Psychology & Neuroscience © 2015 American Psychological Association

2015, Vol. 8, No. 2, 211–245 1983-3288/15/$12.00 http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/h0101059

Memory in Children and Adolescents With Autism Spectrum

Disorder: A Systematic Literature Review

Suelen Bordignon, Renata Giuliani Endres, Clarissa Marceli Trentini,

and Cleonice Alves Bosa
Federal University of Rio Grande do Sul

The aim of this study was to systematically review the literature to investigate the
presence or absence of impairment and mnemonic skills in children and adolescents
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.

with autism spectrum disorder (ASD). The Biblioteca Virtual em Saúde (BVS) and
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.

Web of Science databases were searched using the following search terms (keywords)
between 2003 and 2013: (asd OR asperger OR autism OR pervasive developmental
disorders OR pdd) AND (childⴱ OR adolⴱ) AND memory. The results showed that
children and adolescents with ASD have impairments in autobiographical memory,
memory for faces, and prospective and associative memory for names and people. The
ASD and control groups did not differ in recognition. Performance in verbal and
visuospatial working memory, verbal and implicit learning, visual memory, narrative
memory, and metamemory was not consistent. Better performance was found in
children and adolescents with ASD in associative memory of animals and sounds.
Although delineating a profile of memory for ASD was not possible, the articles
reviewed herein suggest some common deficits in this population.

Keywords: adolescent, Autism Spectrum Disorder, children, memory, systematic review

Autism spectrum disorder (ASD) is a neuro- not only brain development but also the way
developmental condition that is characterized people experience and respond to external de-
by the presence of central impairments in the mands (Boucher & Bowler, 2008). Studies on
socio communicative domain and restricted, re- memory have sought to clarify the processes
petitive, stereotyped patterns of behavior, inter- that underlie their different systems. Several
ests, and activities (American Psychiatric Asso- taxonomies have been developed along with
ciation, 2013). People with ASD are part of a advances in memory research, and memory has
heterogeneous group with great variability in been delineated according to particular charac-
terms of the severity of autistic symptoms, cog- teristics and functions (e.g., working memory,
nitive skills, and adaptive functioning (Ge- prospective memory, episodic memory, and se-
schwind, 2009; Kanne et al., 2011). Studies mantic memory, among others; Tulving &
have been conducted to better understand the Craik, 2000).
profile of these individuals with regard to as- The nature of memory function in ASD has
pects related to neuropsychological functions, been studied for decades, but little effort has
such as memory (Reinvall, Voutilainen, Kujala, been made to summarize the findings (Boucher
& Korkman, 2013). & Bowler, 2008). Memory has been character-
Memory is a fundamental function for the ized as a cognitive domain that is widely re-
learning process. Its early impairment affects sponsible for the clinical manifestations of ASD
and the more generalized secondary cognitive
deficits that constitute executive dysfunction
This article was published Online First May 18, 2015. (Williams, Goldstein, & Minshew, 2006b).
Suelen Bordignon, Renata Giuliani Endres, Clarissa Mar- To contribute to our understanding of execu-
celi Trentini, and Cleonice Alves Bosa, Institute of Psychol- tive function in autism, findings from studies on
ogy, Federal University of Rio Grande do Sul. inhibition, working memory, and set shifting/
Correspondence concerning this article should be ad-
dressed to Suelen Bordignon, Rua Antônio Michelon,
cognitive flexibility must be considered in rela-
498, Santa Rita, Bento Gonçalves, RS 95700-000, Brazil. tion to participants’ levels of development, the
E-mail: [email protected] tasks used to measure executive function, and
211
 212 BORDIGNON, ENDRES, TRENTINI, AND BOSA

the groups that are chosen to compare the per- deficits in ASD patients showed that memory
formance of individuals with autism. Each of impairment may be a consequence of central
these layers provides unique information to- difficulties in the executive functions that are
ward a better understanding of the development present in these individuals (Bennetto, Penning-
of executive function among individuals with ton, & Rogers, 1996; Russell et al., 1996) or a
the disorder (Russo et al., 2007). Specifically in basic deficit in information processing (Min-
terms of working memory, impairments among shew & Goldstein, 2001; Minshew, Goldstein,
individuals with ASD are more complex. The Muenz, & Payton, 1992; Minshew & Payton,
heterogeneity of samples has led to differences 1988). Our current understanding of the mem-
in the findings relevant to working memory in ory profile of ASD individuals suggests not
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.

the autistic spectrum. For example, evidence of only impairments in some aspects, including the
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.

