Sensory over responsivity, anxiety and autistic traits

Abstract Commented [MOU1]: Well structure – have another look once

you have made revisions to the draft

Background: An increasing number of studies have found a relationship between sensory

over responsivity (SOR), anxiety and autism with high levels in one variable normally

correlating with high levels in another variable (Mazurek et al 2013). They haven't however

looked at the predictive nature of autism and anxiety on SOR.

Aim: To assess whether there is a relationship between SOR and anxiety/ autistic traits and to

see whether anxiety and autistic traits in the general population can predict levels of sensory

over responsivity in individuals.

Method: In order to measure for SOR, the Glasgow Sensory Questionnaire (GSQ) was used

along with a computer based visual task (CVT) measuring visual temporal event structure

coding using a perceptual simultaneity paradigm programmed on SuperLab. Anxiety was

measured using the State Trait Anxiety Inventory (STAI) , and autistic traits were measured

using the Autism Spectrum Quotient (AQ). Relationship between GSQ scores and AQ

scores/STAI scores were looked at independently separate from the relationship between

CVT scores and AQ scores/STAI scores.

Results: Only AQ total was found to be a significant predictor of scores on the GSQ. AQ

scores were able to predict two domains within the GSQ (vestibular and proprioceptive).

Within the AQ, "attention to detail" was the only domain which was found to be a significant

predictor of scores on the GSQ

Conclusions: We can conclude that autistic traits may in fact influence or predict certain

domains of SOS but not others, which is similar to previous findings (Robertson & Simmons
Sensory over responsivity, anxiety and autistic traits

2013). Anxiety on the other hand was not found to influence SOR. This may be due to

participants not scoring very high on the GSQ, with an average of 26/84, showing a very low

SOR
Sensory over responsivity, anxiety and autistic traits
Introduction
Sensory over responsivity
Sensory over responsivity (SOR) is when an individual exhibits an intense automatic
response to sensory stimuli in comparison to that which is typically expected (Miller et al.,
2007). These responses may be exhibited when exposed to any type of sensory stimuli such
as touch, sound, visual or taste. Responses can include a mixture of fear, discomfort,
aversion, withdrawal, irritability or mood upsets (Lane et al 2010) and can be quite impairing
to an individual (Kinnealey and Fuiek, 1999). Individuals with sensory over responsivity also
show an increase in ability to make sensory discriminations which is where they are able to
discriminate a stimuli based on one or various aspects, which is superior to that of a typical
individual (Ward et al, 2017). These sensory discriminations can take place in either a single
or a number of sensory modalities, with the responses being more pronounced in some
modalities compared to others (Ward et al, 2017). The Glasgow Sensory Questionnaire
(Robertson & Simmons, 2012), has been widely used to assess abnormal sensory functioning,
including sensory over responsivity and sensory under responsivity.
Although sensory processing difficulties are not considered as being an official diagnostic
factor for autism, a growing body of research has suggested the presence of sensory
processing difficulties in autistic individuals (Kern et al 2006).
Autism and sensory processing
Commented [MOU2]: You have covered a very broad and
complex literature in your introduction, which is particularly
impressive given that you didn’t take the autism module. The
problem at the moment, however is in how you are organizing the
information. You present some really crucial information right
towards the end of the introduction that would make far more sense
earlier on. What I suggest is that before you re-read the introduction,
you plan it our using bullet points – what needs to be included where
in order to create a coherent flow and story that will lead you clearly
to your research question and predictions. At the moment, some of
the really key points are getting lost/confused, which will affect your
mark.
Make sure you’ve covered the basics about triad of impairments and
inclusion of sensory in DSM5 (book chapter?). Make sure you don’t
have lots of short paragraphs as that makes things seem list like. You
also need to link the different sections more clearly. You need to
make the rationale for including the task far clearer
We need to have a look at the results
Commented [MOU3]: Do people tend to show this effect within
a single modality? And if so, do they only show enhanced
discrimination within that same modality
Commented [MOU4]: See comment above about DSM5
Commented [MOU5]: There are some very good points in this
section, but think about where it would be best placed – could it help
you to link the section about autism and then that section about
SOR, autism and anxiety?
Sensory over responsivity, anxiety and autistic traits

Autism is a lifelong, neurodevelopment disorder which is characterised by difficulties in

social interaction and social skills and involves the use of repetitive behaviors and actions

(Mazurek and Petroski, 2014).
The clinical description of autism as characterised by the DSM-5 is defined by twoa triad of
Commented [MOU6]: Have a look at how autism is diagnosed
(e.g. ICD-10/DSM-5). Commonly, it is characterized by a triad of
impairments. DSM5, however, introduced the sensory symptoms
into the diagnostic criteria, so that would be a very cleat link to your
study

domains;impairments; impaired social interaction, impaired social communication behavior You should not have a paragraph that is just a single sentence

and the presence of restricted and repetitive patterns of behaviors, interests, or activities

(Carrington, 2016). These three domains also have a number of subdomains, such as for

example social communication being made up by impaired nonverbal communication,

difficulties in developing and sustaining relationships, and having a lack of emotional

reciprocity (Carrington, 2016). Sensory related issues have recently been introduced as a

diagnostic criteria for autism, with hyper or hypo reactivity to sensory input being a

subdomain for the repetitive/restricted patterns of behavior domain. One measure which has

been widely used to measure autistic traits in clinical and non-clinical samples is the Autism -

spectrum quotient (AQ) published in 2001 by Simon Baron - Cohen. The AQ has been found

to strongly positively correlate with the GSQ, in both participants with high and low autistic

traits (Robertson and Simmons, 2013).

(Grapel, Cicchetti and Volkmar, 2015).

