Contributions of face processing, social anhedonia and mentalizing to the expression of social autistic-like traits.

Introduction: Quantitative autistic-like traits (QATs) are a constellation of traits that mirror those of clinical autism and are thought to share the same mechanisms as the condition. There is great interest in identifying the genetic and neurobiological basis of QATs, but progress is hindered by the composite nature of these clinically based constructs. Social QATs are defined according to the diagnostic criteria for autism, comprising multiple potential neural mechanisms that may contribute to varying degrees. The objective of this study was to decompose social QATs into more specific constructs, in line with the Research Domain Criteria (RDoC). We chose constructs with trait-like properties and known or suggested significance for autistic social function: (1) social anhedonia, (2) prosopagnosia (face blindness), and (3) mentalizing (attributing mental states to images of eyes). We hypothesized that these constructs may all contribute to observed variance in social QATs. Methods: We recruited 148 adults with a broad range of QATs (mean age 37.9 years, range 18-69; 50% female; 5.4% autistic) to an experimental behavioral study conducted online. We estimated social QATs using the social factor of the Comprehensive Autistic Traits Inventory. We used the Oxford Face Matching Task and the Reading the Mind in the Eyes Test to measure face matching ability and mentalizing, respectively. Social anhedonia traits were measured with the Anticipatory and Consummatory Interpersonal Pleasure Scale, and prosopagnosic traits with the 20-item Prosopagnosia Index. A combination of frequentist and Bayesian statistics was used to test the social constructs as predictors of social QATs. Results: We found that social anhedonic traits, prosopagnosic traits, and face matching performance were likely predictors of social QATs, whereas mentalizing showed limited contribution. Conclusion: The findings support prosopagnosic and anhedonic traits, but not mentalizing deficits, as dimensional predictors of individual differences in social function across the autistic spectrum. Further, the study strongly suggests that social reward systems and face processing networks play significant and independent roles in autistic-like social function. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]