What Can Performance in the IEDS Task Tell Us About Attention Shifting in Clinical Groups?
Poor IEDS scores in autism reflect slow learning from mistakes, not a shifting deficit.
01Research in Context
What this study did
Researchers ran a computer task called IEDS on autistic adults. The task asks people to shift attention when rules change. A math model then split errors into two buckets: trouble shifting focus or slow learning from mistakes.
What they found
The model showed poor scores came from weak punishment learning, not from a broken attention switch. In plain words, autistic people noticed the new rule later because negative feedback taught them more slowly. Their ability to shift was fine once they learned the rule.
How this fits with other research
This updates Ozonoff et al. (2004). That team also saw low IEDS scores and blamed frontal-lobe shifting problems. The new model says the old view was incomplete; the real issue is how fast people learn from “wrong” feedback.
It also echoes Skripkauskaite et al. (2021). They tracked eye moves to social pictures and found autistic adults could shift quickly if the prior picture vanished first. Both studies say, “Shifting works; other factors slow the response.”
Finally, it extends Weiss et al. (2001). The older paper claimed a shifting delay in high-functioning autism. The 2021 data suggest that delay was actually slower punishment learning, not a core switching deficit.
Why it matters
If you give an IEDS test, low scores no longer equal “can’t shift attention.” Look at teaching history instead. Boost immediate, clear feedback and extra practice after errors. This small tweak may lift performance without targeting executive skills.
Want CEUs on This Topic?
The ABA Clubhouse has 60+ free CEUs — live every Wednesday. Ethics, supervision & clinical topics.
Join Free →After each error on a shift task, give instant verbal feedback and one repeat trial before moving on.
02At a glance
03Original abstract
The Intra-Extra-dimensional set shift task (IEDS) is a widely used test of learning and attention, believed to be sensitive to aspects of executive function. The task proceeds through a number of stages, and it is generally claimed that patterns of errors across stages can be used to discriminate between reduced attention switching and more general reductions in rates of learning. A number of papers have used the IEDS task to argue for specific attention shifting difficulties in Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD) and Schizophrenia, however, it remains unclear how well the IEDS really differentiates between reduced attention shifting and other causes of impaired performance. To address this issue, we introduce a simple computational model of performance in the IEDS task, designed to separate the competing effects of attention shifting and general learning rate. We fit the model to data from ASD and comparison individuals matched on age and IQ, as well as to data from four previous studies which used the IEDS task. Model fits do not show consistent evidence for reductions in attention shifting rates in ASD and Schizophrenia. Instead, we find performance is better explained by differences in learning rate, particularly from punishment, which we show correlates with IQ. We, therefore, argue that the IEDS task is not a good measure of attention shifting in clinical groups. LAY SUMMARY: The Intra-Extra-Dimensional Set shift task (IEDS) is often given to autistic individuals, who tend to make more errors relative to comparison groups. This higher error rate is taken to mean that autistic individuals struggle with attention control. Our computational model of the IEDS shows that the performance of ASD and some other clinical groups can be explained instead by differences in learning rate, rather than differences in attention control.
Autism research : official journal of the International Society for Autism Research, 2021 · doi:10.1002/aur.2484