Although sensory processing difficulties are not considered as being an official diagnostic

factor for autism, a growing body of research has suggested the presence of sensory

processing difficulties in autistic individuals (Kern et al 2006). Commented [MOU7]: See comment above about DSM5
Sensory over responsivity, anxiety and autistic traits

Crane, Goddard and Pring (2009) looked at the levels of sensory processing in adults with

autism using the Adult/Adolescent Sensory profile which is a 60 item self-report Commented [MOU8]: What is this? Think about how your
order the information within this paragraph, as you go on to partially
answer this question a little later on
questionnaire which measures an individual’s response to sensory events which occur in their

daily life. These autistic individualsand were then compared them to a comparison group

consisting of the general population. Results found that abnormalities in sensory processing

were present in a large number of individuals in the ASD condition with 94.4% of the sample

reporting extreme levels of sensory processing in at least one sensory quadrant as measured

by the Adult/Adolescent Sensory profile (AASP). The quadrants assessed with the AASP

measure are; low registration, sensory sensation seeking, sensory sensitivity and sensation

avoiding. "Sensory sensitivity" and "sensation avoiding", indicate low levels of neurological

thresholds, and are good indicators of levels of sensory over responsivity. The study reported

significant positive within group correlations for scores in both the "sensory sensitivity" and

"sensation avoidance" domains, in the ASD group but not the comparison group, showing Commented [MOU9]: So you mean that these two variables are
correlated but only in the ASD group?

that autism is in fact highly related to sensory over responsivity.

Similarly, Tavassoli et al (2014), investigated whether adults with autism reported higher

levels of sensory over responsivity compared to adults in a non-clinical sample. Autistic traits

Measures were assessedmeasured using the AQ , the Ravens Matrices and SOR was assessed
using the Sensory ProcessingOver-Responsivity Scale (Miller and Schoen, 2012) which is a
self-reported questionnaire which measures an individual’s responses to sensory input in a
Commented [MOU10]: You will need to explain what this is –
see my comment above about how you could potentially introduce it
earlier.
Formatted: Not Highlight
Commented [MOU11]: These measures will need references.
Again, what is the sensory processing scale? A tasl? A
questionnaire? Who completes it?

number of sensory domains such as touch, smell, taste and proprioception). A direct positive

correlationrelationship was found between the number of autistic traits in an individual and Commented [MOU12]: Do you mean correlation?

their scores for sensory over responsivity. The higher the autistic traits reported, the higher

the levels of sensory over responsivity. This study looked at each individual sensory modality

assessed rather than just sensory over responsivity scores overall and reported a positive
Sensory over responsivity, anxiety and autistic traits

correlation between sensory over responsivity and autism in every modality assessed (vision,

hearing, touch, smell, taste and proprioception) for the ASD group but not the control group. Commented [MOU13]: Do you mean that they had higher
scores than a control group? And/or that the correlation was
observed in each modality?
These results show us that it is important to view each modality separately rather than

viewing sensory over responsivity as a whole, and is different from the previous study which

only reports an overall total score of sensory sensitivity.

These studies have shown that there is a clear relationship between autism and higher levels

of sensory over responsivity in a number of sensory modalities. The same has also been

found for autistic traits in the general population.

Autistic traits in non-clinical samples Commented [MOU14]: Although the use of subheadings is a
good feature if your introduction, you need to make sure that the
sections are linked. For example, why are you now telling me about
autism? I know that you make this link later on, but it seems like a
very sudden and unclear change of topic.

Autism was once considered as only being present in a clinical sample, completely

distinguishable from the general population (Emily et al, 2015). However recent evidence has

suggested that autistic traits lie on a continuum which are normally distributed across the

general population (Ewa et al, 2015). These findings open up the possibility to measure and

observe autistic traits which exist in non-clinical samples and not just constrict us to clinical

samples. One measure which has been widely used to look at autsitic traits within the general

population is the Autism - spectrum quotient (AQ) published in 2001 by Simon Baron -

Cohen.

Relationship between autistic traits and sensory sensitivity Commented [MOU15]: Don’t you already have a section about
this? If the only difference is that you are now talking about traits in
the general population, I still think these sections could go together.
Sensory over responsivity, anxiety and autistic traits

Previous research has examined the relationship between autistic traits in the general

population and sensory sensitivity. Robertson and Simmons (2012) looked at the over and

under responsivity responses to sensory stimuli in the general population. They used the

Glasgow Sensory Questionnaire and the Autism Quotient to assess sensory sensitivity and

autistic traits, and results showed that individuals with higher levels of autistic traits were

much more likely to display atypical sensory responsiveness. This included both hyper

sensitivity which is an overreaction to the sensory stimuli and hypo sensitivity which in

comparison is a reduced response to sensory stimuli (Ward et al. 2017) Moreover, Horder et

al. (2014), also used self-reported measures to assess autistic traits and sensory sensitivity,

and found an association between autistic traits and unusual sensory experiences. However

both these studies did not distinguish between the effects of autistic traits on hyper and hypo

sensitivity, so we are not able to differentiate and assess the direct relationship and effect of

autistic traits on sensory over responsivity from this study.

Autistic traits in non-clinical samples Commented [MOU16]: Although the use of subheadings is a
good feature if your introduction, you need to make sure that the
sections are linked. For example, why are you now telling me about
autism? I know that you make this link later on, but it seems like a
very sudden and unclear change of topic.

Autism is a lifelong, neurodevelopment disorder which is characterised by difficulties in

social interaction and social skills and involves the use of repetitive behaviors and actions
(Mazurek and Petroski, 2014).
Commented [MOU17]: Have a look at how autism is diagnosed
(e.g. ICD-10/DSM-5). Commonly, it is characterized by a triad of
impairments. DSM5, however, introduced the sensory symptoms
into the diagnostic criteria, so that would be a very cleat link to your
study

You should not have a paragraph that is just a single sentence

Sensory over responsivity, anxiety and autistic traits

Autism was once considered as only being present in a clinical sample, completely

distinguishable from the general population (Emily et al, 2015). However recent evidence has

suggested that autistic traits lie on a continuum which are normally distributed across the

general population (Ewa et al, 2015). These findings open up the possibility to measure and

observe autistic traits which exist in non-clinical samples and not just constrict us to clinical

samples. One measure which has been widely used to look at autsitic traits within the general

population is the Autism - spectrum quotient (AQ) published in 2001 by Simon Baron -

Cohen.

Sensory Over Responsivity, anxiety and autism Commented [MOU18]: As above, you need to link into this
section – in particular, why is anxiety also important?

