See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/259740840

Cognitive and Psychoanalytic conceptualisations of autism-a comparative

literature review

Article · January 2008

CITATION READS

1 939

1 author:

Thomas Richardson
University of Southampton
172 PUBLICATIONS 3,587 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Thomas Richardson on 23 July 2014.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

URJHS Volume 7

Cognitive and Psychoanalytic Conceptualisations of Autism: A

Comparative Literature Review

Thomas Hugh Richardson

Trinity College, Dublin, Ireland

Abstract

In the time since the condition was originally labelled in 1943, a wide range of theories have
been put forward to explain the emergence, maintenance, and treatment of autism. There is
often controversy in this area, as different paradigms often disagree about the aetiology of
autism and its subsequent treatment. This paper reviews and compares conceptualisations of
autism based on the psychoanalytic and cognitive paradigms, exploring separate theories within
these models such as weak central coherence, theory of mind, executive function, autistic
identification, drives and attachment in autism, and refrigerator mother theory. The cognitive
and psychoanalytic models approaches to treatment and their subsequent effectiveness are also
reviewed, and consideration is given to controversies in the treatment of this pervasive
developmental disorder. It is concluded based on the available literature that the
psychodynamic model focuses primarily on the emergence and causes of autism, whereas the
cognitive model is more concerned with the maintenance of the disorder and its cognitive
consequences and symptoms, whilst neither give sufficient consideration to its treatment.

Introduction

Autism is a pervasive developmental disorder characterised by deficits in social behaviour and

communication and unusual and restricted, repetitive behaviours (APA, 2000). Since Leo
Kanner first labelled and described the condition in 1943, there have been a number of
attempts to explain this disorder. Two important paradigms that have made contributions are
the cognitive and the psychodynamic paradigm. This paper will examine and critically evaluate
the contribution that these models have made to the understanding of the emergence,
maintenance, and treatment of autism.

The Cognitive Model and Autism

Since its rise to popularity in recent decades, the cognitive model has contributed considerably
to the understanding of autism. Autism is characterised not only by social deficits but also by
deficits in cognitive control (Dichter & Belger, 2007), with most autistic children having
impairments in at least one area of cognitive functioning (Szelag et al., 2004). Cognitive
symptoms and social symptoms may in fact overlap and be related to one another; Shah &
Wing (1986) argue that the social deficit observed in autism is directly related to the level of
general cognitive function. Cognitive “scripts” of specific events and the usual procedures
surrounding them have been found to be deficient in autism, in particular in terms of scripts for
social routines, which may account for a number of the social deficits observed ( Trillingsgaard,
1999).

The most common view of autism is that it is primarily a deficit in communication skills, with
deficits such as stereotyped conversations, echolia, and a lack of understanding of metaphors
and non-verbal behaviour (e.g., Siegel, 1998). Autistic individuals are poor at remembering
verbal sounds (Gervais et al., 2004), which may explain the limited attention paid to voices and
the inability to infer emotional meaning from voices (Gervais et al., 2004). Autistic individuals
also have trouble recognising emotional expressions (Dichter & Belger, 2007). Autistic children
also have abnormal sensory input, in particular integrating different sensory modalities, and
thinking and interests are rigid, with poor conceptual reasoning ( Bjorne & Balkenius, 2005;
Rumsey & Hamburger, 1988) .
Cognitive development in autism

A number of computational models of autism have been developed to explain the processes
involved in the abnormal cognitive development of autism ( Bjorne & Balkenius, 2005). Such
models have been used to suggest that a single cognitive impairment early in life can lead to an
array of problems along the cognitive developmental pathway, eventually leading to the
collection of cognitive deficits known as autism ( Bjorne & Balkenius, 2005). Focusing on the
cognitive developmental pathway of autism can lead to a greater understanding in terms of
causes and potential treatment ( Bjorne & Balkenius, 2005), as a number of cognitive variables
have been found to predict long-term outcome (Nordin & Gillberg, 1998). It has been suggested
that autism is a combination of a number of cognitive disorders (Baron-Cohen & Swettenham,
1997). However, there are 3 main cognitive theories of autism which will be examined in this
paper; weak central coherence, deficient theory of mind, and executive dysfunction.

