No Anxiety

Psychology and Psychotherapy Articles

autism

Autism and Linear Cognition: Neuro-psychological implications

by

Abstract

by Robert DePaolo

This article discusses the literal, linear cognitive style typically seen in individuals with autism. Similarities between this thought process and the cognitive styles seen in obsessive compulsive disorders, anxiety disorders and clients with traumatic brain injury are considered and dismissed. Meanwhile, autistic linearity is deemed a special kind of cognitive rigidity caused in part by neuropsychological dyspraxia.

Stop and Go Neurology…

Autistic cognition is a difficult subject to wrap one’s mind around, in part because the functional levels of individuals diagnosed with autism can vary so much. While those disparities arguably make the term autistic diagnostically mystifying, if not downright untenable, it is a reality researchers, educators and writers have to deal with. Despite those vagaries, there are fairly pervasive features within the spectrum. One is cognitive rigidity, i.e. the tendency to think and act as though life consists of only ‘stop and go’ thoughts and behaviors. (D’Cruz, Raggino et.al 2013). For the most part autism precludes the ability to see nuance, gray areas of experience, to accommodate changes in routine and to alter behaviors to deal with changes in stimulus conditions and social circumstances. (Watanabe, Lawson, et al. (2019)

Patterns similar to these are seen in individuals with psychiatric disorders such as schizophrenia and obsessive compulsive disorder, as well as organic disorders such as traumatic brain injury. (Whiting, Deane et al. 2017)

The single track mindedness inherent in these disorders results from several sources. In schizophrenia, neurotransmitter depletion blocks the flow of neurochemical activity that under normal circumstances enables it to extend, branch off laterally and integratively and facilitate figure-ground thought and perception (Walz J.A. 2017).

Similar connectivity deficits are seen in traumatic brain injured patients. In their case damage to brain tissue and the superposition of enlarged ventricles (liquid sacks) over synaptic tissue prevents proper conductivity.(Poca, Sahuquillo,et al.2005). That leads to fragmentation, uncertainty and the need for the TBI patient to compensate through cognitive rigidity.

Cognitive rigidity and compulsiveness present differently for the individual with emotional disorders. While cognitive and behavioral tendencies within that rubric vary from person to person there are common symptomatic antecedents. One of which is anxiety.

When anxiety is intense and chronic, arousal levels create rigid fight/flight tendencies. Those high levels of arousal mobilize what Cannon called emergency reactions on such a regular basis as to block integrative thought. (1932). By analogy, rather than seeing both forest and trees the hyper-anxious individual is forced to attend to narrow stimuli he perceives as threatening.

The picture changes a bit with regard to autism. I believe this is largely because of the language factor. The typical diagnostic criteria for autism include substantial language deficits. In discussing that factor it is helpful to consider both the neurological and functional aspects of language.

As Luria and Trotsky have pointed out, language is both an external communicative faculty and an internal, regulatory faculty (Derovesne (2011). Seldom discussed is that language functions seem to extend beyond the social and interpersonal domains. They also help to maintain neural stability.

The human brain is vast, with billions of neurons and many billions of connections among and between those neurons. That provides advantages: for example enabling us to label and distinguish between and among a wide variety of phenomena, to research, combine and separate objects and conceive of relationships within the natural world. In the process we can create that marvelous thing called culture.

However, there is a drawback. With billions of neurons sending signals around the brain each experience will entail potential confusion or… “noise.” That noise must be modulated or the vastness of the brain would be highly disadvantageous.

In that context language seems function as a search light in the brain, providing focus and closure through the neuro-symbolic targeting of circuits that separate event-relevant networks from circuits that are peripheral to any given task at hand.

There are several means through which modulation is provided. One is through the binary mechanism of excitatory and inhibitory neurons. (Lakna 2018) One type halts conductivity, the other stimulates conductivity. As long as the brain can coordinate the timing of the two ( for example when certain neural clusters are activated, others inhibited) it is possible to engage in effective thought and behavior patterns.