intact working memory function has been typi- free recall of words, sentences, and stories
cally found in studies in which individuals with (Bennetto et al., 1996; Gaigg, Gardiner, &
autism are compared with those with intellec- Bowler, 2008; Minshew & Goldstein, 2001;
tual disabilities, whereas impairments in work- Williams et al., 2006b), but also areas of pre-
ing memory performance have been generally served skills, including recognition memory
noted in studies in which comparisons were (Bennetto et al., 1996; Williams et al., 2006b)
made with typically developing individuals and cued tasks (Boucher & Lewis, 1992).
(Griffith, Pennington, Wehner, & Rogers, 1999; In a study by Jones et al. (2011), 94 adoles-
Minshew & Goldstein, 2001; Russell, Jarrold, cents with ASD and 55 without the disorder
& Henry, 1996). completed memory measurements (Everyday
Although some studies have reported deficits Memory of the Rivermead Behavioral Memory Test
in individuals with ASD with regard to working [RBMT]) and a standard word list recall test
memory, these findings remain contradictory (Children’s Auditory Verbal Learning Test-2
(Griffith et al., 1999; Ozonoff & Strayer, 2001). [CAVLT-2]). The results showed that the ASD
Some prior studies failed to demonstrate spatial group presented significant impairment on the
working memory deficits in individuals with RBMT, including prospective memory, and
autism because of low task difficulty according CAVLT-2 compared with the control group. In
to the participants’ levels of ability. Therefore, addition to these findings, social and communi-
deficits in this domain may be present only cative skills were significantly associated with
when working memory load exceeds some lim- prospective memories in the daily memory con-
ited capacity (Steele, Minshew, Luna, & text but not with the word recall task. Millward,
Sweeney, 2007). Powell, Messer, and Jordan (2000) and Boucher
In a study that investigated variations in (1981) reported impairments in children and
working memory load, which increases the adolescents with ASD with regard to retrospec-
amount of information that needs to be remem- tive memory for activities during either a walk
bered and the number of trials over which it or a laboratory test session. Moreover, regard-
needs to be maintained, high-functioning indi- ing the memory for events, individuals with
viduals with autism performed a subtest of the autism had worse performance in self-executed
computerized Cambridge Neuropsychological tasks than in tasks performed by peers (Mill-
Test Automated Battery (CANTAB), which as- ward et al., 2000).
sesses spatial working memory. The autism Studies have not been consistent with regard
group made more errors than a matched group to memory function in ASD and the character-
of typically developing controls in this task, and ization of this population with regard to this
they were less likely to consistently use a spe- cognitive function (Williams et al., 2006b). Ad-
cific organized search strategy to complete the ditionally, understanding preserved and defi-
task. Overall, these results demonstrate a reduc- cient memory processing in ASD may help de-
tion of spatial working memory ability in au- velop programs for neuropsychological
tism and extend previous findings by demon- rehabilitation. From this perspective, the pres-
strating that these deficits are significant when ent study sought to investigate skills and im-
the tasks impose heavier demands on working pairments in memory function in children and
memory (Steele et al., 2007). Some models that adolescents with ASD through a systematic re-
have been utilized in the study of cognitive view of the literature from 2003 to 2013.
 MEMORY IN AUTISM SPECTRUM DISORDER 213

Method Results and Discussion

The study assessed articles that dealt with Based on the articles that met the inclusion
memory assessment in children and adolescents criteria of empirical studies that assessed the
with ASD. The Biblioteca Virtual em Saúde: memory construct in children and adolescents
BVS (BIREME—Biblioteca Regional de Me- with ASD, the present study initially considered
dicina) and Web of Science Cross Search the frequency of publications per year and sam-
(Thomson Scientific/Institute for Scientific In- ples. Afterward, we analyzed the assessment
formation Web Services) databases were con- instruments used, types of memory investi-
sulted on November 10, 2013, using the follow- gated, and results that were reported. The search
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.

ing search terms for articles published between for articles with the aforementioned search
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.

2003 and 2013: (asd OR asperger OR autism terms resulted in 362 articles with abstracts in
OR pervasive developmental disorders OR pdd) the BVS (BIREME) database and 533 articles
AND (childⴱ OR adolⴱ) AND memory. All of with abstracts in the Web of Science Cross
the terms used should be present in either the Search database published between 2003 and
titles or abstracts of the articles. The search 2013. We excluded 465 duplicate articles that
results (including abstracts) were collated, and appeared in both database. The remaining arti-
duplicates of articles that appeared in more than cles were evaluated based on the inclusion and
one database were excluded. exclusion criteria, leaving a total of 45 articles
The inclusion criteria were empirical articles that were assessed in the present systematic
that assessed memory in children and adoles- review.
cents up to 19 years of age using one or more With regard to the number of publications per
instruments and/or tasks and studies with nor- year, 10 studies were from 2013, three were from
mative control groups or children and adoles- 2012, 10 were from 2011, two were from 2010, four
cents with typical development. Abstracts were were from 2009, five were from 2008, two were
from 2007, two were from 2006, five were from
evaluated by two independent judges. Articles
2005, and two were from 2003. Among the 45
that presented disagreement among the judges
studies, most of them (80.8%) discussed mem-
with regard to the inclusion criteria were shown
ory assessment in mixed samples (i.e., they in-
to a third judge who assessed the articles based
cluded children or adolescents with Asperger
on an analysis of the defined criteria. All of the syndrome, ASD, High-Functioning Autism
articles that involved the assessment of memory (HFA), or Global Development Disorders–not
in children and adolescents with ASD were otherwise specified).
selected. The present study first excluded arti- Six studies (13.3%) had samples of partici-
cles that referred to systematic literature re- pants with HFA, and only two (4.4%) had sam-
views, theoretical studies, case reports, experi- ples with Asperger syndrome. Only 20 studies
mental studies with animal models, book had samples that were matched for IQ, although
chapters, conference proceedings, brain imag- most of them had this variable controlled. Most
ing studies, articles in languages other than Por- of the samples of children and adolescents with
tuguese, English, or Spanish, drug presenta- ASD in the studies were composed of male
tions, studies with participants ⬎19 years of participants. The participants’ weighted mean
age, and studies that did not focus on memory age was 10.99 years (range, 5–18 years).
assessment in this population. The full-text ar- The studies were grouped according to dif-
ticles were then obtained, although some of ferent memory characterizations to elucidate
them could not be obtained through CAPES their underlying processes. The present study
(Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal identified articles that discussed working mem-
de Nível Superior) journals. Further analysis of ory, episodic memory, prospective memory,
the articles resulted in some exclusions, in iconic memory, metamemory, recognition, se-
which some of the studies had no control groups mantic memory, associative memory, and auto-
with typical development or normative samples. biographical memory. The instruments and
Other articles were foreclosed because the full tasks that were used for memory assessment in
version presented exclusion criteria not previ- the studies used visual, verbal, and auditory
ously identified by abstract. stimuli. Importantly, some of the instruments
 214 BORDIGNON, ENDRES, TRENTINI, AND BOSA

