Table 1.

Temporal Sensitivity Measure by Thresholds

		Sample		Modality	Tasks	Findings	Commentaries
		ASC	NT
Mostofsky, Goldberg, Landa, and Denckla [2000]	n	11	17	Auditory	Temporal thresholds: Empty intervals	No difference in thresholds between groups	Small sample Presence of outliers
	Age	13.3 (6.8–17.8)	12.5 (8.3–16.7)				Not a full threshold procedure
	IQ	101 (81–132)	105 (80–133)
Jones, Poliakoff, and Wells [2009]	n	72	48	Auditory	Temporal thresholds: Filled intervals	No differences between groups in duration discrimination	A dinosaur is a more complex stimuli than the classic auditory paradigm
	Age	15.6 (5.7)	15.6 (5.9)
	IQ	87.79 (17.32)	89.33 (21.53)
Bhatara et al. [2013]	n	12	15	Auditory	Gap detection thresholds: Gap detection	Higher gap detection thresholds in ASC (15 msec) versus NT (5 msec)	Small sample
	Age	10.42 (1.92)	12.83 (1.75)				Lower verbal IQ in ASC (P < 0.01)
	VIQ	93 (16)	111 (13)
	PIQ	99 (16)	105 (15)
Kargas, López, Reddy, and Morris [2015]	n	21	21	Auditory	Temporal thresholds	Higher thresholds and higher variability in ASC	The authors warned that the SBRI scale of ADOS is not the best for measuring repetitive and restrictive behaviors
	Age	30.3 (10.4)	29.5 (11.4)
	IQ	109.5 (18.3)	115.9 (10.6)
						No correlation between SBRIa scores and duration discrimination in ASC
Poole, Gowen, Warren, & Poliakoff [2015], Poole, Couth, Gowen, Warren, & Poliakoff [2015]	n	18	18	Tactile	Temporal thresholds: Gap detection	No differences in tactile thresholds	Small sample
	Age	29.8 (8.1)	29.1 (7.2)
	IQ	118.3 (9.9)	117.6 (13.4)

^aStereotyped behaviors and restricted interests.