Some timing comes from brain wave activity: the rhthmic quality of which seems to have a probative effect on learning and memory (Pribram, 1971). However, much of it comes from learning. With experience, the brain establishes fixed circuits corresponding to learned behaviors and cognitions. If circuit A stores the memory for turning on a faucet, circuit B will not. With learning circuits become functionally differentiated so that with added experience one doesn’t interfere with another. Somewhat ironically, human learning (ostensibly deriving from the vastness of the human brain) actually occurs by reducing the effective size and volume of the brain through the process of elimination. This is seen in the course of cognitive development.

In child development the first year is characterized by longitudinal connections within the brain. During that phase simple associations are accrued and the child shows a rigid cognitive style.
Around age two a branching process begins, whereby neural connections spread around the brain in multi-dimensional manner. In effect the single neural highway of year one becomes a multiple series of off-roads and bypasses in the second year. (Lenrout, Giodd 2007). Interestingly around this time the child also begins to develop a sense of self. This comes about because in being able to crawl, then walk, he finds he can move toward goals without being carried by another person. He becomes functionally, motorically separate from the caretaker. Rather than being merely a symbiotic extension of mom or dad, he becomes a distinctive “me.” From that sense of self comes what some have referred to as a “theory of mind,” (Korkmaz 2011). Being able to separate himself from others psychologically allows the child to understand that being separate means others can be studied, imitated and learned from. In a sense, they become objectified, didactic vehicles.

The motor aspect of self development is not the only determinant of self and other perception. Language development (which also occurs during the first and second years) is even stronger. With increasing language capacities the child can gain and enhance a sense of self, and develop a theory of mind.

Interestingly, language development also depends on the branching mechanism that occurs between the first and second year. With a disruption in that branching process there will tend to a deficient sense of self, and of others. The child will lack a theory of mind and will tend to think and act in terms of the first associative stage of neural development featuring chained, linear associative behavior and cognition.

Linearity is not the only factor in autism. Without the benefits of fluid neural branching the brain of an autistic individual will be prone to intensive and pervasive noise. Arousal episodes will be excruciating, which can make learning new tasks highly frustrating and produce an avoidant mindset. That has educational implications. The learning problems seen in autism often lead to high power teaching methods that can elevate arousal levels, which are the autistic child’s Achille’s heel. in that sense it is not surprising that some research has shown hat for some autistic students, attempts at new learning are often accompanied by arousal induced behavior problems and even seizure activity. (Billeci, Tonacci et al 2018), Prince, Kim et al (2016).

Because the preferred state of arousal for autistic individuals is manageably low, they will tend to resist new teaching and when prompted to cooperate will do so by use of self-regulatory behaviors such as behavioral perseveration, hand flapping, humming, rocking etc. These seem to be monotony/stability restoring behaviors to offset the noise and concomitant arousal in the brain.
Note, here the word ‘arousal’ doesn’t necessarily refer to spike activity or excessive autonomic activity. It refers more generally to unresolved neural activation, i.e. a disproportion between arousal ands closure – what Goldstein referred to as the “catastrophic reaction” (Klonoff, Lage et al 1993). It is possible that in addition to controlling arousal levels these behaviors are used as a substitute for language regulation; indeed might be a form of para-linguistic expression.

As seen in the psychiatric therapeutic process, language is a soothing mechanism, not just because it can talk us into equanimity by relabeling stressful events but because it can ameliorate noise within the brain. That suggests without language the individual will tend toward an intently avoidant mindset.
Some individuals with autism have language but it is topographically similar to their behavior patterns, perhaps featuring a lack of contextual understanding, a proneness to literal cognition and difficulty augmenting language with peripheral communicative gestures (facial and manual expressions) and body language. (Grafton (2013).

In line with the above factors it would seem a central issue in autism revolves around why they think and act in linear fashion.

