Increased openness to external influences in adolescents with intellectual disability: Insights from an experimental study on social judgments.

Ramos-Cabo et al. (2021) asked 48 teens with intellectual disability to judge short social stories. Half the stories had hidden cues that pushed the teens toward harsher or nicer ratings.

The team also tested 48 typical teens of the same age and 48 younger kids without disability. They wanted to see who changed their ratings after the hidden cues.

Teens with ID swung to the extremes. They gave much harsher or much nicer scores right after the hidden cue. Typical teens stayed steady. The ID group acted like children four years younger.

Even non-social cues, such as color borders, swayed their choices.

Raspail et al. (2025) helps explain why. They show that poor inhibition in mild ID links to mis-reading faces and intent. Weak brakes let outside cues rush in.

Beaurenaut et al. (2024) used a similar lab game with autistic adults and found no extra sway. This flags that the jumpy judgment pattern is tied more to ID than to autism traits.

Honigfeld et al. (2012) and van Rijn et al. (2008) map social deficits in sex-chromosome disorders. Together the four papers sketch a line: when executive skills lag, social cues hijack choices.

If you run social-skills groups, expect teens with ID to echo the last thing they hear. Preview tough scenes, teach a stop-and-check routine, and rehearse saying “Is that a fact or just a feeling?” before they post or speak.