An Auditory Component to Autism

New evidence suggests people with autism can recognize feelings and other traits of humanness in voices as well as—or even better than—neurotypical people do

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

“The face is the index of the mind,” according to an ancient proverb. People with autism, however, are often unable to judge when a face conveys emotions such as happiness or sadness, and many researchers take this as evidence that autism involves serious deficits in processing social information. Yet the voice, too, can provide emotional cues, and several recent studies indicate that when listening to voices, people with autism can actually recognize feelings and other traits of humanness as well as—or even better than—neurotypical people do.

The studies were small and focused exclusively on high-functioning adults with autism, whose abilities are not necessarily representative of the broader autistic population, points out Andrew Whitehouse, head of autism research at Telethon Kids Institute in Australia. And success on a laboratory task does not necessarily translate into success in real-world social interactions, adds Helen Tager-Flusberg, a professor of psychological and brain sciences at Boston University. Nevertheless, the studies suggest that at least for some subgroups of autistic people in certain situations, deficits in identifying emotions could be confined primarily to vision. “This is great news from a treatment perspective,” says Kevin Pelphrey, director of the Autism and Neurodevelopmental Disorders Institute at George Washington University. “It is much easier to help someone overcome an inability to read emotion from faces than it would be to treat a fundamental lack of understanding of emotion from all modalities.”

Three Studies on Autism and Emotion


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.


Daniel Javitt of the Nathan Kline Institute for Psychiatric Research in New York State and his colleagues displayed photographs of faces expressing happiness, sadness, fear or anger. The 19 participants with autism did a poor job of identifying these emotions. But when researchers played audio clips of voices conveying similar feelings, these same participants identified the relevant emotions just as well as a control group. The results were published in August in the Journal of Psychiatric Research.

Neuroscientist Tamami Nakano of Osaka University in Japan and her colleagues asked participants to rate real and computer-generated singing voices. Although the performance of the autistic and control groups differed for the real voices, the 14 participants with autism nonetheless gave the artificial voices the same low ratings for humanness and emotional qualities as their neurotypical peers did. The results were published in August in Cognition.

A team led by I-Fan Lin of Tokyo Metropolitan University measured how quickly people could judge whether or not a particular sound came from a human. (Audio examples included a violin playing a note and a person pronouncing the vowel “i.”) The 12 participants with autism not only performed the task faster than their neurotypical peers, they also did it better, readily responding to human voices even when important acoustic components were missing. The results were published online in May in Scientific Reports.

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