The answer is not clear, at least neurologically. It is obvious that cross connections that in the normal brain allow for the multi-access among neurons and provide for conceptual thought and contextual cognition. But just why those interconnections are blocked in autism is unknown. Possible causes could be neuro-chemical, related to tissue damage or as some have suggested caused by a hyper-volume of neurons in the brain resulting from interruption of the “pruning” process in childhood, whereby deletion of neurons occurs to streamline the brain and facilitate access among various brain sites. (Pederson, 2018).

Still, another possibility is that since navigating fluidly among billions of neural connections requires extraordinary coordination among expiatory and inhibitory neurons, there is some something highly dysrhythmic about the autistic brain.

What creates the rhythm and orchestration in the brain? While language serves that purpose (all languages, including human language have cadence and sequential, orderly grammatical features) even that would require a governing mechanism. Might it be found in aberrant brain wave activity, or perhaps in a tendency toward double firing in the sensory motor domains so that feedback is not registered properly?

The idea of redundant or skewed feedback in autism has been discussed in the past. (Mosconi Mohanty et al 2015). In fact sensory instruments with delayed feedback have been used with autistic populations with some but certainly not overwhelming success. Such double, redundant or diffuse neuronal firing would be consistent with excessive-neural volume in the brain since neural systems would tend to collide and replicate rather then parse efficiently in the course of learning.

Another question revolves around whether linear cognition is a built-in feature of the autistic brain, forcing them both structurally and functionally to think and act that way, or whether linearity is a compensatory cognitive style used by the autistic individual to control extreme arousal diffusion as the brain addresses the normal figure/ground, conceptual features of the environment.

I tend to believe much of autistic behavior and cognition is an attempt at adaptation by a fragile central nervous system that lacks the inhibitory/excitatory neural orchestration to address the world in normal terms. Once again, this suggests autism is primarily a severe form of psycho-neural dyspraxia.
In a previous article I referred to a prime cause of autism through the idea of the “Bad Maestro.” I still believe autism is a most fundamentally a profound type of dyspraxia. Whether this has any validity can only be determined by research on the coordination among impulses in the brain following stimulus presentations. Whether this is valid there is no structural reason why autistic people would lack language ability. Their hyoid bones are present, their larynx is situated normally, and they do not typically display hearing loss (Beers, McBoyle et. al. 2014). Absent such deficits a significant factor could be a deficient orchestration mechanism that can juggle some 25 billion neural connections efficiently enough to produce flexible cognition, contextual emotions and normal language.

REFERENCES

Beers, A. McBoyle, M. Kakande, E. Santos, R.C. Kozak, K. (Jan. 2014) Autism and peripheral hearing loss: A systemic review. International Journal of Pediatrics 78 (1) 96-101

Bellici, L. Tonacci, A. Narzisi, A. (May 2018) Heart rate variability during a joint attention task in toddlers with Autism Spectrum Disorder. Frontiers in Physiology 9: 467

Cannon, W. (1932) Wisdom of the Body. U.S. W.W. Norton & Co.

D’Cruz, A.M. Ragging, M.E. Mosconi, W. Shrestha, S. Cook, E. Sweeney, J.A. (2013) Reduced behavioral flexibility in autism spectrum disorders. Neuropsychology 21 (2) 152-160

Derovesne, C. (Sept 9 2011) Speech and regulation of behaviors: The works of LS Trotsky and AR Luria. Geriatric Psychological, Neuropsychiatry. (3) 355-362

Grafton, A. (April 23, 2013) Study reveals linguistic deficits behind autism children’s difficulties understanding other people. Article in Autistic Spectrum Ret. April 23, 2013.

Klonoff, PS. Lage, GA. Chiapello, DA. (1993) Varieties of the catastrophic reaction to brain injury: a self psychology perspective. National Library of Medicine 57 (2) 227- 241

Korkmaz, b. (2011) Theory of Mind and neurodevelopmental disorders in childhood. Pediatric Research. 69 (5) Pt. 2 101R-8 R

Lakna, A. (Sept 11, 2018) Differences between excitatory and inhibitory neurons. Article in PED IIA.