SOR, anxiety and autism have been mentioned together in a number of studies. Mazurek et al Commented [MOU19]: See comment above about sensory
symptoms

(2013) looked at toddlers with ASD, and found that they experience high rates of anxiety

alongside high rates of sensory processing problems which involved sensory over

responsivity and sensory under responsivity. This suggests that SOR, anxiety and autism are

interrelated with possible common underlying mechanisms. Furthermore, Green, Ben-Sasson,

Soto and Carter (2012) examined the relationship between anxiety and sensory over

responsivity symptoms in children with ASD. They found that sensory over responsivity

remained stable during the year the study was conducted in, however anxiety increased

significantly. SOR , was found to positively predict changes in anxiety more than the severity

of autism showing a strong link between the two. suggesting that SOR is able to predict the

later development of anxiety. Commented [MOU20]: This needs unpacking more – at the
moment the claim you (or they!) are making does not seem
supported.

These studies show that there is a clear relationship between sensory over responsivity,

anxiety and autism with all three factors being interlinked, and emphasises the importance of

investigating causality between all three variables. We will look at further studies which have Commented [MOU21]: Is there any evidence linking SOR and
anxiety independently of autism?
Sensory over responsivity, anxiety and autistic traits

looked at the direct relationships between SOR and autism/autistic traits and SOR and

anxiety.

Autism and sensory processing Commented [MOU22]: There are some very good points in this
section, but think about where it would be best placed – could it help
you to link the section about autism and then that section about
SOR, autism and anxiety?

Although sensory processing difficulties are not considered as being an official diagnostic

factor for autism, a growing body of research has suggested the presence of sensory

processing difficulties in autistic individuals (Kern et al 2006). Commented [MOU23]: See comment above about DSM5

Crane, Goddard and Pring (2009) looked at the levels of sensory processing in adults with

autism using the Adult/Adolescent Sensory profile and compared them to a comparison group Commented [MOU24]: What is this? Think about how your
order the information within this paragraph, as you go on to partially
answer this question a little later on
consisting of the general population. Results found that abnormalities in sensory processing

were present in a large number of individuals in the ASD condition with 94.4% of the sample

reporting extreme levels of sensory processing in at least one sensory quadrant as measured

by the Adult/Adolescent Sensory profile (AASP). The quadrants assessed with the AASP

measure are; low registration, sensory sensation seeking, sensory sensitivity and sensation

avoiding. "Sensory sensitivity" and "sensation avoiding", indicate low levels of neurological

thresholds, and are good indicators of levels of sensory over responsivity. The study reported

significant positive within group correlations for scores in both the "sensory sensitivity" and

"sensation avoidance" domains, in the ASD group, showing that autism is in fact highly Commented [MOU25]: So you mean that these two variables
are correlated but only in the ASD group?

related to sensory over responsivity.

Similarly, Tavassoli et al (2014), investigated whether adults with autism reported higher

levels of sensory over responsivity compared to adults in a non-clinical sample. Measures
were assessed using the AQ, the Ravens Matrices and the Sensory Processing Scale. A direct
Commented [MOU26]: You will need to explain what this is –
see my comment above about how you could potentially introduce it
earlier.
Commented [MOU27]: These measures will need references.
Again, what is the sensory processing scale? A tasl? A
questionnaire? Who completes it?
Sensory over responsivity, anxiety and autistic traits

positive relationship was found between the number of autistic traits in an individual and Commented [MOU28]: Do you mean correlation?

their scores for sensory over responsivity. The higher the autistic traits reported, the higher

the levels of sensory over responsivity. This study looked at each individual sensory modality

assessed rather than just sensory over responsivity scores overall and reported sensory over

responsivity in every modality assessed (vision, hearing, touch, smell, taste and

proprioception) for the ASD group. These results show us that it is important to view each Commented [MOU29]: Do you mean that they had higher
scores than a control group? And/or that the correlation was
observed in each modality?
modality separately rather than viewing sensory over responsivity as a whole, and is different

from the previous study which only reports an overall total score of sensory sensitivity.

These studies have shown that there is a clear relationship between autism and higher levels

of sensory over responsivity in a number of sensory modalities. We will now look at vision as

an independent measure of SOR. Commented [MOU30]: Why?

Autism and enhanced visual functioning Commented [MOU31]: Placement of section (and does it need
its own heading)?

One of the sensory modalities which has been frequently looked at is the visual modality.

Individuals with autism tend to display heightened perceptual abilities in visual search tasks

(Jospeh et al., 2009), figure detection (Joliffe and Baron-Cohen, 1977) and visual

discrimination tasks (Plaisted et al, 1998). Samson, Mottron, Soulieres, and Zeffiro (2012)

looked into why adults with autism have enhanced visual functioning by using a quantitative

meta-analysis of functional imaging studies. They found that there was more activity in

certain parts of the brain associated with visual processing in individuals with autism

compared to a typical adult, giving clear experimental evidence to support this heightened

visual ability in autistic individuals.

Sensory over responsivity, anxiety and autistic traits

Another study by Sudgen, Simmons and McGonigle (2018) investigated the relationship

between autistic traits and sensory processing by looking at the sound modality and using the

Autism Quotient to measure autistic traits. They however, found no significant correlations

between AQ scores and sensory processing in their chosen domain. Although it is important

to point out that this study only had a sample of 23 students so larger sample sizes may have

been needed for detection of a correlation. This study also only focused on a single sensory

modality, and excluded all other sensory domains, which is why it is important to further

independently investigate the other sensory domains including vision. Commented [MOU32]: It’s not really clear why you are
including this when your heading says you are focusing on vision.

Enhanced perceptual functioning model

Mottron, Dawson, Soulieres, Hubert and Burack (2006) proposed the idea of an “Enhanced

Perceptual Functioning” model which looks at trying to understand perceptual functioning in

autistic individuals. The model attempts to account for superior functioning in the visual and

auditory modalities in individuals with autism and can be supported by a number of studies.
This superior visual ability can be linked to SOR as SOR is characterised by responses to
sensory stimuli which are more intense, and it may be this increased intensity which allows
Commented [MOU33]: Why are you telling me about this?
Does it link to sensory features? In most of this section, your are
presenting evidence of superior performance ( which is all relevant
to EPF), but not linking it into your argument about SOR.
Formatted: Font: 12 pt

for autistic individuals to show greater performance When looking at the visual modality,

individuals with autism have been reported to have improved performance on tasks which

involve the detection of visual elements when compared to typically developing individuals

(Plaisted et al., 1999; O’Riordan et al., 2001; Caron et al., 2004; Pellicano et al., 2005).