Central coherence

The weak central coherence theory of autism (Frith, 1989) suggests that symptoms observed in
autism are due to a style of cognition termed weak central coherence. This refers to a limited
ability to understand the context in which events occur, an inability to see the “big picture.”
This results in autistic individuals taking things literally, such as not being able to understand
metaphors or sarcasm. Computational models have used the principles of weak central
coherence to account for both the poor generalisation and poor context processing observed in
autism (Cohen, 1994; Bjorne & Balkenius, 2005 ). Weak central coherence seems to be a
separate factor in autistic cognition ( Teunisse et al., 2004). However, it may not be related to
the behavioural symptoms of the disorder as weak central coherence is not related to either
social competence or severity of symptoms ( Teunisse et al., 2004). Thus it may be a
consequence of autism rather than a cause.

Theory of mind

“Theory of mind” refers to the ability to infer what others are thinking so that it is possible to
predict their behaviour (Happé, 1999). Baron-Cohen (1995) originally proposed that autistic
individuals do not have this important part of social cognition. They cannot tell what others are
thinking, hence the reason they do not respond to facial expressions or tone of voice. According
to Baron-Cohen (1995), a lack of a theory of mind is the main cognitive component of autism
and can explain a number of the observable social deficiencies in autism, such as low levels of
social eye contact. This lack of a theory of mind has been found consistently in autism and has
been argued to be crucial in the cause of the disorder (Travis & Sigman, 1998). However,
others have argued that it does not account for all of the deficits observed (Smukler, 2005).
Happé et al. (2001) argue that the theory of mind account of autism is useful in explaining
many of the social and communication deficits observed, however it cannot account for other
symptoms such as repetitive behaviours and restriction of interests. Furthermore there is
evidence that a lack of a theory of mind cannot explain all of the deficit social behaviour in
autism; for example it has been shown that training to improve theory of mind does not
improve social skills (Ozonoff & Miller, 1995). Thus it may be that theory of mind is an
important factor in the cognitive aspects of autism, however it is unlikely to account for the
range of symptoms associated with the disorder.

Executive function

Ozonoff et al. (1991, 1994) first proposed the executive dysfunction model for autism.
“Executive function” refers to the complicated cognitive capacities used to control action and
motor co-ordination, in particular in unusual circumstances. Included in this therefore is
planning behaviour, observing behaviour, using working memory, and inhibiting automatic
reactions. This model has been used to successfully explain a number of symptoms, in
particular such executive impairment can account for the repetitive and restricted behaviour
observed in autistic children (Pennington et al., 1997). Cognitive shifting, an important part of
executive function, has been found to predict poor social abilities in adulthood and is the only
factor that can predict improved social intelligence in autistic individuals (Nordin & Gillberg,
1998). However, whilst executive dysfunction can explain certain deficits, it cannot account for
the areas of cognition that are intact or superior (Happe et al., 2001).

Cognitive treatment

Cognitive accounts of autism have lead to a number of cognitive approaches to its treatment. A
number try to improve the sensory abnormalities in autistic children, with an important therapy
being auditory integration training that attempts to reduce sensitive hearing (Smith, 1996).
This has been argued to improve a number of cognitive deficits such as memory and language
comprehension (Stehli, 1991), though others only suggest very limited or no benefits (Rimland
& Edelson, 1995; Mudford et al., 2000). Due to the nature of autism Cognitive Behaviour
Therapy (CBT) has not been considered to be appropriate, however evidence suggests that a
modification of CBT techniques may be useful for the treatment of autism (Laskaridou &
Tagouli, 2007). A number of aspects of cognitive functioning such as cognitive shifting and
central coherence have been found to predict long-term outcome, yet have not been applied to
treatment programmes despite having significant potential (Berger et al., 1993; Teunisse et al.,
2004). Improving social functioning is one of the most important goals in terms of the
treatment of autism (Teunisse et al., 2004); whilst certain treatments have been found to have
a positive impact on social skills (Howlin, 1997), those using cognitive principles have been less
effective (Ozonoff & Miller, 1995). Because aspects of cognition vary considerably between
individuals, a purely cognitive treatment for all may be inefficient (Baron-Cohen & Swettenham,
1997).