Lenrout, R.K. Giodd, J.N. (2007) The structural development of the human brain as measured longitudinally with magnetic resonance images. In Loch. D. Fischer, K.W. Dawson, G. (eds) Human Behavior, learning in the human brain; typical development. Guilford Press.

Mosconi, M. Mohanty, S. Greene, R. Cook, E. Vaillancourt, D. Sweeney, J. (2015) Feedforward and feedback motor control anomalies implicate cerebellar dysfunction in Autistic Spectrum Disorder

Pederson, T. (2018) in Autism poor “pruning” of neurons leads to excess synapses. Psych Central

Poca, M. Sahuquilla, J.Mataro, B. Bentham, B. Arikan, F. Baquena, M. (2005) Ventricular enlargement after moderate or severe head injury: a frequent and neglected problem. Neurotrauma Nov. 22. 1303-1310

Pribram. K. 1971 Language of the Brain: Experimental Paradoxes and Principles in Neuropsychology. Englewood NJ Prentice Hall

Prince, B. Kim, E. Wall, C.A. (2016) The relationship between autistic symptoms and arousal level in toddlers with Autism Spectrum Disorder as measured by electrodermal activity. SAGE Journals

Walz, J.A. (2017) The neural underpinnings of cognitive flexibility and their disruption in psychotic illness. Neuroscience March, 14 34 203-217

Watanabe,T. Lawson, R. Walden, Y. Rees, G. (2019) A neuroanatomical substrate linking perceptual stability to cognitive rigidity in autism. Journal of Neuroscience 39 (33) 6540-6534

Whiting, D.L. Deane, F. Simpson, G. Ciarochi, J. (2017) Cognitive and psychological flexibility after a traumatic brain injury and the implications for treatment in acceptance-based therapies: A conceptual review. Research Online – Faculty of Social science – Papers

Lateral Inhibition, Language Deficits and Autistic Development

by

by Robert DePaolo

Abstract

This article discusses a pervasive brain function that has implications for language development, arousal modulation and autistic symptomatology. It revolves around the phenomenon known as the Mach band – which is a hypothetical description of an actual neural process known as lateral inhibition. It is this process that facilitates perceptual accuracy, prevents noise/uncertainty build up in the brain and prevents random uncontrollable excitation.

A Distinction Machine…

it is generally assumed that the evolution of a large brain was a watershed event in man’s ascendancy in nature. A large brain does provide obvious advantages. For example, vast neural connections allow for more associations, expansive memory and greater cognitive flexibility, all of which have enabled homo sapiens to adapt to more varied environments and circumstances than any other creature.

However there is an equally obvious disadvantage to having a large brain. It is a drawback that pertains to any highly complex, vast information system; a greater probability of noise interference. The more neurons and interconnections, the greater the potential for info-chaos and uncertainty. Perhaps that is why, despite our pan-adaptability humans seem to be the only animals with substantial degrees of mental illness and cognitive dysfunction . *

Fortunately, in most instances, there is a built-in mechanism that operates as a noise buster and enables humans to negotiate around a highly complex brain. It is called lateral or “surround” inhibition and it allows us to distinguish relevant inputs from irrelevant, peripheral inputs that would otherwise create interference patterns, prevent efficient response selection and accurate perception (Yantis, 2014). Without this mechanism a large brain would actually prove disadvantageous since the search for adaptive perceptions and behaviors would involve an excruciating needle in the haystack scenario.

Beyond preventing mass interference (noise) lateral inhibition provides the benefit of emotional equanimity, because it also modulates arousal levels. Just as an influx of visual and auditory stimuli are chaperoned by this mechanism for perceptual and behavioral clarity so too does it facilitate emotional control and specification. In both instances the impact of lateral inhibition on perception, behavior and emotional arousal levels is profound.

