↓ Skip to main content

Novel Metaphors Comprehension in a Child with High-Functioning Autism Spectrum Disorder: A Study on Assessment and Treatment

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Psychology, January 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
17 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
46 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Novel Metaphors Comprehension in a Child with High-Functioning Autism Spectrum Disorder: A Study on Assessment and Treatment
Published in
Frontiers in Psychology, January 2017
DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2016.02004
Pubmed ID
Authors

Sergio Melogno, Maria A. Pinto, Margherita Orsolini

Abstract

Until the first decade of the current millennium, the literature on metaphor comprehension highlighted typical difficulties in children with high-functioning Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD). More recently, some scholars have devised special programs for enhancing the capability of understanding metaphors in these children. This article presents a case study based on a treatment aiming at enhancing novel metaphor comprehension in a high-functioning child with ASD. M.M., a pseudoacronym for an 8;10 year-old boy, diagnosed with high-functioning ASD, was first assessed with a metaphor comprehension test. This testing (at time T0) highlighted a rigid refusal of metaphors and a marked tendency toward literal interpretation. A baseline treatment (8 sessions of 45-60 min each, twice a week) was implemented, based on a series of recognition, denomination and emotion comprehension activities. M.M.'s metaphor comprehension was assessed a second time (T1), followed by the experimental treatment (same duration and frequency as the first one), specifically focused on metaphor comprehension. Finally, a third assessment of metaphor comprehension took place (T2), followed by a last assessment 4 months later (follow-up, T3). The comparison between the performances at the metaphor comprehension test across the four assessments, from T0 to T3, showed that the baseline treatment produced no effect at all, whereas a significant improvement appeared at T2, just after the experimental treatment, later confirmed at the follow up. Both quantitative and qualitative results showed an evident improvement in the way M.M. handled the semantic issues posed by the metaphors of the test, in line with the strategies he was taught during the treatment.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 46 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Italy 1 2%
Unknown 45 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 9 20%
Professor 6 13%
Student > Bachelor 6 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 9%
Other 3 7%
Other 8 17%
Unknown 10 22%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 17 37%
Linguistics 6 13%
Medicine and Dentistry 4 9%
Neuroscience 3 7%
Social Sciences 2 4%
Other 3 7%
Unknown 11 24%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 18 August 2020.
All research outputs
#14,610,122
of 24,006,566 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#14,803
of 32,225 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#225,814
of 427,818 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#245
of 417 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,006,566 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 32,225 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.8. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 53% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 427,818 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 46th percentile – i.e., 46% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 417 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.