Social and pragmatic deficits in autism: cognitive or affective?

Glenn (1988) looked at two big ideas about why autistic people struggle with social talk. One idea says the brain thinks differently. The other says feelings are muted.

The paper pulls together early studies on eye gaze, turn-taking, and jokes. It asks which idea predicts the exact mix of strong and weak social skills seen in autism.

The author sides with the cognitive story. He shows that many social gaps line up with thinking-style quirks, not flat emotions.

Yet he admits the affective camp has merit. Some autistic kids do show less shared joy, but the pattern is too patchy to be the main driver.

Mace et al. (1990) filmed preschoolers and found autistic children shared fewer smiles during joint play. This supports the affective side, but only for very young kids.

Yates et al. (2020) leap ahead 32 years. Brain studies now back a blended EP-M/STORM model, not the simple broken-mirror tale. The field has moved past either-or.

Kunda et al. (2011) update the cognitive track in a different way. They show many autistic people think in pictures, giving teachers a concrete cue: use visuals, not extra emotion prompts.

You no longer have to pick a team. Use cognitive tools—visual schedules, clear rules, perspective-taking drills—and stay alert to flat affect. Check both lanes, then tailor. If a learner rarely smiles back, add brief affect sharing targets. If they hug too hard, teach spatial boundaries with color floor spots. One size never fits autism.