Eye-tracking studies on exploration of faces and objects in autism provided important knowledge but only in a constraint condition (chin rest, total time looking at screen not reported), without studying potential differences between subjects with autism spectrum disorder (ASD) and controls in spontaneous visual attention toward a screen presenting these stimuli. This study used eye tracking to compare spontaneous visual attention to a screen displaying a face or an object between children with autism and controls in a nonconstraint condition and to investigate the relationship with clinical characteristics in autism group. Time exploring screen was measured during passive viewing of static images of faces or objects. Autistic behaviors were assessed by the CARS and the BSE-R in autism group. In autism group, time exploring face screen and time exploring object screen were lower than in controls and were not correlated with degree of distractibility. There was no interaction between group and type of image on time spent exploring screen. Only time exploring face screen was correlated with autism severity and gaze impairment. Results highlight particularities of spontaneous visual attention toward a screen displaying faces or objects in autism, which should be taken into account in future eye-tracking studies on face exploration.

This study aimed at evaluating the autonomic response to pleasant affective touch in children with Autism Spectrum Disorders (ASD) and age-matched typically developing (TD) peers, thanks to multiple autonomic nervous system (ANS) parameters and by contrasting CT (C-tactile fibers) high- vs. low-density territory stimulations. We measured pupil diameter, skin conductance, and heart rate during gentle stroking of two skin territories (CT high- and low-density, respectively, forearm and palm of the hand) in thirty 6–12-year-old TD children and twenty ASD children. TD children showed an increase in pupil diameter and skin conductance associated with a heart rate deceleration in response to tactile stimulations at the two locations. Only the pupil was influenced by the stimulated location, with a later dilation peak following CT low-density territory stimulation. Globally, ASD children exhibited reduced autonomic responses, as well as different ANS baseline values compared to TD children. These atypical ANS responses to pleasant touch in ASD children were not specific to CT-fiber stimulation. Overall, these results point towards both basal autonomic dysregulation and lower tactile autonomic evoked responses in ASD, possibly reflecting lower arousal and related to social disengagement.

Background: For hearing-impaired individuals, hearing aids are clinically fit according to subjective measures of threshold and loudness. The goal of this study was to evaluate objective measures of loudness perception that might benefit hearing aid fitting. Method: Seventeen adult hearing aid users and 17 normal-hearing adults participated in the study. Outcome measures including categorical loudness scaling, cortical auditory evoked potentials (CAEPs), and pupillometry. Stimuli were 1-kHz tone bursts presented at 40, 60, and 80 dBA. Results: Categorical loudness scaling showed that loudness significantly increased with intensity for all participants (p < 0.05). For CAEPs, high intensity was associated with greater P1, N1, and P2 peak amplitude for all listeners (p < 0.05); a significant but small effect of hearing aid amplification was observed. For all participants, pupillometry showed significant effects of high intensity on pupil dilation (p < 0.05); there was no significant effect of hearing aid amplification. A Focused Principal Component analysis revealed significant correlations between subjective loudness and some of the objective measures. Conclusion: The present data suggest that intensity had a significant impact on loudness perception, CAEPs, and pupil response. The correlations suggest that pupillometry and/or CAEPs may be useful in determining comfortable amplification for hearing aids.

We demonstrate, for the first time in a single within-subject protocol, how low-level (illumination) and high-level (cognitive load) factors differentially shape both baseline pupil size and the oscillatory hippus. Bright light drives tonic constriction and reduces hippus amplitude probably via iris biomechanics, while mental effort elicits dilation and increases hippus frequency through central arousal circuits. Individual resting-pupil profiles predict the amplitude of these responses.