The Autistic Conundrum…

Questions have arisen as to why,some autistic individuals have exceptional (if somewhat narrow) skill levels in certain areas while others have more severe limitations. Lack of diagnostic accuracy might be one reason; bearing in mind that the autistic spectrum encompasses both those with fine motor deficits so profound as to render the use of eating utensils problematic and those whose fine motor and cognitive skills are intact enough to enable them to write lengthy auto-biographies.

However there are other possible explanations for what might be termed ‘autistic narrowness.’ It would appear both higher and lower functioning autistic individuals operate in an experiential tunnel and that deviation from this narrow vantage point comprises an aversive experience. This has relevance with regard to the question of why autistic individuals engage in self stimulatory behaviors, rely so heavily on routine and demonstrate task avoidance tendencies.

It is well established that one facet of autism is the “kindling” process – the tendency for neural activity to spike fairly chronically (Krista, Gilby et al 2013 ). One can assume the jolt resulting from spiking is aversive to the autistic individual, Since he or she is easily overwhelmed by spreading, unmodulated inputs and since all learning, particularly involving motor skills is accompanied by heightened arousal levels autistic learning deficits are not solely due to cognitive limitations but also in large part to arousal intolerance and task avoidance (Iverson 2015), (Liss, Saulnier et al 2006).

No one sits still with the impingement of aversive stimuli. Instead one responds adaptively to terminate or override the aversion. If true, it follows that self stimulatory behaviors (rocking, humming, finger play) are not awkward manifestations of neuro-pathology or lack of cognitive ability per se but arousal modulating, adaptive behaviors that conceivably substitute for defective lateral inhibition functions. In that context the narrow skill learning style of the higher functioning autistic individual could be considered a compromise learning style pitting personal tolerance vs. environmental vagaries.

Nuts and Bolts…

Lateral inhibition entails the capacity of excitatory nerve cells to suppress surrounding nerve cells. One of its purposes is to create contrast in facilitating sensory perception so that edges in the visual domain and details in other sensory areas can be accurately detected. Most of this process originates in the higher center of the brain – the cerebral cortex (Coppola, Parisi et al (2013) but extends to a mid brain structure called the thalamus (Lavallee, Deschenes 2014). It is an encoding mechanism that, as mentioned above prevents noise from overwhelming the brain and has parallels to the “slow potential wave micro-structure” regulatory, memory-encoding process referenced by Karl Pribram (1991).

Lateral inhibition is usually associated with sensory systems such as touch, vision and hearing but since this mechanism is permeates the cortex and thalamus (the latter of which acts as a relay station transmitting neural signals to a variety of brain sites) it can be presumed to be widespread around the brain. As discussed above, since it dampens surrounding interference patterns, making sure that relevant inputs are highlighted, it must operate reciprocally with memory. That is because deciding on relevant vs. irrelevant inputs involves learning in the first place. While some sensory phenomena are built in to the central nervous system – for example perception of angles, edges and perhaps the human face,(Cowen, Chun et al. 2014 ) there can be said to be a reciprocal interaction between memory and the “noise busting” aspect of lateral inhibition. That has implications for autism.

For many autistic individuals anxiety is a central problem; not just because of specific fears but, also because they have difficulty consolidating memory and anchoring experiences to the point of comfortable familiarity, either for lack of adequate lateral inhibition, or because they do not have the perceptual and/or emotional clarity to readily establish memories in the first place. While they can certainly memorize information. memory entails two processes; consolidation and retrieval. Problematic lateral inhibition could create noise within neural interactions and prevent memory from functioning smoothly – thus the need for repetition and routine as adaptive/compensatory measures.