Psychoanalysis and Autism

Since autism was first described by Kanner in 1943, psychoanalysis has contributed to
understanding the emergence, maintenance, and treatment of autism. Psychoanalysts view
autism as a disorder in which the development of a sense of self and a sense of others is
altered dramatically (Mayes & Cohen, 1994). Autism is explained through psychoanalytic
concepts such as a dysfunctional emergence of the self, internalization, identification, and
introjection (Mayes & Cohen, 1994). Autism can be conceptualised through object relations
theory as the prolonging of a stage in normal development where object relations feature
prominently in perception (Hobson, 1990). Psychoanalytic explanations focus less on the
cognitive symptoms and more on the social deficits observed (Hobson, 1990). Autism differs
from other childhood psychiatric disorders as there is a significant disconnection from the
outside world, and there are two main psychoanalytic explanations for this aspect of autism
(Fendik, 2005). One is that the disorder is a regression to an earlier stage of development;
another holds that autistic behaviour is a defence mechanism in response to extremely stressful
situations.

There are a number of sources of evidence that support psychoanalytic views of autism
(Volkmar, 2000). Early psychoanalysts believed that the experience of autistic children played a
role in the pathology, and a number of studies have suggested that autistic children have a
qualitatively different experience in psychoanalytic terms, with problems in object relations and
other aspects of ego development, which are responsible for the social abnormalities observed
in the condition (Volkmar, 2000). Many early psychoanalysts believed that autism is
psychogenic, and this can still be found in such approaches today (Hobson, 2005).

Autistic identification

It has been argued that the mechanisms of social engagement, which lead to identification as
outlined by Freud are crucial in autistic development (Hobson, 2005). Meltzer (1975) developed
a model of autism based on three main ideas: the dismantling of the ego, adhesive
identification, and the bio-dimensionality of object relations. The dismantling of the ego refers
to the notion that autistic children split their ego across the different senses so that they can
never properly perceive the world around them, and all sensations are combined. The
biodimensionality of object relations refers to how the autistic child relates to libidinal objects,
with an inability to see beyond the surface of objects. This relates in biodimensionality whereby
the self identifies with only the surface of objects, which leads to a difficulty of articulating
thoughts. Tustin (1977) similarly explained autism in terms of an infant having a fear of a
discontinuity between their body and the outside world. The infant protects itself from this fear
by constructing the illusion that is merged as one with the outside world.

Drives and autism

Freud’s original concepts of drives have been especially influential in psychodynamic

explanations of the causes of autism. Adhesive identification is often seen in autism and results
from the transfer of energy from the death drive and the libido when these drives are being
defused (Ribas, 1998). Thus autism can be viewed as the diffusion of drives, in particular the
death drive. The role of the libido in autism in terms of the diffusion of energy has been
neglected, but it may explain the phenomenon of adhesiveness and auto-sensuality observed in
autism (Ribas, 1998). There is a lack of unity in terms of the integration of the self, and there is
a lack of projection in autistic children.

Refrigerator mother theory

Bettelheim argued that autism is caused by “refrigerator” mothers; autism is a defence

mechanism against cold, emotionless, and detached mothers (Gardner, 2000). Autistic children
are been raised in unstimulating and uncaring homes during the early stages of development
where language and social skills usually develop. Mothers do not interact with their children
enough, and this is the underlying cause of autism. A number of psychoanalysts such as Tustin
(1981) agree with this conceptualisation, claiming that problems in the behaviour of mothers to
their children are responsible for autistic behaviour. Bettelheim claimed that using this principle
he was able to cure 85% of his autistic patients, however this has been subsequently shown to
be inaccurate (Pollak, 1997). Despite no experimental research to provide evidence for the
refrigerator mother theory of autism, a number of psychoanalysts continue to follow these ideas
(Roser, 1996).