utilized emotional or social stimuli, and one of bal working memory in the ASD sample. Seven
the characteristics of clinical population studies articles found impairments in this function in
is the presence of impairment in these domains. some of the aspects that were assessed (Alder-
To better understand the results, some studies son-Day & McGomigle-Chalmers, 2011; An-
were grouped according to these differences. dersen, Hovik, Skogli, Egeland, & Oie, 2013;
Ham et al., 2011; Joseph, McGrath, & Tager-
Working Memory Flusberg, 2005; Joseph, Steele, Meyer, &
Tager-Flusberg, 2005; Mayes & Calhoun, 2008;
Among the different memory subtypes, most Narzisi et al., 2013), and seven mentioned as-
of the articles evaluated working memory. The pects of preserved verbal working memory in
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.

working memory concept refers to the active ASD (i.e., they did not show differences com-
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.

use of memory to manipulate information. The pared with a control group or normative sample;
initial model that was proposed by Baddeley Chan et al., 2011; Ham et al., 2011; Joseph,
(1998) consists of a multicomponent system McGrath, et al., 2005, Joseph, Steele, et al.,
that comprises the central executive, episodic 2005; Maister & Plaisted-Grant, 2011; Saldãna,
buffer, phonological loop, and visuospatial Carreiras, & Frith, 2009; Williams et al.,
sketchpad (Baddeley, Eysenck, & Anderson, 2006b).
2009). According to this model, the central ex- In the articles that assessed verbal working
ecutive is an attentional controller that manages memory using Digit Span or Word Span, a
working memory. The phonological loop and higher number of studies did not find significant
visuospatial sketchpad are responsible for ac- differences between ADS and control groups
tively maintaining verbal and visuospatial infor- (Chan et al., 2011; Ham et al., 2011; Joseph,
mation, respectively. The episodic buffer is the McGrath, et al., 2005; Maister & Plaisted-
component that is able to store the information Grant, 2011; Saldaña et al., 2009). Two studies
that is being manipulated, and it has connec- reported poor performance in the ASD group
tions with the other components and long-term compared with controls or a normative sample
memory inputs. (Ham et al., 2011; Mayes & Calhoun, 2008). In
In some of the studies, working memory was the Digit Span subtest, a list of numbers to be
assessed as part of executive function and not repeated in the same order is read to the partic-
always specifically analyzed. For this reason, ipant. The list of numbers that are read increases
some of the articles defined their evaluations in during the task. In the Digit Span subtest of the
terms of components, as proposed by Baddeley Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children
(2003; i.e., considering the phonological loop, (WISC) or tasks that used the same paradigm
visuospatial sketchpad, episodic buffer, and (i.e., requesting the participants to repeat num-
central executive). Many of the studies distin- bers that are read forward and backward, in
guished verbal and visuospatial working mem- which the length of the list of words gradually
ory. Table 1 shows the main findings for work- increases), two studies did not report differ-
ing memory. ences in forward (Chan et al., 2011; Saldanã et
Sixteen studies on working memory in chil- al., 2009) or backward (Ham et al., 2011;
dren and adolescents with ASD were selected. Saldaña et al., 2009) repetition, whereas one
Among these, six assessed working memory as study reported worse performance for forward
the main component, and five assessed visu- as well as backward (Mayes & Calhoun, 2008).
ospatial working memory. Four assessed both Verbal working memory was assessed by the
of these, and two assessed working memory in WISC Letter-Number Sequencing test in two
everyday activities through parents’ reports. studies (Andersen et al., 2013; Mayes & Cal-
Concerning verbal working memory, among houn, 2008), in which the ASD group had worse
the articles analyzed, no consensus was reached performance compared with controls. In this
with regard to the existence of impairment of task, the examiner presents a list of scrambled
this function in children and adolescents with numbers and letters, and the participant must
ASD. Among the 10 articles that presented respond by saying the numbers in ascending
measures for the assessment of verbal working order, followed by the letters in alphabetical
memory, some of them found, in addition to order (the length of the list gradually increases
impaired performance, preserved aspects of ver- during the task). Impairments in verbal working
 This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.

Table 1
Working Memory Assessment in Samples of Children and Adolescents With ASD
Age (years) Gender Assessment
Article Sample M (SD) (% male) Type of memory instrument Main results
Andersen et al., 2013 38 HFA (16 ADHD 12.0 (2.3) 81.57 Verbal memory Letter-Number • HFA group (general)
symptoms 11.6 (2.0) 55.69 Sequencing (LNS) had worse performance
[HFA⫹], 22 11.6 (2.0) 64.00 test (WISC-IV) in verbal working
without memory than TD group.
symptoms • HFA⫹ group was more
[HFA⫺]) impaired than HFA⫺
79 ADHD and TD groups in verbal
50 TD working memory.
• HFA group was more
impaired than TD group
in verbal working
memory.
Chan et al., 2011 21 ASD 10.27 (2.26) 89 Verbal memory Digit Span Forward • No significant difference
21 TD 9.85 (2.15) 50 was found between ASD
and TD groups in
performance on Digit
Span.
Ham et al., 2011 19 ASD (16 AS, 3 12.1 (2.3) 89 Verbal memory Working Memory • ASD group did not
HFA) 12.0 (2.1) 91 Test Battery for differ in Digit recall
23 TD Children: digit (phonological loop) but
recall, word list showed worse
matching, listening performance in the
recall Word List Matching and
Listening recall (central
MEMORY IN AUTISM SPECTRUM DISORDER

executive) subtests
compared with control
group.
Saldanã et al., 2009 14 ASD 13.9 (1.3) 92 Verbal memory Digit Span Forward • No significant difference
12 TD 13.7 (1.9) 100 and Backward was found between
(WISC) groups.
Mayes & Calhoun, 54 HFA 8.2 (2.0) 89 Verbal memory Digit Span Backward • Performance in working
2008 and Forward and memory was
Letter Number significantly impaired
Sequencing compared with
(WISC-IV) normative sample.
(table continues)
215
 This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.

