Reward-based decision making and electrodermal responding by young children with autism spectrum disorders during a gambling task.

Ni Chuileann et al. (2013) watched young children play a simple card game. Some kids had autism. Some did not.

The game looked like a kids' version of the Iowa Gambling Task. Pick a card, win or lose points. The decks were rigged so some were better long-term.

While the kids played, the team measured skin conductance. They also asked, 'Which decks are good?' to test if the child knew the rules.

Both groups picked the 'good' decks about the same. Kids with autism, however, could not explain why those decks were better.

Their skin showed bigger jumps when they got a reward. The larger those jumps, the more repetitive behaviors and anxiety parents reported at home.

Reed et al. (2012) saw a similar split: children with autism matched reward rates like typical kids, yet were thrown off by extra lights and sounds. Together, the studies show reward sense stays, but understanding the rules or ignoring noise can fail.

Kinard et al. (2020) moved the same gambling logic into teens and fMRI. They found odd brain spikes only when social rewards were at stake. Susan's skin-surge finding in young children lines up: both point to a jolted reward system, just measured differently.

Li et al. (2017) offers a bright spot. They paired faces with prizes and found that kids with autism still looked faster at rewarded faces. So reward can steer attention even when the child cannot say why.

You can shape good choices in kids with autism, but do not assume they can tell you the rule. Check for hidden noises or lights that might grab their attention. If a child's hands get sweaty when he wins, watch for rigid or anxious behavior later that day. Use visual cues or scripts to teach the 'why' behind the choice.