Performance of children with autism on the Embedded Figures Test: a closer look at a popular task.
The Embedded Figures Test does not guarantee superior local visual search in high-functioning autistic children.
01Research in Context
What this study did
The team gave the Embedded Figures Test to high-functioning children with autism and to matched peers without autism.
They recorded how fast and how accurately each child found the hidden shapes.
What they found
Both groups scored the same on speed and accuracy.
The expected autism advantage for spotting tiny details never showed up.
How this fits with other research
Brereton et al. (2006) and Geurts et al. (2008) earlier reported faster, more accurate hidden-figure scores for autistic children.
Muth et al. (2014) pooled many studies and still found a small edge for autism on this task.
Alonso Soriano et al. (2015) ran an automated version and also saw no group difference, backing up the null result.
The clash looks big, but most positive studies counted incorrect attempts or used very young kids. The 2011 and 2015 papers used stricter accuracy and RT measures with older children, so the advantage may simply be smaller and easier to miss.
Why it matters
If you test visual detail skills with the Embedded Figures Test, do not assume a child with autism will always outperform peers. Use multiple tasks and watch for small, subtle gains rather than large, obvious ones.
Want CEUs on This Topic?
The ABA Clubhouse has 60+ free CEUs — live every Wednesday. Ethics, supervision & clinical topics.
Join Free →Pair the EFT with a second visuo-spatial task before labeling any child as having a detail advantage.
02At a glance
03Original abstract
The Embedded Figures Test assesses weak central coherence and individuals with autism are commonly assumed to perform superiorly; however, the evidence for this claim is somewhat mixed. Here, two large (N = 45 and 62) samples of high-functioning children (6-16 years) with autism spectrum disorder performed similarly to typically-developing children on accuracy and reaction time measures; this could not be attributed to insufficient power. Inconsistent past findings are most likely due to methodological and analysis techniques, as well as heterogeneity in central coherence within autism spectrum disorders. While this task has been useful in establishing weak central coherence as a cognitive theory in autism, inconsistent past findings and its inability to disentangle global and local processing suggest that it should be used with caution in the future.
Journal of autism and developmental disorders, 2011 · doi:10.1007/s10803-011-1182-4