This improved performance has been linked to heightened SOR.

Sensory over responsivity, anxiety and autistic traits

A study by Caron, Mottron, Berthiaume and Dawson (2006), investigated the concept of a

visuospatial peak in autistic individuals which is where individuals show superior ability to Commented [MOU34]: You will need to explain what you
mean by this.

analyse, represent and mentally manipulate objectss which is when the recognition of . They

assessed their performance on a number of tasks measuring perceptual functioning involving

spatial visualisation ability, visual search, perceptual discrimination, long-term visual

memory and visual motor abilities. Overall they found that individuals with ASD

demonstrated a constant level of performance within these tasks and performed higher in

comparison to a control group.

Individuals with autism show greater performance on long exposure and short exposure

hierarchical tasks in which they have to differentiate targets from surrounding task-irrelevant

stimuli (Mottron et al, 2006). It has also been found that discrimination thresholds for global

motion (Milne et al., 2002; Pellicano, Gibson, Maybery, Durkin, & Badcock, 2005), second-

order movement (Bertone, Mottron, Jelenic, & Faubert, 2003), and biological motion (Blake,

Turner, Smoski, Pozdol, & Stine, 2003) were heightened in individuals with ASD, once again Commented [MOU35]: What does all of this mean? You will
need to link it into the argument.

giving evidence to a superior more intense reaction to visual sensory stimuli which can be

linked back to increased levels of SOR which are prevalent in autistic individuals. ,.

There is however, currently no indication that individuals with ASD show superior

performance in dynamic perception tasks according to research carried out to account for the

"Enhanced Perceptual Functioning" model (Mottron et al, 2006). Commented [MOU36]: As above – also, this is too short to be a
paragraph.

Previous research mentioned has shown that autistic individuals have shown superior

performance on a number of perceptual tests. A specific type of test which has not yet been

looked at by the "Enhanced Perceptual Functioning model" is one which measures temporal

event structure (Falter et al, 2012). This involves temporal event structure coding which
Sensory over responsivity, anxiety and autistic traits

processes temporal relationships between events. Events which occur within temporal

windows are judged simultaneous (Poncelet and Giersch 2014). Commented [MOU37]: So how could this be linked into EPF?

Falter, Elliott, and Bailey (2012) tested visual temporal event-structure coding in high

functioning adults with ASD with the use of a perceptual simultaneity paradigm. They found

lower thresholds in visual simultaneity in the individuals with ASD , meaning the ASD

individuals were able to distinguish between asynchrony and simultaneous stimuli more

easily which fits in with the idea of enhanced perceptual functioningwhich may suggest that

ASD is characterized by an increase in the parse of temporal event-structure. This study is Commented [MOU38]: ?
Commented [MOU39]: Does this fit with the idea of enhanced
going to use the same paradigm to test for any influence autistic traits in the general perceptual functioning? And again, how could this link into SOR?
Commented [MOU40]: Implies causality

population may have on visual temporal event structure coding which can test the visual

modality in sensory sensitivity. Commented [MOU41]: This linking sentence may be better
elsewhere – it sits in the middle of a review of evidence at the
moment so feels out of place.

Another similar study by Falter, Braeutigam, Nathan, Carrington and Bailey (2012) also used

a perceptual simultaneity paradigm to investigate the difference in judgment of simultaneous

and asynchronous visual stimuli between clinical and non-clinical samples. This involved a

simultaneous condition with 0 ms delay between two stimuli and a delay condition with a

delay of 17ms between two stimuli. . They found that autistic participants were able to

significantly distinguish better between the delay and simultaneous conditions.They found Commented [MOU42]: This result needs to be explained more
clearly and linked into the previous study

that autistic participants were able to distinguish significantly better between those stimuli

which were simultaneous and those which appeared simultaneous but had a delay of 17 ms

between the two stimuli. This study present similar findings to the previously mentioned

study by Falter, Elliott and Bailey (2012).

Sensory over responsivity, anxiety and autistic traits

Relationship between autistic traits and sensory sensitivity Commented [MOU43]: Don’t you already have a section about
this? If the only difference is that you are now talking about traits in
the general population, I still think these sections could go together.

Previous research has examined the relationship between autistic traits in the general

population and sensory sensitivity. Robertson and Simmons (2012) looked at the over and

under responsivity responses to sensory stimuli in the general population. They used the

Glasgow Sensory Questionnaire and the Autism Quotient to assess sensory sensitivity and

autistic traits, and results showed that individuals with higher levels of autistic traits were

much more likely to display atypical sensory responsiveness. This included both hyper

sensitivity which is an overreaction to the sensory stimuli and hypo sensitivity which in

comparison is a reduced response to sensory stimuli (Ward et al. 2017) Moreover, Horder et

al. (2014), also used self-reported measures to assess autistic traits and sensory sensitivity,

and found an association between autistic traits and unusual sensory experiences. However

both these studies did not distinguish between the effects of autistic traits on hyper and hypo

sensitivity, so we are not able to differentiate and assess the direct relationship and effect of

autistic traits on sensory over responsivity from this study.

Anxiety and sensory over responsivity Commented [MOU44]: Needs to come much earlier

Anxiety is a disorder which is characterised by feelings of worry, unease and nervousness

and can be impairing for an individual and can cause deficits in social skills especially in

autistic individuals (Bellini 2004). Individuals with autism appear to be prone to social Commented [MOU45]: There is a lot of information in here –
you are talking about both ASD and non-ASD samples and linking
to social behaviours. It would be good to unpack this
anxiety (Bellini, 2004; Kuusikko et al, 2008), and sensory over responsivity has shown to

contribute to this social anxiety (American Psychiatric Association, 2013).

Sensory over responsivity, anxiety and autistic traits

High levels of anxiety are usually experienced in social situations, which may be partially

down to humans having a desire to make a positive impression on others (Mansell and Clark,

1999). Hofmannn and Bitran (2007), found that individuals with higher levels of social

anxiety are generally more sensitive to sensory information. This is because extreme levels of

anxiety are characterised by hyperarousal which leads to a state of hypervigilance which is an

enhanced sate of sensory over responsivity and leads to an exaggerated intensity of behaviors

in order to try and detect any threatening activity.