216

Table 1 (continued)
Age (years) Gender Assessment
Article Sample M (SD) (% male) Type of memory instrument Main results
Narzisi, Muratori, 22 ASD (10 AUT, 9.77 (3.65) 100 Visuospatial and Word List • ASD group showed
Calderoni, Fabbro 12 PDD-NOS) TD-matched 100 verbal memory Interference, worse performance in all
and Urgesi, 2013 44 TD Memory for subtests.
Designs, and • The lower performance
Sentence in Memory for Design
Repetition test may have been
(NEPSY-II) influenced by the verbal
intelligence (for
understanding of the
task).
Maister & Plaisted- 15 ASD 11.8 (1.5) 100 Visuospatial and Visuospatial delayed • No significant difference
Grant, 2011 15 TD 11.2 (1.2) 73 verbal memory matching-to- was found between ASD
sample task and and TD groups in short-
word span task term visuospatial and
phonological memory.
Williams et al., 38 HFA 11.68 (2.46) NI Visuospatial and Number/Letter • No differences were
2006b 38 TD 12.16 (2.19) verbal memory (WRAML) found between groups in
Finger Windows verbal working memory.
• Performance was
significantly impaired in
the finger windows
subtest compared with
TD group.
BORDIGNON, ENDRES, TRENTINI, AND BOSA

Joseph, McGrath, & 37 ASD (32 AUT, 7.1 (1.9) 86 Visuospatial and Word Span Forward • No differences were
Tager-Flusberg, 5 PDD-NOS) 8.3 (2.1) 77 verbal memory and Backward and found between groups in
2005 31 TD Block Span the Word Span Forward
Forward and and Backward and
Backward Block Span Forward.
• ASD group had worse
performance than control
group on Block Span
Backward.
 This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.

Table 1 (continued)
Age (years) Gender Assessment
Article Sample M (SD) (% male) Type of memory instrument Main results
Joseph, Steele, 24 ASD 8.11 (2.4) 87 Visuospatial and Verbal Span Forward • No significant
Meyer, & Tager- 24 TD 8.11 (2.2) 79 verbal memory Self-ordered pointing differences were found
Flusberg, 2005 (SOPT) - verbal between groups in
and non-verbal performance on Verbal
conditions Span and non-verbal
SOPT.
• ASD group had
impaired performance
(more mistakes) in the
verbal condition of the
SOPT compared with
TD group.
Reinvall et al., 2013 30 AS 13.5 (1.2) 66 Visuospatial memory Memory for designs • No significant difference
30 TD 13.7 (1.0) 66 (Finnish version of was found between
NEPSY-II) groups in visuospatial
memory.
Alderson-Day & 14 ASD (13 AUT, 13.2 (2.3) 85 Visuospatial memory Adapted version of • ASD group had to ask
McGomigle- 1 AS) 13.4 (2.2) 78 Twenty Questions more questions than TD
Chalmers, 2011 14 TD Task - memory group to complete the
condition task when the working
memory condition was
required.
• ASD group used more
functional questions and
TD group used a higher
MEMORY IN AUTISM SPECTRUM DISORDER

number of abstract
questions.
Altgassen et al., 2009 11 ASD 9.6 (2.6) Visuospatial memory Ongoing Task • No difference was found
11 TD 10.6 (2.9) between groups in the
single task of the
Ongoing Task.
• In the double task,
accuracy was
significantly impaired in
the ASD group.
(table continues)
217
 This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.

218

Table 1 (continued)
Age (years) Gender Assessment
Article Sample M (SD) (% male) Type of memory instrument Main results
Corbett et al., 2009 18 ASD (12 AUT, 9.4 (1.96) NI Visuospatial memory Spatial Span and • ASD group showed
3 AS, 3 PDD- 9.4 (1.98) Spatial Working deficits in working
NOS) 9.5 (1.81) Memory subtests memory in both subtests.
18 ADHD (CANTAB)
18 TD
Sinzig, Morsch, 20 ASD (15 AS, 5 10.9 (3.1) 94.7 Visuospatial memory Task performed on a • No significant
Bruning, Schmidt, HFA) ⫹ ADHD 12.3 (3.0) 80 computer screen differences were found
& Lehmkuhl, 2008 20 ASD (15 AS, 5 12.2 (2.0) 70 with colored between groups.
HFA) 13.1 (3.0) boxes. The child
20 ADHD was asked to pile
20 TD up blue boxes on
the right side of
the box.
Afterward, the
child had to search
for new boxes,
trying not to take
the same ones that
were already
placed in the stack
(they did not
disappear after
being taken). The
“Strategy score” is
BORDIGNON, ENDRES, TRENTINI, AND BOSA

estimated
according to the
number of
searches that start
from the same
place. The number
of errors between
searches and time
to perform the test
were recorded.
 This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.

