directly contribute to the characteristic social deficits of both disorders. The current paper argues that direct comparison of social cognitive impairment can highlight shared and divergent mechanisms underlying pathways to social dysfunction, a process that can provide significant clinical benefit by informing the development of tailored treatment efforts. Thus, while the history of diagnostic conflation between autism and schizophrenia may have originated in similarities in social dysfunction, the goal of direct comparisons is not to conflate them once again but rather to reveal distinctions that illuminate disorder-specific mechanisms and pathways that contribute to social cognitive impairment.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 10 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 165 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 4 2%
United Kingdom 3 2%
Australia 1 <1%
Germany 1 <1%
Spain 1 <1%
France 1 <1%
Unknown 154 93%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 43 26%
Researcher 25 15%
Student > Master 16 10%
Student > Bachelor 15 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 13 8%
Other 27 16%
Unknown 26 16%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 78 47%
Medicine and Dentistry 20 12%
Neuroscience 12 7%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 9 5%
Linguistics 3 2%
Other 10 6%
Unknown 33 20%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 28 November 2019.
All research outputs
#6,506,570
of 25,654,806 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Neurodevelopmental Disorders
#243
of 514 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#44,172
of 192,012 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Neurodevelopmental Disorders
#4
of 6 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,654,806 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 74th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 514 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.0. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 52% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 192,012 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 6 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 2 of them.