There has been a growing body of literature which has suggested that there is a significant

association between sensory over responsivity and symptoms of anxiety amongst non-clinical

samples. A few child studies have looked at the relationship between anxiety and sensory

processing. For example Goldsmith, Hulle, Arneson, Schreiber and Gernsbacher (2006)

looked at tactile and auditory sensory over responsivity in young children. They found that

SOR in these domains was correlated with greater levels of anxiety, showing that anxiety

plays a role in SOR. Similarly, Lane, Reynolds, and Dumenci (2012) found that sensory

challenges were a mediator for anxiety in children 6-10 years.

Furthermore, Kinnealey and Fuiek (1999) looked at whether typical functioning adults with

SOR had more symptoms of anxiety compared to adults without SOR. Participants were

assigned to a sensory over responsivity group or non-sensory over responsivity group after

being assessed on the Adult Sensory Interview. They were matched for age, race and gender

and anxiety was measured using the IPAT anxiety scale (1976). Results on the IPAT anxiety

scale were able to distinguish between the two groups, with higher self-reported scores in the

sensory over responsivity group. The mean difference between the two groups was
Sensory over responsivity, anxiety and autistic traits

significant at 0.05, showing that there was a clear difference in the levels of sensory over

responsivity in adults with and without anxiety. Commented [MOU46]: This paragraph makes a really
important point – well done!

Green and Ben-Sasson (2010), proposed three theories to explain the association found

between SOR and anxiety in individuals with autism. The first being that SOR is caused by

anxiety, the second being that anxiety is caused by SOR and the third being that the two

factors are casually unrelated. These two variables (SOR and anxiety) have also been found

to be related in other populations (Serafini, Engel-Yeger, Vazquez, Pompili and Amore 2017)

and not just in autistic individuals. Commented [MOU47]: This would make much more sense
after your section about anxiety and autism below

Overall there have been very limited studies which have attempted to explore the direct

relationship between anxiety and sensory over responsivity in adults.

Anxiety and Autism Commented [MOU48]: Another really important section that
needs to be earlier.

White, Oswald, Ollendick and Scahill (2009) carried out a systematic review in which they

looked at the levels of anxiety in children and adolescents with ASD. They found that anxiety

was common in these children and adolescents with studies indicating that between 11% and

84% of individuals experienced some level of anxiety.

Replicated findings were also demonstrated by Gillott & Standen (2007) in an adult study

who found that adults with autism are almost three-times more anxious than non-autistic

individuals. They are often described as highly anxious (Waller & Furniss, 2004).
Sensory over responsivity, anxiety and autistic traits

Summary

Overall previous research has looked into the relationship between sensory over responsivity,

anxiety and autism/ autistic traits. However what much of the research has not done is to look

at the predictive abilities of variables such as anxiety and autistic traits on SOR. Therefore, in

this study we will look at not just exploring the relationship between SOR and

anxiety/autistic traits but also look at whether the independent variables can predict SOR. Commented [MOU49]: Why is this important?

This is important as it may allow for further research to be carried out to investigate whether

controlling for one of the variables can help lessen the other (for example, whether

controlling for anxiety can lessen SOR).

In order to measure SOR in this study, we will use the GSQ which will measure all sensory

domains (visual; auditory; gustatory; olfactory; tactile; vestibular and proprioceptive).We will

also We will include the use of a perceptual simultaneity paradigm carried out in the form of

a computer based task, as the , as the "Enhanced Perceptual Functioning" model has provided

a strong basis for heightened visual perception in autistic individuals. It has not however Commented [MOU50]: Why this task? You haven’t mentioned
that you will also use the GSQ – how does including a task add to
this?
looked at studies which involve the use of temporal event structure which is what we are

going to focus on as a number of other studies have . Commented [MOU51]: Why?

This study is going to use the same paradigm to test for any relationship between influence Commented [MOU52]: Implies causality
Formatted: Not Highlight
autistic traits in the general population and may have on visual temporal event structure

coding which canwill measuretest the visual modality in sensory sensitivity.

Sensory over responsivity, anxiety and autistic traits

We hypothesis that there will be a relationship between SOR and anxiety/autistic traits and

that STAI scores and AQ scores will have a significant positive relationship with sbe able to

significantly predict scores on the GSQ. Commented [MOU53]: First time you have mentioned it. What
are your predictions about the associations with task performance?
This is a really crucial part of your introduction, so you will need to
unpack this much more.

Method

Design

This study used a within subject experimental design to try and minimise any effects of

individual differences. It included the use of two independent variables, the first being

autistic traits in the general population as measured by the Autism Quotient, and the second

being the current and stable levels of anxiety as measured by the State Trait Anxiety Commented [MOU54]: Are these independent?

Inventory.

The dependant variable was sensory over responsivity which was measured by both, the

Glasgow Sensory Questionnaire and the visual based computer task. which was measured as

the amount of correct responses made by participants to a 17ms delay condition in the visual

task. Commented [MOU55]: ?

The design used to measure the data was a correlation analysis followed up by a multiple

regression analysis in order to look at the independent variables predictive ability on the

dependant variable. Commented [MOU56]: More appropriate in an analysis section.

Participants
Sensory over responsivity, anxiety and autistic traits

30 undergraduate students (26 females, 4 males) aged between 18-24 years volunteered to

take part in the study. They were recruitedacquired either through the SONA system set up by

Aston university or through word of mouth. The sample consisted of first, second and final

year psychology students from Aston University. Participants had normal or corrected visual

acuity with no history of visual impairments and they all gave written informed consent and

were fully debriefed at the end of the study. The study was reviewed by Aston University’s

Ethics committee.