Expression, Comprehension and Cadence…

Deficient lateral inhibition could also have implications for language development. Language is a vast encoding process that might well be dependent on lateral inhibition. It is not just a social-communicative skill. It also allows us to separate one experience, event or object from another. The minute we label a color “red” it automatically creates a distinction between “red” and “blue.” In that context superior human social perception might ultimately derive from what Spence called discrimination learning (1936). As an aside, this implies a connection between language and the hyper-social nature of our species. For example, to be as social as we are requires a greater capacity to distinguish one person or group from another categorically.

While lateral inhibition is a natural byproduct of neural development it can only function effectively by being able to sift through neural interference patterns at variable rates in the course of child development. In child development vertically arranged pathways are followed by horizontally arranged pathways resulting in a cross grid morass of vast interconnections. As inter-connectivity expands noise levels increase in the child’s brain with age (which might explain why, prior to decline around the age of two some autistic children appear normal). As a result, in the course of child development, lateral inhibition would have to keep pace. Just how this occurs is unknown but one key might lie in the regulatory functions of a site often referred to as the brain’s central computer.

Posterior Stability…

The cerebellum is an interesting brain structure located above the hind brain with a unique cellular topography. It has extensive connections to various other parts of the brain, which speaks to its functional influence. it is also the most uniform of the major brain sites, with only two types of cells – Pyramidal and Purkinje cells – which has led some to liken it to a computer (Ito 1979). That comparison is based on the fact that its smooth, uniform structure has a programmed, regulatory topography apparently designed to anchor other parts of the brain – particularly with regard to motor and cognitive memories. It appears to be a low noise structure, providing the luxury of automatic responding. In other words, once stored in the cerebellum, a behavior or cognitive memory no longer requires sifting and retrieval – an enormously helpful function, not only because it enhances stability but because by ameliorating the search for memories it conserves energy in the brain.

There seems to be evidence of dysfunctional development in the pathways of the cerebellum of autistic individuals, specifically fairly consistent signs of cerebellar hypoplasia (lack of cellular maturation) (Hampsom,Blatt 2015).

Developmental deficiency in the cerebellum would mitigate against automaticity. which coincides with the autistic child’s tendency to behave as though each experience is new and in many instances threatening. In not being able to store experiences in automatic memory the autistic individual would appear to be subject to an excruciating, chronic level of hyper-vigilance and anxiety.

The Pleasure of Specificity…

With regard to questions on language development, and in a larger context, the evolutionary origins of human language no clear answers have been provided. Numerous theories abound but the closest thing to an empirical sense of human language development has typically been derived from infant/toddler observations. One typical observation noted by parents and linguists is that children tend to develop simultaneously the skills of pointing and speaking. Some have surmised that this indicates a primarily social aspect to language development; more specifically a ‘theory of mind’ capability that allows toddlers to approximate what others might be thinking. In other words, the child purportedly seeks to know if: “What I see is what you see” as a sort of interpersonal confirmation ( Korkmaz 2011).

Certainly that is an important aspect of language development but perhaps not the core factor. For example one could just as readily assume the child points and speaks not because he is wondering what another might be seeing or thinking but because he has so many neurons in his brain (most of which are not quite interconnected – an infant’s brain has as many neurons as an adults but early on the wiring is not meshed) that the act of identifying an object is a noise busting, information attaining experience that gives him great joy- just as closure and resolution might please an adult at the climax of a who-done-it movie. In this scenario the child is not asking for confirmation of his observations but instead communicating his joy over neuro-experiential resolution (closure) as a kind of aha experience.

If “closure theory” has any merit than it would tie in with the importance of lateral inhibition in the developing brain and In part resolve the conflict between the nature and nurture theories of language acquisition – particularly regarding the question of why children can learn language so quickly (a phenomenon that tends to favor nature theorists).

If, built into the brain is a noise busting mechanism, reinforced by a persistent closure/pleasure experience (internal feedback) then both the nature and nurture theories of language acquisition could be accommodated. In that sense instinct and learning might be seen as two sides of the same coin because for lateral inhibition to operate effectively, the process must rely on learned memories in determining what are relevant vs. peripheral pathways – lateral inhibition being bio-natural while specific words, dialects etc. are learned.

On the other hand if noise busting was not fluid due to defective lateral inhibition then instead of being pleasurable, language reception and expression would be aversive. That would mean that part of the reason autistic individuals have trouble speaking is because they find both listening and speaking too overwhelming, the search for phonics, words and phrases too difficult. That would mean language and learning deficits are caused in part by an emotional (noise) avoidance reaction.

Observations of autistic individuals would seem to indicate that the auditory channel in particular is effected by this deficit (Leekam, Nieto et al 2007 ). Not being able to effectively parse (laterally inhibit) various sounds would make learning of language and other skills difficult. By the same token the auditory stimulus of music – which is synthesized by melody and cadence (both can to an extent compensate for deficient lateral inhibition via rhythmic encoding) might be more tolerable, even enjoyable.

It all suggests autism is largely a stimulus avoidance disorder, requiring chronic, adaptive (albeit limiting) noise remedial behaviors, including extreme adherence to routine, over reliance on specific learning styles, use of stimulus control behaviors to override chronic CNS exhaustion (because of the endless sifting and sensory contrast demands placed on the brain) a need for brain/body rest due to that exhaustion and opportunities to control their sensorium by being able to terminate tasks prior at the point of intolerable arousal (analogous to what Goldstein called the “catastrophic reaction”(2012 ). It is a life style characterized by a ‘less is more’ paradigm that necessarily sacrifices integrative/conceptual volume learning for neuro-functional equanimity.

REFERENCES

Coppola, G. Parisi, V. Di Lorenzo, C. Magis, D, Schoenen, J. Pierelli, F. (2013) Lateral inhibition in visual cortex of migraine patients between attacks. Journal of Headache and Pain: 14 ( 1) 20

Cowen, A.S. Chun, M.M. Kuhl, B.A. (2014) Neural portraits of perception; reconstructing face images from evoked brain activity. Neural Image 94 12-22

Goldstein catastrophic reaction reference… (2012) Medical Eponyms – retrieved from Medical Dictionary – The Free Dictionary

Hampsom, D. Blatt, G. (2015) Autism spectrum disorders and neuropathology of the cerebellum. Frontiers in Neuro-science 9: 420

Ito, M. (1979) Is the cerebellum really a computer? Trends in Neuroscience Vol. 2 122-126

Iverson, P. (2015) The sensory impact of arousal levels on attention in autistic children. Children’s Disability and Special Needs. On line article www.come unity. com.

Korkmaz, B. (2011) Theory of Mind and neuro-developmental disorders of childhood. Pediatric Research 69 (5) A2 101R-8R

Krista, L. Gilby,S. O’Brien. J. (2013) Autism and neuro-development; Kindling – a shared vulnerability? Science Direct Vol. 26 (3) 370-374

Lavallee, P. Deschenes,M. (2014) Dendroarchitecture and lateral inhibition in thalamic barreloids. Journal of Neuroscience 24 (27) 6098-6105

Leekam,S.R. Nieto,C. Libby,SJ. Wing, L. Gould,J. (2007) Describing the sensory abnormalities of children and adults with autism. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders Vol. 37 (15) 894-910

Liss, M. Saulnier, C. Fein, D. Kinsbourne, M. (2006) Sensory and attention abnormalities in autistic spectrum disorders. Autism 10, 155-172

* Mental illness – animal reference…Article in Leviathan Process references observations by various field researchers and zoologists that while animal psychopathology does occur in captivity it has not been observed in the wild. and only because the animals are not able to exert natural behaviors- rather than having psychic conflicts.

Pribram, K. 1991) Brain and perception: holonomy and structure in figure processing, Hillsdale N.J. Laurence Erlbaum Associates

Spence,K.W. (1936) The nature of discrimination learning in animals Psychology Review 43 (5) 427-449

Yantis, S. (2014) Sensaton and Perception, New York.NY Worth Publishing p. 77