Table 1 (continued)
Age (years) Gender Assessment
Article Sample M (SD) (% male) Type of memory instrument Main results
Rosenthal et al., 185 ASD 34 (5–7) 85 Working memory Behavior Rating • Worse working memory
2013 65 (8–10) 85 Inventory of performance as ASD
50 (11–13) 76 Executive children’s age advanced
36 (14–18) 86 Function-Parent compared with
Form (BRIEF) - normative sample.
Working Memory
subtest (and
informer answers
about memory in
everyday
situations)
Yerys et al., 2011 28 ASD (11 AUT, 10.89 (1.5) 75 Working memory Behavior Rating • A significant difference
12 AS, 5 PDD- 11.07 (1.32) 72 Inventory of was found between
NOS) Executive groups, and the ASD
18 TD Function-Parent group showed more
Form (BRIEF) - impairment than the TD
Working Memory group.
subtest (an • It was reported greater
informer responds deficits of working
MEMORY IN AUTISM SPECTRUM DISORDER

about memory in memory in the group

everyday with ASD
situations)
Note. ADHD ⫽ attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder; AS ⫽ Asperger syndrome; ASD ⫽ autism spectrum disorder; AUT ⫽ autism; CG ⫽ control group; HFA ⫽
high-functioning autism; PDD-NOS ⫽ pervasive developmental disorder–not otherwise specified; TD ⫽ typical development; NI ⫽ not informed.
219
 220 BORDIGNON, ENDRES, TRENTINI, AND BOSA

memory in ASD were also found in the follow- Altgassen et al., 2009; Corbett, Constantine,
ing tasks. The participants were supposed to Hendren, Rocke, & Ozonoff, 2009; Joseph,
judge whether two word lists were the same and McGrath, et al., 2005; Joseph, Steele, et al.,
whether the sentences were correct or incorrect 2005; Narzisi et al., 2013; Williams et al.,
(i.e., a central executive component of working 2006b). Summarizing these findings was not
memory). The participants also performed a simple because the tests and tasks that were
memory task that required inhibition compo- used in the studies were quite different. Only
nents (word list inference), in which two lists of two studies used the same instrument (Memory
different words were shown; among these, the for Design subtest of the Neuropsychological
participants were asked to repeat the list as it Assessment [NEPSY]) but they showed incon-
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.

was read by the examiner. Furthermore, the sistent results (Narzisi et al., 2013; Reinvall et
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.

participants performed tasks that required the al., 2013). In this task, participants observe ab-
repetition of sentences (Narzisi et al., 2013). stract pictures that are displayed in a grid. After
The tasks that showed similar performance having the pictures removed from their visual
between the ASD and control groups were those fields, they receive cards with the pictures to be
in which a list of two-syllable words was read to placed in the previous positions. Similarly, the
the participants, and they were asked to repeat visuospatial delayed match-to-sample task of
them in the same order (Maister & Plaisted- Maister and Plaisted-Grant (2011), which is
Grant, 2011), and those in which a list of words quite similar to the NEPSY subtest, did not
was presented, and the participants were asked show differences between groups.
to point, in a drawing grid, the same order of Among the tasks, the ASD group had worse
words heard, both forward and backward (Jo- performance than controls on Block Span
seph, McGrath, et al., 2005; Joseph, Steele, et (backward; in which the participant is asked to
al., 2005). In all of the tasks, the length of the tap the blocks backward; Joseph, McGrath, et
list gradually increased during the assessment. al., 2005), SOPT (Self-Ordered Pointing; in
Notably, one of the studies (Andersen et al., which “the individual initiate and execute a
2013) controlled symptoms of attention-deficit/ sequence of responses, maintain a record of
hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) in the ASD responses, and monitor their performance”;
sample, finding more impairment when symp- Strauss et al., 2006, p. 471; Joseph, Steele, et al.,
toms were associated. Although controlling 2005), Twenty Question Task (in which partic-
these variables is important, not all studies do it, ipants must name an item [e.g., robot] about
even when considering the diversity of this clin- which the examiner is thinking; the examiner
ical population. These data indicate the need to provides hints by disclosing certain characteris-
evaluate other functions, such as attention, tics of the items, such as color, the number of
when studying memory, considering this an im- feet, etc.; Alderson-Day & McGomigle-Chalm-
portant condition for encoding (Tulving & ers, 2011), Ongoing Task (i.e., a computer
Craik, 2000). In the working memory model, working memory task, in which stimuli are
the attentional component is called the central shown at different places/positions, and partic-
executive. Among the articles evaluated herein, ipants must remember the symbol configura-
only one reported the use of a task that evalu- tion; e.g., symbols were shown, and the partic-
ated the central executive component. The re- ipants had to say whether they were at the same
sults indicated worse performance in the ASD position; Altgassen et al., 2009), and Spatial
group (Ham et al., 2011). Span and Spatial Working memory subtests (the
Some of the studies that assessed visuospatial first subtest follows the paradigm of Block Span
working memory reported no differences be- forward and backward [previously presented],
tween ASD and control groups in some tasks and the second one requires the participant to
and subtests (Altgassen, Williams, Bölte, & keep information in working memory, manipu-
Kliegel, 2009; Joseph, Steele, et al., 2005; late it, and inhibit previously emitted responses;
Maister & Plaisted-Grant, 2011; Reinvall et al., Corbett et al., 2009).
2013; Sinzig et al., 2008). Others reported im- A possible explanation for these aspects is the
paired performance in ASD in some character- theory of executive dysfunction, which has been
istics of visuospatial working memory (Alder- purported to underlie many of the key charac-
son-Day & McGomigle-Chalmers, 2011; teristics of autism, both in the social and non-
 MEMORY IN AUTISM SPECTRUM DISORDER 221

social domains. The behavioral problems that while collecting gold coins and avoiding ob-
are addressed by this theory include rigidity and stacles. In the time-based task, the car had
perseveration, which are explained by the poor little fuel and had to be filled up. In the
initiation of new nonroutine actions and the event-based task, the participants were sup-
tendency to be stuck on a given task set. At the posed to press a key when passing trucks.
same time, the ability to perform routine actions Brandimonte et al. (2011) used a task in
can be excellent, manifested as a strong liking which participants were asked to press keys
for repetitive behavior and sometimes elaborate according to figures to perform a prospective
rituals. Repetitive actions dominate daily life in memory task. They were asked to press a
many people with autism. They are well known different key when the target appeared. Alt-
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.