Apparatus

The apparatus for the visual based computer task consisted of an Intel Core 2 Duo Computer Commented [MOU57]: This would be more appropriate in the
section where you describe the task

with Microsoft XP computer operating system. The monitor measured 22.1 inches

horizontally by 16 inches vertically. Participants viewed the display from a distance of

around 45 centimeters. Responses were entered using a standard keyboard, with only the keys

‘s’ and ‘d’ needed to complete the task. The stimuli for the computer based task were

generated and run by the SuperLab experiment generator. which also stored data results and

inputted them into an excel spreadsheet. Commented [MOU58]: You don’t need this

MeasuresStimuli Commented [MOU59]: Measures would be a better title

Measurement of autistic traits in the general population.Autism Spectrum Quotient Commented [MOU60]: It would be better to have the heading
as he name of the test, with the reference (e.g. autism spectrum
(AQ) (Baron-Cohen et al., 2001) quotient (AQ; ref)
Formatted: Font: (Default) +Headings CS (Times New
Roman), 12 pt, Bold

The aAutism - spectrum quotient ; this consists of 50 statements which are to be answered by

choosing either "definitely agree", "slightly agree", "slightly disagree" or "definitely disagree.
Sensory over responsivity, anxiety and autistic traits

The questions cover five different domains associated with the autism spectrum: social skills;

communication skills; imagination; attention to detail; and attention switching/tolerance of

change. This took approximately 10 minutes to complete. Commented [MOU61]: This what? But you don’t need to
specify how long it took

This measure has been used similarly in a number of studies which also look at non-clinical Commented [MOU62]: Is there evidence that this measure has
previously been used with this type of sample? Is it a good measure
(Test-retest reliability? Internal consistency?)
populations (Ruzich et al, 2015); Von dem Hagen, 2010). Baron-Cohen et al, (2001) carried

out a study to establish the test-retest reliability of the AQ and found that scores from the first

and second AQs were strongly correlated and did not differ statistically. The internal

consistency of items in all five domains were also calculated, with the Cronbach’s alpha

coefficients being moderate to high in all items, showing a good consistency across all items.

The Glasgow Sensory Questionnaire (Robertson & Simmons, 2012)

Measurement of sensory over responsivity. Commented [MOU63]: As above – see comments both for the
title and information about how good the measure is.
Formatted: Indent: Left: 0.2"

The Glasgow Sensory Questionnaire ; this consists of 42 items which cover 7 modalities:

visual; auditory; gustatory; olfactory; tactile; vestibular and proprioceptive. The frequency

of each of the item is rated on the 5 point Likert scale ranging from never to always. The

questionnaire consisted of questions which measured both hypersensitivity and

hyposensivity; we only looked at scoring the scores for hypersensitivity as we are only

looking at SOR. A test retest reliability analysis was carried out on all 42 key items using

the Cronbach’s Alpha, and scores showed acceptable levels of reliability (Field, 2005).

This took approximately 10 minutes to complete.

State- Trait anxiety inventory (Spielberger, 1983)

Measurement of anxiety. Commented [MOU64]: See comments for previous sections.
Did you use both state and trait? If yo used only one, which one and
why? You would need to have justified this in the introduction.
Sensory over responsivity, anxiety and autistic traits

The State-Trait Anxiety Inventory ; this consists of 40 items, 20 of which evaluate the current

state of anxiety and 20 which evaluate relatively stable aspects of “anxiety proneness”.

Responses for the S-Anxiety scale assess intensity of current feelings using: ‘not at all’,

‘somewhat’, ‘moderately so’, and ‘very much so’. Responses for the T-Anxiety scale assess

frequency of feelings “in general”: ‘almost never’, ‘sometimes’, ‘often’, and ‘almost always’.

The STAI measure demonstrated excellent internal consistency in a study carried out by

Gros, Antony, Simms and McCabe (2007), as well as excellent test-retest reliability (Barnes,

Harp, and Jung, 2002).

This took approximately 10 minutes to complete.

Computer based visual task (perceptual simultaneity paradigm) Commented [MOU65]: Paragraph structure

What was the task based on?

Why white on black?

This task was based on the study by Falter, Braeutigam, Nathan, Carrington and Bailey

(2012) who also used a perceptual simultaneity paradigm to investigate the difference in

judgment of simultaneous and asynchronous visual stimuli between clinical and non-clinical

samples. In each trial, stimuli consisted of a black screen (22.1 inches horizontally, 16 inches

vertically) with two white bar stimuli (measuring 10.5 cm in length by 4cm in width)

appearing on the left and right sides of the screen. A black background was used as opposed

to white to prevent saturation from staring at a white screen.

Sensory over responsivity, anxiety and autistic traits

Each trial began with a white fixation cross presented in the centre of a black screen for a

duration of 500ms.

This was then followed with the appearance of two white bar stimuli appearing in one of

three conditions; simultaneously, with a delay of 17ms between the appearance of the first

white bar and the second white bar, and with a delay of 117ms between the appearance of the

first white bar and the second white bar.

Each block began with a white fixation cross presented on a blank black screen for Commented [MOU66]: These two paragraphs are a very clear
description of the task – they should be in the section describing the
paradigm and are actually a little clearer than what is currently there
500ms.This was to enable the participant to focus their attention in the centre of the screen.

This then automatically followed with a presentation of two white bar stimuli which were

positioned to the left and right of the centre of a black screen and were presented either; (1)

simultaneously (2) separated by a very short delay of 17ms (3) or a longer delay of 117ms.

The stimuli were then left on the screen until a response was made. They had to respond to

stimuli that was presented simultaneously by clicking the ‘S’ key on the keyboard in front of

them once the two stimuli were presented. For stimuli that were separated by a delay of either

17ms or 117 ms they were required to click on ‘D’ key when the two white bar stimuli were

presented. No feedback was given on responses. These timings were chosen based on the

previously mentioned Falter et al (2012) study.

Participants had to complete a practice block of 9 trials which were then followed by four

experimental blocks consisting of 60 trials each. (There were 240 trials overall). There was a

screen which informed participants that they could take a break between each experimental

block (after 60 trials) and had to press ‘any key’ to move onto the next experimental block

when they were ready. Participants were instructed to keep their eye movements on the

screen at all times during the trials.

Sensory over responsivity, anxiety and autistic traits

The experiment consisted of 5 different blocks being (a) practice block (b) Experimental

block 1 (c) Experimental block 2 (d) Experimental block 3 and (e) Experimental block 4. The

practice block consisted of 9 trials with the remaining four experimental blocks consisting of

60 trials each. All together there were 240 trials in the experimental blocks; the number of

trials being used once again based on the Falter et al (2011) study. The practice block

consisted of 3 trials of each condition (simultaneous, delay 17ms and delay 117ms). (Each

experimental block consisted of 20 trials of each condition (simultaneous, delay 17ms and

delay 117ms). Trials were presented in a randomised order, in order to try and decrease any

practice effects.

