Search

We tested the potential for Gazefinder eye-tracking to support early autism identification, including feasible use with infants, and preliminary concurrent validity of trial-level gaze data against clinical assessment scores. We embedded the ~ 2-min 'Scene 1S4' protocol within a comprehensive clinical assessment for 54 consecutively-referred, clinically-indicated infants (prematurity-corrected age 9–14 months). Alongside % tracking rate as a broad indicator of feasible assessment/data capture, we report infant gaze data to pre-specified regions of interest (ROI) across four trial types and associations with scores on established clinical/behavioural tools. Most infants tolerated Gazefinder eye-tracking well, returning high overall % tracking rate. As a group, infants directed more gaze towards social vs. non-social (or more vs. less socially-salient) ROIs within trials. Behavioural autism features were correlated with increased gaze towards non-social/geometry (vs. social/people) scenes. No associations were found for gaze directed to ROIs within other stimulus types. Notably, there were no associations between developmental/cognitive ability or adaptive behaviour with gaze towards any ROI. Gazefinder assessment seems highly feasible with clinically-indicated infants, and the people vs. geometry stimuli show concurrent predictive validity for behavioural autism features. Aggregating data across the ~ 2-min autism identification protocol might plausibly offer greater utility than stimulus-level analysis alone. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Debate has long surrounded whether temperament and personality are distinct sets of individual differences or are rather two sides of the same coin. To the extent that there are differences, it could indicate important developmental insights concerning the mechanisms responsible for linking traits with outcomes. One way to test this is to examine the joint and incremental predictive validity of temperament and personality in the same individuals across time. Using a longitudinal sample spanning 3 decades starting at infancy and followed up to 37 years old (N = 7081), we ran a series of Bayesian generalized linear models with measures of childhood temperament and adult-based personality to predict outcomes in several life domains. Results indicated that while each set of individual differences were often related to the same outcomes, there were instances in which temperament provided incremental validity above adult personality, ranging from 2 to 10% additional variance explained. Personality in childhood explained the most variance for outcomes such as cognitive ability and educational attainment whereas personality performed best for outcomes such as health status, substance use, and most internalizing outcomes. These findings indicate childhood and adulthood assessments of personality are not redundant and that a lifespan approach is needed to understand fully understand life outcomes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Research agrees that self-reported measures of time spent with social media (TSM) show poor convergent validity, because they correlate modestly with equivalent objective digital trace measures. This experience sampling study among 159 adolescents (12,617 self-reports) extends this work by examining the comparative predictive validity of self-reported and digital trace measures of TSM, that is, the extent to which self-reported and digital trace measures of TSM correspond in their effects on self-esteem, well-being, and friendship closeness. Using an N = 1 method of analysis, we investigated the correspondence on a between-person, within-person, and person-specific level. Although our results confirmed the poor convergent validity of self-reported TSM reported earlier, we found that self-reports of TSM had comparable predictive validity to digital trace measures on all three levels. Because comparative predictive validity of self-reported TSM is crucial for investigating social media effects, our results have important implications for future research using self-reported TSM. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]