Autism Symptoms Seen in Babies

Infants that would later be diagnosed with the disorder began to avoid eye contact at two months of age

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

Children with autism make less eye contact than others of the same age, an indicator that is used to diagnose the developmental disorder after the age of two years. But a paper published today in Nature reports that infants as young as two months can display signs of this condition, the earliest detection of autism symptoms yet.

If the small study can be replicated in a larger population, it might provide a way of diagnosing autism in infants so that therapies can begin early, says Warren Jones, research director at the Marcus Autism Center in Atlanta, Georgia.

Jones and colleague Ami Klin studied 110 infants from birth — 59 of whom had an increased risk of being diagnosed with autism because they had a sibling with the disorder, and 51 of whom were at lower risk. One in every 88 children has an autism spectrum disorder (ASD), according to the most recent survey by the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention in Atlanta.


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


At ten regular intervals over the course of two years, the researchers in the new study showed infants video images of their careers and used eye-tracking equipment and software to track where the babies gazed.

“Babies come into the world with a lot of predispositions towards making eye contact,” says Jones. “Young babies look more at the eyes than at any part of the face, and they look more at the face than at any part of the body.”

Diagnoses made
Twelve children from the high-risk group were diagnosed with an ASD — all but two of them boys — and one male from the low-risk group was similarly diagnosed. Between two and six months of age, these children tended to look at eyes less and less over time. However, when the study began, these infants tended to gaze at eyes just as often as children who would not later develop autism.

Jones and Klin were surprised by that distinction, because they had expected that infants who go on to develop autism would make noticeably less eye contact from birth. But Jones says that the team’s finding points to a window for interventions aimed at treating autism: “It does give us hope, because it suggests that, were we able to identify children at this early time point in life, there’s a bit of a foundation we could begin to build on with treatments.”

Simon Baron-Cohen, an autism researcher at the University of Cambridge, UK, says that the new study of the ability to make eye contact is “remarkable in containing so many time points that the investigators can catch the time window when the atypical development of this skill begins to emerge”. The work has the potential to reveal how autism develops and could enable early detection and thus early intervention, Baron-Cohen adds.

Jones says that it is too early to use his team’s findings to diagnose autism. For that to happen, much larger population studies need to establish that a decline in gazing at eyes can accurately predict the development of autism. “That’s our long-term future objective,” he says.

This article is reproduced with permission from the magazine Nature. The article was first published on November 6, 2013.

Ewen Callaway is a senior reporter at Nature.

More by Ewen Callaway

First published in 1869, Nature is the world's leading multidisciplinary science journal. Nature publishes the finest peer-reviewed research that drives ground-breaking discovery, and is read by thought-leaders and decision-makers around the world.

More by Nature magazine

It’s Time to Stand Up for Science

If you enjoyed this article, I’d like to ask for your support. Scientific American has served as an advocate for science and industry for 180 years, and right now may be the most critical moment in that two-century history.

I’ve been a Scientific American subscriber since I was 12 years old, and it helped shape the way I look at the world. SciAm always educates and delights me, and inspires a sense of awe for our vast, beautiful universe. I hope it does that for you, too.

If you subscribe to Scientific American, you help ensure that our coverage is centered on meaningful research and discovery; that we have the resources to report on the decisions that threaten labs across the U.S.; and that we support both budding and working scientists at a time when the value of science itself too often goes unrecognized.

In return, you get essential news, captivating podcasts, brilliant infographics, can't-miss newsletters, must-watch videos, challenging games, and the science world's best writing and reporting. You can even gift someone a subscription.

There has never been a more important time for us to stand up and show why science matters. I hope you’ll support us in that mission.

Thank you,

David M. Ewalt, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe