The benefit of directly comparing autism and schizophrenia for revealing mechanisms of social cognitive impairment

Autism and schizophrenia share a history of diagnostic conflation that was not definitively resolved until the publication of the DSM-III in 1980. Though now recognized as heterogeneous disorders with distinct developmental trajectories and dissociative features, much of the early nosological confusion stemmed from apparent overlap in certain areas of social dysfunction. In more recent years, separate but substantial literatures have accumulated for autism and schizophrenia demonstrating that abnormalities in social cognition directly contribute to the characteristic social deficits of both disorders. The current paper argues that direct comparison of social cognitive impairment can highlight shared and divergent mechanisms underlying pathways to social dysfunction, a process that can provide significant clinical benefit by informing the development of tailored treatment efforts. Thus, while the history of diagnostic conflation between autism and schizophrenia may have originated in similarities in social dysfunction, the goal of direct comparisons is not to conflate them once again but rather to reveal distinctions that illuminate disorder-specific mechanisms and pathways that contribute to social cognitive impairment

Did you call me?:5-month-old infants own name guides their attention

An infant's own name is a unique social cue. Infants are sensitive to their own name by 4 months of age, but whether they use their names as a social cue is unknown. Electroencephalogram (EEG) was measured as infants heard their own name or stranger's names and while looking at novel objects. Event related brain potentials (ERPs) in response to names revealed that infants differentiate their own name from stranger names from the first phoneme. The amplitude of the ERPs to objects indicated that infants attended more to objects after hearing their own names compared to another name. Thus, by 5 months of age infants not only detect their name, but also use it as a social cue to guide their attention to events and objects in the world

Spreading or concentrating drinking occasions - Who is most at risk?

Aims: (a) To compare acute negative consequences for people who drink a given amount of alcohol on few occasions (concentrators) per week in comparison with the consequences for people who drink the same amount on more days in a week (spreaders). (b) To investigate whether these associations are cross-culturally stable. Methods: Analysis is based on general population surveys of adults conducted in 7 European countries. Results: It appeared that more drinking occasions in many countries lead to more consequences independent of the volume consumed. Risky single-occasion drinking was to be associated with higher risks for immediate health consequences and legal problems, accidents and fights. Among older respondents the same frequency pattern appeared, with the exception of immediate health consequences among women. Hence, more regular drinking seemed to have more beneficial effects on older individuals compared to younger ones, which may be related to the different drinking situation: younger people mostly drinking outside the home. Amongst the younger people, frequent drinking seemed to be associated with more acute consequences. Cultural and methodological variations must be taken into account. Conclusion: Even so, it is concluded that the credibility of these findings is strengthened by differences in the methods of the surveys. Copyright © 2008 S. Karger AG