Attachment

The relevance of attachment to autism has been noted since the first description of the disorder
by Kanner (1943) who noted the inability to form emotional affection with others. The DSM-III
made the distinction between childhood schizophrenia and autism in terms of attachment
behaviour (APA, 1980). Rutgers et al. (2004) argue that a lack of early and secure attachment
leads to the social isolation observed in autism. Although autistic children show attachment
behaviours, they are significantly less securely attached (Rutgers et al., 2004) and cannot be
comforted by their caregiver (Shirataki, 1994). Such disturbances in the mother-daughter
relationship have been shown to have severe and long-lasting effects (Robson, 1972), and
socially isolated monkeys behave in such a similar way to autistic children that it has been
argued that autism is a result of a social isolation from parents (Harlow & McKinney, 1971).
However differences in attachment behaviour in autism have been refuted by a number of
studies (Sigman & Ungerer, 1984; Dissanayake & Rossley, 1996), and the cause-effect nature
of any relationship is unclear.

Psychoanalytic treatment

Despite a number of objections, psychoanalytic theories continue to be applied to the treatment

of autism (Bromfield, 2000). Psychodynamic interventions concentrate on the worker-child
relationship, rather than directly attempting to induce behavioural change (Helm, 1976), and
the importance of a close encounter between the practitioner and child is stressed (Dessiex et
al., 2001). Holding therapy focuses on the autistic child’s relationship with the mother, with
physical affection being encouraged (Welch, 1988). The refrigerator mother theory of autism
has been particular important in influencing interventions, and in the 1950’s and 60’s
psychoanalytic play therapy based on these principles was the most common treatment used
for autism (Howlin, 1997). It has been argued that intensive psychoanalytic psychotherapy can
improve autistic children’s long-term prognosis, but that this is often overlooked (Langdell,
1973) and that using counter-transference is especially useful in improving prognosis ( Parada,
1996 ). However others argue that the blame that is put on parents and the lack of goals and
structure can in fact worsen behaviour in autistic children (Smith, 1996).

Controversies in Treatment

Regardless of the approach used, whether autism can be treated at all is controversial
(Charman, 1999). Autism has long been seen as a disorder with lifelong morbidity, with such a
poor prognosis to the extent that it has been deemed to be incurable (Rutter, 1970). Autism
has been described for a long time as a disorder for which the cause is unclear, and treatment
even less clear (Moore & Shiek, 1971). The American Academy of Child and Adolescent
Psychiatry’s official policy is that "it now appears that the usefulness of psychotherapy in autism
is very limited" (AACAP, 1999). Psychotherapy for autism may not be effective regardless of
whether the cognitive or psychodynamic approach is used. As with all treatments for autism,
neither approach has received sufficient empirical study of its effectiveness (Howlin, 1997;
Campbell et al., 1996).