to benefit from prompts and externally provided gassen et al. (2009) used a task in which the
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.

structures that initiate these routines or help participants had to press a button every 2 min.
them switch sets (Hill, 2004). Many authors define prospective memory as
Two of the studies used one of the parents of a nonsingle construct (Hannon, Adams, Har-
children with ASD to assess working memory rington, Fries-Dias, & Gipson, 1995), in which
in everyday activities (Rosenthal et al., 2013; the performance of a task in this modality uses
Yerys, Wallace, Jankowski, Bollich, & Ken- episodic memory and strategies (e.g., clues or
worthy, 2011) using the Working Memory sub- cues), among other necessary cognitive func-
test of the Behavior Rating Inventory of Exec- tions. According to the results, children and
utive Function (BRIEF)-Parent Form. Both of adolescents with ASD exhibit impairments in
the studies reported impairment in the ASD prospective memory.
sample. The study by Rosenthal et al. (2013)
reported worse performance as age advanced
Memory for Faces
compared with the normative sample.
The findings with regard to working memory Some studies have focused on assessing
in the present review partially oppose some memory skills with regard to facial processing
authors who advocate the notion that memory in individuals with ASD to better understand
deficits are present to some extent in several
their social deficits. Studies have reported a
individuals with ASD (Boucher & Bowler,
specific memory impairment domain, defined as
2008). Unclear are the differences that might
the poor recognition of faces that are related to
exist in the extension and severity of memory
other object categories (Blair, Frith, Smith,
impairments along the spectrum of autism
(Boucher, Mayes, & Bigham, 2012). Abell, & Cipolotti, 2002; Boucher & Lewis,
1992; Hauck, Fein, Maltby, Waterhouse, &
Feinstein, 1998; Williams, Goldstein, & Min-
Prospective Memory
shew, 2005).
Another memory category that shares some Most of the studies assessed herein that
components of executive functions is prospec- dealt specifically with face memory reported
tive memory. It is characterized by the ability to worse performance for discrimination and im-
plan, organize, and record information at a suit- mediate and delayed face recognition when
able moment in a certain field or context with- assessed using the NEPSY-II (Narzisi et al.,
out a specific reminder (Cuttler & Graf, 2007). 2013; Reinvall et al., 2013), using a face
The four studies that dealt with prospective recognition task (Wilson, Palermo, & Brock,
memory found impairments in the ASD group 2012), and in young children (Kuusikko-
(Altgassen et al., 2009; Brandimonte, Filip- Gauffin et al., 2011; Table 3). In the memory
pello, Coluccia, Altgassen, & Kliegel, 2011; for faces task (NEPSY), participants visualize
Rajendran et al., 2011; Williams, Boucher, a series of photos, receive a sheet of paper
Lind, & Jarrold, 2013; Table 2). with three photographs, and are required to
For the assessment of prospective memory, select the photo that was previously shown.
three studies used specific tasks, and one of The task requires discrimination among the
them used the Virtual Errands Test (VET). photos and recognition. Similarly, in the rec-
Williams et al. (2013) used a task performed ognition task by Wilson et al. (2012), two
on a computer, in which a car was driven photos were presented, and the participant
 This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.

222

Table 2
Prospective Memory Assessment in Samples of Children and Adolescents With ASD
Age (years) Gender
Article Sample M (SD) (% male) Type of memory Assessment instrument Main results
Williams et al., 2013 21 ASD (13 AUT, 10.60 (2.01) NI Prospective memory Prospective memory task • ASD group showed impairment
8 AS) 10.59 (1.31) based on time and in time-based prospective
21 TD event memory, but event-based
prospective memory remained
unchanged.
Brandimonte et al., 30 ASD 8.25 (2.44) 70 Prospective memory Prospective task • TD group had significantly
2011 30 TD 8.33 (1.91) 70 better performance than ASD
group.
Rajendran et al., 18 ASD 11.6 (17.4) 88 Prospective and Virtual Errands Test • ASD group showed difficulty
2011 18 TD 12.2 (18.3) 77 retrospective (VET) following rules.
memory • Such difficulties suggest
difficulties in the following
rules: “forget/do not
remember,” previously learned
(retrospective memory) or rules
for “not bringing to mind” in
the accomplishment of the task
(prospective memory).
Altgassen et al., 11 ASD 9.6 (2.6) Prospective memory Prospective memory • Controls had significantly more
2009 11 TD 10.6 (2.9) task: task correct responses for
BORDIGNON, ENDRES, TRENTINI, AND BOSA

simultaneous to the prospective memory than the

Ongoing Task clinical group. Controls would
(previously presented), monitor time more often.
in which the
participants had to
press a button every 2
min
Note. ASD ⫽ autism spectrum disorder; AUT ⫽ autism; TD ⫽ typical development; NI ⫽ not informed.
 This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.

