Decontextualised minds: adolescents with autism are less susceptible to the conjunction fallacy than typically developing adolescents.

Morsanyi et al. (2010) asked autistic and typically developing teens to solve simple probability puzzles. The puzzles were designed to catch the conjunction fallacy — the gut feeling that a detailed story sounds more likely than a broad one.

Each teen read short vignettes and picked the most probable ending. The team then counted how often each group fell for the fallacy.

Autistic teens fell for the trick less often than their typical peers. Yet they did not score higher on overall logic; they simply relied less on juicy context.

In plain words: they were harder to fool, but not better at math.

Nevin et al. (2005) saw a similar coolness to context years earlier. They recorded brain waves while autistic kids listened to sentences. The N4 wave — a marker of semantic expectancy — stayed flat, showing the kids did not lean on story context to predict words.

Girardi et al. (2021) pushed the age range upward. Adults with ASD missed hidden timing cues more often than controls. Like the teens in Kinga et al., they seemed less swayed by prior expectations.

Emerson et al. (2025) add a twist: stronger grammar skills predicted less efficient mental effort in autistic learners, the opposite of typical peers. Together these papers paint a picture — autistic thinkers often bypass context, for better or worse.

If your client with autism seems unmoved by "likely" social stories, it may not be inattention. They could be weighing facts without the usual narrative glue. Use clear, rule-based language in instruction and skip persuasive anecdotes that rely on context. When teaching safety or social skills, state odds plainly: "Most kids wait for the walk sign" may land better than a dramatic story about someone who didn’t.