Conclusion

The psychodynamic and cognitive models have both been used to explain the emergence and
maintenance of autism and attempted subsequently to suggest treatments. These theories
focus on very different aspects of autistic behaviour, with the cognitive model concentrating on
deficits in areas such as theory of mind and executive function, whilst the psychodynamic model
concentrates primarily on parent relationships and upbringing. It seems that the psychodynamic
model focuses primarily on the emergence and causes of autism, whereas the cognitive model
is more concerned with the maintenance of the disorder and its cognitive consequences and
symptoms. Neither in fact gives much attention to its treatment, though this maybe simply due
to the previously stated assumption that autism is incurable. It has been argued that the
cognitive account of autism is the more accurate representation of the disorder, and that
psychodynamic explanations focus too heavily on specific aspects of the disorder (Frith, 1989).
However this criticism could work both ways. Both psychodynamic and cognitive models tend to
explain autism in terms of a single unitary deficit accounting for all of the observed symptoms.
However there is insufficient evidence to suggest that autism is the result of a unitary deficit,
and it may be that no single theory or approach can adequately account for the wide-ranging
symptoms of the disorder (Szelag et al., 2004). This author believes that the cognitive model
provides a more accurate account of the emergence and maintenance of autism, though this
may simply appear to be the case due to the difficulty in testing psychodynamic
conceptualisations of this disorder. This paper concludes that the cognitive model needs to
focus on combinations of cognitive symptoms, and begin to move away from the unitary deficit
theories that dominate the paradigm today. In terms of the treatment, though the two models
examined here propose very different treatments, it seems that neither can cure autism,
though there is more evidence at present to suggest that cognitive approaches have the
greatest potential to improve the prognosis of autistic children.

References

American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry (1999). Practice parameters for the
assessment and treatment of children, adolescents, and adults with autism and other
pervasive developmental disorders. Journal of the American Academy of Child and
Adolescent Psychiatry, 38, 32-54.

American Psychiatric Association. (2000). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders:
text revision (4 th ed.). Washington, DC: Author.

American Psychiatric Association. (1980). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders.
(3rd edn).Washington, DC: Author.

Baron-Cohen, S. (1995). Mindblindness: An Essay on Autism and Theory of Mind. Cambridge,

MA: MIT Press, 1995.

Baron-Cohen, S. & Swettenham, J. (1997). Theory of mind in autism: Its relationship to

 executive function and central coherence. In Cohen, D, J. & Volkmar, F, R. (Eds.), Handbook
of autism and pervasive developmental disorders (880–893). New York: Wiley.

Berger, H, J, C., van Spaendonck, K, P, M., Horstink, M, W, I, M., Buytenhuijs, E, L., Lammers,
P, W, J, M. & Cools, A, R. (1993). Cognitive shifting as a predictor of progress in social
understanding in high-functioning adolescents with autism: A prospective study. Journal of
Autism and Developmental Disorders, 23, 341–359.

Bjorne, P. & Balkenius, C. (2005). A model of attentional impairments in autism: first steps
toward a computational theory. Cognitive Systems Research, 6, 193–204.

Bromfield, R. (2000). Its the tortoises race: Long-term psychodynamic psychotherapy with a
high-functioning autistic adolescent. Psychoanalytic Inquiry, 20, 732-745.

Campbell, M., Schopler, E., Cueva, J. E., & Hollin, A. (1996). Treatment of autistic disorder.
Journal of American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, 35, 134-143.

Charman, T. (1999). Autism and the pervasive developmental disorders. Curr Opin Neurol, 12,
155-9.

Cohen, I, L. (1994). An artificial neural network analogue of learning in autism. Biological

Psychiatry, 36, 5–20.

Dessiex, V., Haas C., Rodrigues, C., Junier, L., Muller-Nix, C. & Ansermet, F. (2001). A
psychoanalytic approach of autism and evaluation scales. Annales medico-psychologiques,
159(2), 111-120.

Dichter, G, S. & Belger, A. (2007). Social stimuli interfere with cognitive control in autism.
Neuroimage, Jan 17. Epub ahead of print.

Dissanayake, C. & Crossley, S, A. (1997). Autistic children's responses to separation and

reunion
with their mothers. J Autism Dev Disord, 27, 295-312.

Fendrik S. (2005). Autism and infantile psychosis. Theoretical and clinical contributions of the
psychoanalysis. Vertex, 16(62), 284-8.

Frith, U. (1989). Autism: Explaining the enigma. Oxford: Blackwell.

Gardner, M. (2000). The brutality of Dr. Bettelheim. Skeptical Inquirer, 24(6), 12-14.