The delay of 117ms condition was only introduced to allow for participants to maintain

attention as the 17ms condition may have been very difficult for some participants to

distinguish from the simultaneous condition and thus cause them to lose attention. Correct

responses were not recorded for this condition when analysing results.

It has been reported that short visual temporal intervals at around 57ms represent units of

subjective time (Brecher, 1932) which are easily able to be perceived by typically functioning

individuals as simultaneous if these units fall within the same window and as asynchronous if

they fall into two separate windows ( Falter et al, 2012). Individuals with autism have been

found to have a significantly lower threshold of simultaneity compared to typically

 Sensory over responsivity, anxiety and autistic traits

developing individuals. Therefore we will be using a 17 ms condition as used in the Falter et

al (2012) study, so we are able to distinguish those who have a lower threshold of

simultaneity from those with a higher thresholds of simultaneity.

The stimuli are presented below.

(FigureIllustration 1) Delay condition: First only the white bar on the left is presented, and

then the white bar on the right appears either 17ms or 117ms after.

(Illustration 2): Simultaneous condition: Both white bars appear on the screen exactly at the

same time.

White fixation cross presented 17 ms/or 117ms later Formatted: Font: 12 pt

500 ms later, a white bar stimuli
on a black background for appears on the left side of the
500ms screen.
(depending on whether its delay
17ms condition or delay 177Formatted: Font: 12 pt, English (United Kingdom)
condition), a white bar stimuli
Formatted: Font: 12 pt, English (United Kingdom)
also appears on the right side of
the screen. Formatted: Font: 12 pt, English (United Kingdom)
Sensory over responsivity, anxiety and autistic traits

Apparatus

The apparatus for the visual based computer task consisted of an Intel Core 2 Duo Computer

with Microsoft XP computer operating system. The monitor measured 22.1 inches

horizontally by 16 inches vertically. Participants viewed the display from a distance of

around 45 centimeters. Responses were entered using a standard keyboard, with only the keys

‘s’ and ‘d’ needed to complete the task. The stimuli for the computer based task were

generated and run by the SuperLab experiment generator.

Procedure

Participants were taken into a dimly lit room and were first given a sheet containing

information on the study. Once they had read over it they were then asked to complete a

consent form. The participants were then asked to fill in a hardcopy of the three

questionnaires; the Glasgow sensory questionnaire, the anxiety state trait questionnaire, and

the Autism Quotient.

Upon completion they were then given an instruction sheet on how to complete the visual

processing computer based test (Falter et al 2013). as well as verbally explained what to do.

Participants were left alone in order to control for any distractions as the task involved high
Sensory over responsivity, anxiety and autistic traits

levels of concentration. The participant was made aware that the researcher was just outside

the room if they needed help with anything.

Before the trials on the computer task started, the screen displayed the instructions clearly

and the participants were instructed to press ‘any key’ to begin the first practice block which

was used to allow the participants to understand how to complete the task accurately. Once

the practice block finished they were presented with a screen which informed that the practice

trial was over and that the real experiment was beginning, once again they had to press ‘any

key’ to being the experimental blocks.

Each block began with a white fixation cross presented on a blank black screen for Commented [MOU67]: These two paragraphs are a very clear
description of the task – they should be in the section describing the
paradigm and are actually a little clearer than what is currently there
500ms.This was to enable the participant to focus their attention in the centre of the screen.

This then automatically followed with a presentation of two white bar stimuli which were

positioned to the left and right of the centre of a black screen and were presented either; (1)

simultaneously (2) separated by a very short delay of 17ms (3) or a longer delay of 117ms.

The stimuli were then left on the screen until a response was made. They had to respond to

stimuli that was presented simultaneously by clicking the ‘S’ key on the keyboard in front of

them once the two stimuli were presented. For stimuli that were separated by a delay of either

17ms or 117 ms they were required to click on ‘D’ key when the two white bar stimuli were

presented. No feedback was given on responses.

Participants had to complete a practice block of 9 trials which were then followed by four

experimental blocks consisting of 60 trials each. (There were 240 trials overall). There was a

screen which informed participants that they could take a break between each experimental

block (after 60 trials) and had to press ‘any key’ to move onto the next experimental block
Sensory over responsivity, anxiety and autistic traits

when they were ready. Participants were instructed to keep their eye movements on the

screen at all times during the trials.

Once the experiment was finished a screen appeared informing participants that the computer

task was over. They were then given a debrief form and given the chance to ask any questions

and discuss anything related to the study.

In order to ensure confidentiality and anonymity, each participant was assigned a randomly

generated ID number. There were two copies of the consent form for each participant, one of

which was handed to the participant which they were asked to keep, and one which was kept

by the researcher’s supervisor which contained the randomly generated ID number on. This

was stored securely meaning only the supervisor was able to link names and ID numbers if

someone chose to withdraw their data.

Data The delay of 117ms condition was only introduced to allow for participants to

maintain attention as the 17ms condition may have been very difficult for some

participants to distinguish from the simultaneous condition and thus cause them to lose

attention. Correct responses were not recorded for this condition when analyzing

results. Analysis Commented [MOU68]: This needs to be with the task paradigm
section, not here.

Within our analysis of results we are going to focus on whether there is a relationship Formatted: Font: 12 pt, Bold
Formatted: Font: Bold

between SOR and anxiety and SOR and autistic traits, and to what extent autistic traits and Commented [MOU69]: Avoid the use of pronouns

anxiety are able to predict SOR. We have two separate measures for SOR, which are the

scores from the GSQ and number of correct responses on the 17ms delay condition from the Commented [MOU70]: You need to have explained why you
are focusing on this earlier

visual based computer task which used the perceptual simultaneity paradigm. Therefore we

will look at the relationship between GSQ scores and autistic traits/anxiety separately and
Sensory over responsivity, anxiety and autistic traits

then we will go on to looking at the relationship between the visual based computer tasks

scores and autistic traits/anxiety. Commented [MOU71]: This would all be better in an analysis
section in the methods. It would need more detail about the types of
analysis – i.e. what sort of correlation and how you woud set up your
The design used to measure the data was a Pearson’s correlation analysis followed up by a regression model.

multiple regression analysis in order to look at the independent variables (anxiety and autistic

traits) predictive ability on the dependantdependent variable (SOR).