Table 3
Memory for Faces Assessment in Samples of Children and Adolescents With ASD
Age (years) Gender
Article Sample M (SD) (% male) Type of memory Assessment instrument Main results
Narzisi et al., 2013 22 ASD (10 AUT, 9.77 (3.65) 100 Memory for faces Memory for Faces • ASD group showed worse
12 PDD-NOS) TD-matched 100 (discrimination and performance than TD
44 TD recognition; Italian group.
version of NEPSY-II)
Reinvall et al., 30 AS 13.5 (1.2) 66 Memory for faces Memory for Faces (Finnish • AS group showed worse
2013 30 TD 13.7 (1.0) 66 version of NEPSY-I) performance in the
Memory for Faces subtest
(discrimination and
recognition) compared
with control group.
Wilson et al., 2012 11 ASD (6 AUT, 10.21 (2.0) 63 Face recognition Eye movement was recorded • ASD group had worse
5 AS) 10.54 (2.04) 54 while the participant performance in the face
11 TD observed faces. Afterward, recognition test.
they performed a face • No differences were found
recognition task between groups in the
time used for eye gaze.
Fast eye movement for
the main characteristics
MEMORY IN AUTISM SPECTRUM DISORDER

was correlated with better

performance in facial
recognition in both
groups.
(table continues)
223
 This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.

224

Table 3 (continued)
Age (years) Gender
Article Sample M (SD) (% male) Type of memory Assessment instrument Main results
Kuusikko-Gauffin 45 ASD (13 HFA 11.5 (2.1) 80 Memory for faces Memory for visual • Significantly better
et al., 2011 and 22 AS) 12.4 (2.3) 44 recognition of faces and performance related to
70 CG visual memory subtests aging was found when the
(NEPSY) analyses were performed
by dividing the groups
into younger and older
children in the Memory
for Faces subtest.
• Young HFA/AS group
had worse performance
than young controls in the
Memory for Faces and
Visual Recognition
subtests.
• Older HFA/AS group had
better performance in the
Visual Recognition subtest
than controls.
López et al., 2008 15 HFA 13.10 (2.4) NI Face recognition Face recognition task • No significant difference
BORDIGNON, ENDRES, TRENTINI, AND BOSA

16 TD 14.4 (0.10) was found between groups

in the tasks.
Note. AS ⫽ Asperger syndrome; ASD ⫽ autism spectrum disorder; AUT ⫽ autism; CG ⫽ control group; HFA ⫽ high-functioning autism; PDD-NOS ⫽ pervasive developmental
disorder–not otherwise specified; TD ⫽ typical development; NI ⫽ not informed.
 MEMORY IN AUTISM SPECTRUM DISORDER 225

had to identify the one that was previously son, Palermo, Schmalzl, & Brock, 2010), and
shown. fans (Snow et al., 2011).
Finally, in the task by López, Leekam, and
Arts (2008), a complete face was shown. Af- Recognition Memory
terward, pictures with only two characteris-
tics were shown (e.g., two mouths). The par- Recognition memory refers to the ability to
ticipants then had to judge which picture was decide whether a stimulus was or was not pre-
part of the previous figure. Importantly, this viously shown. Its components include recollec-
task requires the participant to remember spe- tion (i.e., the active search for information
cific characteristics rather than recognize the stored at a certain moment) and familiarity (i.e.,
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.

face as a whole. Some authors stated that an automatic process that occurs more rapidly;
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.

memory deficits for faces may result in dif- Khoe, Kroll, Yonelinas, Dobbins, & Knight,
ferences in social interest or eye movement 2000). The tasks that assess recognition mem-
strategies. Additionally, face recognition def- ory have two formats: “yes/no” tasks and
icits mainly affect memory for faces and not “forced choice” tasks. In the former, items are
their perception, showing that the impairment presented again and mixed with new ones, and
is specific to social stimuli (Weigelt et al., the respondent must say whether that item was
2014). One of the articles analyzed herein previously shown in the previously learned list.
sought to assess memory bias in photographs In the latter, a new list is presented for learning,
with people. The study showed a bias in the and the respondent must decide whether the
person’s gaze at the photo in both groups item was present in the first or second list.
(Freeth, Ropar, Chapman, & Mitchell, 2010). In the memory assessment, specifically in
recognition tasks, the studies did not find sig-
In one of the tasks performed with a con-
nificant differences between ASD subjects and
trolled gaze time, individuals with ASD did not
controls with regard to different stimuli, such as
differ in the time of eye gaze, but the best
sensorial/perception, temporal, spatial, verbal,
performance in facial recognition was associ-
associative, and story (Lind & Bowler, 2009;
ated with quick eye movements for the main
Molesworth, Bowler, & Hampton, 2005; Sal-
characteristics of the face (Wilson et al., 2012). mond et al., 2005; Souchay, Wojcik, Williams,
One of the studies showed better performance in Crathern, & Clarke, 2013). One study reported
face memory as age progressed (Kuusikko- worse performance in the ASD group compared
Gauffin et al., 2011). The younger children had with controls in visual recognition tasks (Sal-
worse scores compared with controls, and this maninan, Tehrani-Doost, Ghanbari-Motlagh, &
difference disappeared in the older children. Shahrivar, 2012), but when IQ was considered
One of the studies used a recognition task for as a covariable, this difference disappeared.
faces and characteristics and did not find differ- This type of task generally shows lower com-
ences between controls and individuals with plexity than recall tasks (Williams et al.,
ASD (López et al., 2008). 2006a), in which stimuli are presented and the
A recent review (Weigelt, Koldewyn, & Kan- individual must state whether the item was or
wisher, 2012) identified 16 studies that com- was not present in the initial phase. Some au-
pared the recognition of faces and other visual thors have sought to distinguish the cognitive
objects in people with ASD to test the specific- processes that underlie these tasks. According
ity of the deficit domain. Among the studies to Tulving and Pearlstone (1966), when a mem-
reviewed, 12 reported selective deficits, in ory trace is available, the representation of
which the recognition of faces was more im- items makes it easier to access. However, when
paired than the recognition of visual patterns a failure in the recognition process occurs, one
(Davies, Bishop, Manstead, & Tantam, 1994; hypothesis suggests that the information is un-
McPartland, Webb, Keehn, & Dawson, 2011), available. Other factors are known to be in-
cars (Wallace, Coleman, & Bailey, 2008; Wolf volved, although item representation may help
et al., 2008), buildings (Hauck et al., 1998; solve tasks in individuals who experience diffi-
Wallace et al., 2008), ordinary objects (Scherf, culty creating memorization strategies and
Behrmann, Minshew, & Luna, 2008), shoes clues. Importantly, in the articles reviewed
(Gepner, de Gelder, & de Schonen, 1996; Wil- herein that utilized recognition tasks specifi-
 226 BORDIGNON, ENDRES, TRENTINI, AND BOSA