Gervais, H., Belin, B., Boddaert, N., Leboyer, M., Coex, A., Sfaello, I., Barthélémy, C., Brunelle,
F., Samson, Yves & Zilbovicius, M. (2004). Abnormal cortical voice processing in autism.
Nature Neuroscience, 7, 801-802.

Happé F. (1999). Autism: cognitive deficit or cognitive style? Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 3
(6), 216-222.

Happ é, F., Briskman, J. & Frith, U. (2001). Exploring the Cognitive Phenotype of Autism: Weak
‘Central Coherence’ in Parents and Siblings of Children with Autism: I. Experimental Tests. J.
Child Psychol. Psychiat., 42(3), 299-307.

Harlow, H, F. & McKinney, W, T. (1971). Nonhuman primates and psychoses. J Autism Child
Schizo, 1, 368-375.

Helm, D. (1976). Psychodynamic and behaviour modification approaches to the treatment of

infantine autism . Journal of Autism and Developmental disorders, 9(1), 27-41.

Hobson, P. (2005). Psychodynamics and developmental psychopathology. Psychiatry, 4:5, 21-

 24.

Hobson, R, P. (1990). On psychoanalytic approaches to autism. American Journal of

Orthopsychiatry, 60(3), 324-36.

Howlin, R. (1997). Prognosis in autism: do specialist treatments affect long-term outcome?

European Child & Adolescent Psychiatry, 6, 55-72.

Kanner, L. (1943). Autistic disturbances of affective contact. Nervous Child, 2, 217–250.

Langdell, J, I. (1973). Childhood autism. California Medicine, 188 (4): 59-61.

Laskaridou, K. & Tagouli, E. (2007). Cognitive behaviour therapy for autism spectrum disorders:
Modifications and applicability, Abstract for poster sessions, European Psychiatry xx (2007)
1e120 P384.

Mayes, L, C. & Cohen, D, J. (1994). Experiencing self and others: contributions from studies of
autism to the psychoanalytic theory of social development. Journal of the American
Psychoanalytic Association, 42(1), 191-218.

Meltzer, D. (1975). Explorations in autism. Perth: Clunie Press.

Moore, D, J. & Shiek, D, A. (1971). Toward a theory of early infantile autism. Psychological
Review, 78, 451-456.

Mudford, O, C., Cross, B, A., Breen, S., Cullen, C., Reeves, D., Gould, J. & Douglas, J. (2000).
Auditory integration training for children with autism: No behavioral benefits detected.
American Journal on Mental Retardation, 105, 118-129.

Nordin, V. & Gillberg, C. (1998). The long-term course of autistic disorders: Update on follow-
up studies. Acta Psychiatrica Scandinavica, 97, 99–108.

Ozonoff, S. & Miller, J, N. (1995). Teaching theory of mind: A new approach to social skills
training for individuals with autism. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 25,
415–433.

Ozonoff, S., Strayer, D, L., McMahon, W, M. & Filloux, F. (1994). Executive function abilities in
autism and Tourette syndrome: An information processing approach. J Child Psychol
Psychiatry, 35, 1015–1032.

Ozonoff. S., Pennington, B, F., Rogers, S, J. (1991). Executive function deficits in high-
functioning autistic individuals: Relationship to theory of mind . J Child Psychol Psychiatry,
32, 1081–1105.

Parada, N, J. (1996). Transference And Countertransference In The Analysis Of A Child With

Autistic Nuclei. Int. J. Psycho-Anal., 77, 773-786.

Pennington, B, F., Rogers, S, J., Bennetto, L., Griffith, E, M., Reed, D, T., & Shyu, V. (1997).
Validity tests of the executive dysfunction hypothesis of autism. In J. Russell (Ed.), Autism
as an executive disorder (pp. 143-178). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Pollak, R. (1997). Creation of Dr. Bettelheim: A biography of Bruno Bettelheim. New York:
Simon & Schuster.

Ribas D. (1998). Autism as the defusion of drives . International Journal of Psychoanalysis, 79

(3), 529-38.