Results

Within our analysis of results we are going to focus on whether there is a relationship Commented [MOU72]: Avoid the use of pronouns

between SOR and anxiety and SOR and autistic traits, and to what extent autistic traits and

anxiety are able to predict SOR . We have two separate measures for SOR, which are the

scores from the GSQ and number of correct responses on the 17ms delay condition from the Commented [MOU73]: You need to have explained why you
are focusing on this earlier

visual based computer task which used the perceptual simultaneity paradigm . Therefore we

will look at the relationship between GSQ scores and autistic traits/anxiety separately and

then we will go on to looking at the relationship between the visual based computer tasks

scores and autistic traits/anxiety. Descriptive statistics of mean average score and standard Commented [MOU74]: This would all be better in an analysis
section in the methods. It would need more detail about the types of
analysis – i.e. what sort of correlation and how you woud set up your
deviation of all variables are illustrated below in table 1. regression model.

Table 1.
A table showing the descriptive statistics of the variables used in the study (n = 30)

M SD
AQ_total 17.5333 7.38934
STAI_total 46.2333 10.73725
GSQ_total 26.3333 9.50983
Comp_noC 62.1667 15.91157
Sensory over responsivity, anxiety and autistic traits

A Pearson’s correlation analysis was first carried out between all four variables to see if there

were any relationships between them. Scores for the State Trait Anxiety Inventory and the

Autism Quotient had a normal distribution, however scores for the GSQ and the computer

task were not normally distributed.

Table 2.
Correlations between autistic traits, Glasgow Sensory Questionnaire scores, State Trait
Anxiety Inventory score and the amount of correct replies in the visual based computer task
(n = 30)

AQ_total GSQ_total STA_total Comp_noC

AQ_total r - .459** .539** .321*
GSQ_total r - .273 .208
STA_total r - .430**
Comp_noC r -
** p < .01 level * p <.05
Comp_noC = Number of correct responses made to the 17 ms delay condition

This table shows that there was a significant relationship between GSQ total and AQ total

(r = .459, p < .01). However a significant relationship was not found between GSQ total and

STAI total (r = .273, p > .05). It also shows that the number of correct responses (to the 17ms

delay condition) on the computer task were significantly correlated with AQ scores (r = .321,

p < .05), and STAI scores (r = .430, p < .01).

A multiple regression analysis was then carried out to measure the predicting strength of
autistic trait scores and anxiety scores on the GSQ scores. Overall the model was significant
with Adjusted R2 = 0.153, showing that 15.3% of Glasgow Sensory scores can be predicted
Commented [MOU75]: If you include a data analysis section
you can explain why you have taken this approach – ie. Why you are
not looking at whether the task and GSQ are related/including them
in the same model. This will also help you to make sure that your
analyses are clearly linked to your research questions and
hypotheses.

by a combination of AQ scores and STA scores accounting for 15.3% of scores on the GSQ

(adjusted R2 = 0.153, F (2, 27) = 3.62, p < .05. ). When looked at individually, AQ total was
Sensory over responsivity, anxiety and autistic traits

a significant predictor of scores on the GSQ (Beta = .439, 95% CI [0.03, 1.10] t = 2.16, p < Commented [MOU76]: Use the symbol

.05). Whereas STA total was not significant so has no predictive ability for the DV.

A multiple regression analysis was also carried out the to measure the predicting strength of

autistic trait scores and anxiety scores on the computer task scores. Overall the model was not Commented [MOU77]: Is there a better way to explain this? It
will be easier once you have more clearly explained why you only
look at the 17ms condition.
significant (adjusted R2 = 0.137, F (2, 27) = 3.30, p > .05) and Adjusted R2 = 0.137, showing

that 13.7% of computer task scores can be predicted by a combination of AQ scores and STA

scores. However neither AQ nor STA scores were found to be significant predictors of Commented [MOU78]: As above, is this significant?

Computer task scores showing they had no significant predictive ability for the DV.

AQ total and the GSQ subgroups

Multiple regression was also carried out on each of the individual subscales on the GSQ Commented [MOU79]: Did you do the correlations for the
subscales? Also, this will need to be linked into the research
question/hypotheses
(visual; auditory; gustatory; olfactory; tactile; vestibular and proprioceptive) to assess exactly

which domains predicted GSQ scores. AQ total was found to be a significant predictor of

GSQ scores on the vestibular subscale (Beta = .405, 95% CI [0.01, 0.25] t = 2.26, p < .05), as Commented [MOU80]: As above, you the symbol

well as on the proprioceptive subscale (Beta = .496, 95% CI [0.04, 0.26] t = 2.91, p < .05),

which was the stronger predictor of the two. Commented [MOU81]: Have you done 7 different models??
Could you not do it the other way round, so see which of the GSQ
subscales predict the AQ total? Also, you haven’t reported your F
statistics,

GSQ scores and AQ subgroups

As we found that AQ total was a significant predictor of scores on the GSQ, the AQ domains

(social skills; communication skills; imagination; attention to detail; and attention

switching/tolerance of change) were looked at individually to see which domains were able to

predict GSQ scores. When a correlation analysis was carried out, a significant relationship
Sensory over responsivity, anxiety and autistic traits

between GSQ and the "attention switching" domain (r = .436, p < .01) and GSQ and the

"attention to detail" domain (r = .536, p < .01) was found. A significant relationship was not

found for the remaining threewo domains with the AQ.

A regression analysis was then carried out on the two domains, "attention switching" and

"attention to detail". Attention to detail was the only domain which was found to be a

significant predictor of scores on the GSQ (Beta = .395, 95% CI [0.25, 3.1] t = 2.43, p < .05). Commented [MOU82]: As above – to discuss

Overall results show that there were a significant relationship between GSQ total and AQ scores as

well as GSQ total and computer task scores but not the same was not found for STAI scores, showing

that there wasn't a relationship between anxiety and SOR as was hypothesised. Furthermore, the AQ

total was found to be a significanta significant predictor of scores only for GSQfor GSQ but

not the computer task. AQ scores were able to predict two domains within the GSQ

(vestibular and proprioceptive). Within the AQ, "attention to detail" was the only domain

which was found to be a significant predictor of scores on the GSQ.