Russell, J. (1998) Autism as an Executive Disorder, Oxford University Press.

Rimland, B. & Edelson, S, M. (1995). Auditory integration training in autism: A pilot study.
Journal of Autism & Developmental Disorders, 25, 61-70.

Robson, K,S. (1972). Development of object relations during the first year of life. Seminars in
Psychiatry, 4, 301-316.

Roser, K. (1996). A review of psychoanalytic theory and treatment of childhood autism.

Psychoanalytic Review, 83, 325-341.

Rumsey, J, M. & Hamburger, S, D. (1988). Neurophysiological findings in high-functioning men

with infantile autism, residual state . J Clin Exp Neuropsychol,10, 201–221.

Rutgers, A., Bakermans-Franenburg, M., van Ijzendoorn M. & Berckelaer-Onnes, I. (2004).

Autism and attachment : a meta-analytic review. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry,
45(6), 1123-1134.

Rutter, M. (1970). Autistic children: Infancy to adulthood. Semin Psychiatry, 2, 435-50.

Shah, A. & Wing, L. (1986). Cognitive impairments affecting social behaviour in autism. In
Schopler E. and Mesibov G. (Eds). Social Behaviour and Autism. New York : Plenum Press

Shirataki, S. (1994). Abnormal attachment relationship as an early sign of autistic disorders.

Presented at the 13th International Congress of IACAPAP, San Francisco.

Siegel, D. (1998). Evaluation of high functioning autism. In Goldstein G., Nussbaum P., and
Beers S. (Eds) Neuropsychology. New York : Plenum Press.

Sigman, M. & Ungerer, J, A. (1984). Attachment behaviours in autistic children. J Autism Dev
Disord, 14(3), 231-44.

Smith, T. (1996). Are other treatments effective? In C. Maurice, G. Green, & S. C. Luce (Eds.),
Behavioral intervention for young children with autism: A manual for parents and
professionals (pp. 45-59). Austin, TX.

Smukler, D. (2005). Unauthorized Minds: How ‘‘Theory of Mind’’ Theory Misrepresents Autism.
Mental retardation, 43(11), 11-24.

Stehli, A. (1991). The sound of a miracle: A childs triumph over autism. New York: Doubleday.

Szelag, E., Kowalska, J., Galkowski, T. & Poppel, E. (2004). Temporal processing deficits in high
functioning children with autism. British Journal of Psychology, 95, 269-282.

Teunisse, J-P., Cools, A, R., Van Spaendonck, K, P, M., Aerts, F, H, T, M. & Berger, H, J, C.
(2004) Cognitive Styles in High-Functioning Adolescents with Autistic Disorder. Journal of
Autism and Developmental Disorders, 31(1), 55-66.

Travis, L, L. & Sigman, M. (1998). Social deficits and interpersonal relationships in autism.
MRDD Res Rev, 4(2), 65 – 72.

Trillingsgaard, A. (1999). The script model in relation to autism. European Child & Adolescent
Psychiatry, 8: 45-49.

Tustin, F. (1981). Autistic states in children. Boston: Routledge.

Tustin, F. (1977). Autism and childhood psychosis. London: Hogarth. (Originally published
1972).

Volkmar, F, R. (2000). Understanding autism: Implications for Psychoanalysis. Psychoanalytic

Inquiry, 20, 660-674.
 Welch, M, G. (1988). Holding time: How to eliminate conflict, temper tantrums, and sibling
rivalry and raise happy, loving, successful children. New York: Simon & Schuster.

RESOURCES:

Research Journal: Vol. 1 Vol. 2 Vol. 3 Vol. 4 Vol. 5 Vol. 6 Vol. 7 Vol. 8 Vol. 9
High School Edition

Call for Papers 1 ¦ Call for Papers 2 ¦ Inventory ¦ News

Planning Conference ¦ Priorities ¦ Faculty Development ¦ Priority Issues ¦
Institutional Plan ¦ URC Home

KON

View publication stats