cally with faces, children and adolescents with are necessary. Some authors indicated that cog-
ASD had worse performance than typically de- nitive functions, such as memory, reasoning,
veloping children and adolescents (Narzisi et and language, mediate social interactions (Cos-
al., 2013; Reinvall et al., 2013; Wilson et al., mides & Tooby, 1992; Pinker, 2004). The im-
2012). These results are summarized in Table 4. portance of learning processes and social inter-
actions for children’s development is widely
Episodic Memory, Learning, and Narrative known. The study of learning processes in in-
Memory dividuals with ASD, including understanding
implicit learning capabilities, can help create
Episodic memory refers to a system of mem- strategies for cognitive and neurological devel-
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.

ories for events that occurred at a particular time opment in this population.
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.

in the past. Tulving (2002) proposed three es- With regard to narrative memory, which con-
sential characteristics of episodic memories: sists of evaluating story recall abilities (Narzisi
subjective sense of time (in which the subject et al., 2013), the results did not show a consen-
can travel mentally in the search for informa- sus. One of the studies reported worse perfor-
tion), autonoetic consciousness (which differen- mance in the ASD group (Narzisi et al., 2013),
tiates the search for past information from ex- and the other one did not show significant dif-
periences lived in the present time or even ferences between groups (Reinvall et al., 2013).
dreams), and the self (i.e., the existence of Both studies used the same test (NEPSY-II) in
someone who can travel in time). According to the version adapted to their culture. In this test,
Bower (2000), learning is the process by which the participant listens to a story and is then
people acquire knowledge, whereas memory is asked to repeat it. The examiner then asks a few
responsible for retrieving the content that is questions to elicit forgotten details.
learned. In another study on storytelling recall, al-
Some studies on memory attempted to assess
though the typically developing group recalled
the maintenance of long-term information and
more information in free recall than the ASD
learning capacity along the trials (see Table 5).
group, accuracy was high in both groups (Mc-
Of the five studies reviewed herein that assessed
Crory, Henry, & Happé, 2007). The ASD group
learning, four reported some impairment in chil-
dren and adolescents with ASD (Andersen et had similar performance to controls for fact
al., 2013; Chan et al., 2011; Erdődi, Lajiness- recognition and worse performance for identi-
O’Neill, & Schmitt, 2013; Narzisi et al., 2013). fication of the information source. In this task,
In one of the studies on verbal learning, assessed the participant was shown a 5-min scene, with
using the Test of Memory and Learning (TOMAL) one actor of each gender (i.e., live drama). The
Visual and Word Selective Reminding Task sub- next day, the child was interviewed and asked to
test, the ASD group presented normal rates of retell the story. Afterward, six general questions
acquisition and rates of information consolida- and 10 specific questions were asked. Immedi-
tion above the normative sample (Erdődi et al., ately afterward, 18 “suggestive” questions were
2013). The studies that used the Hong Kong asked. The assessment of false memories did
List Learning Test (HKLLT) reported worse not reveal differences with regard to the gen-
performance in verbal learning in the ASD eral, specific, or suggestive questions (McCrory
group (Chan et al., 2011). The third study eval- et al., 2007).
uated an HFA group using the Hopkins Verbal With regard to episodic memory assessment,
Learning Test–Revised (Norwegian version) different tasks and instruments were used in the
and reported worse performance in acquisition studies reviewed herein. Concerning the differ-
and long-term recall in the clinical group, who ent types of stimulus presentations, some stud-
had worse scores when associated with ADHD ies divided memory into visual and verbal/
symptoms (Andersen et al., 2013). auditory. Some of the articles did not show
Only one of the studies assessed implicit performance differences in visual memory tests
learning (Nemeth et al., 2010), which did not and tasks (Dunphy-Lelii & Wellman, 2012; Sal-
find differences between ASD and control manian et al., 2012), and others showed im-
groups in information consolidation. Further paired performance in ASD (Åsberg, Dahlgren,
studies that assess learning in this population & Sandberg, 2008).
 This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.

Table 4
Recognition Memory Assessment in Samples of Children and Adolescents With ASD
Age (years) Gender
Article Sample M (SD) (% male) Type of memory Assessment instrument Main results
Souchay et al., 2013 19 ASD 14.15 (2.44) 84 Recognition memory Three recognition tasks: • ASD group showed the
19 TD 13.18 (2.70) 73 (a) sensory/perception same recognition
aspects, capacity as controls,
(b) temporal aspects, and although the AUT
(c) spatial aspects. The group presented fewer
participants answered the remembered responses.
following for each target Similar to controls,
and distractor: R they were able to
(remembered), K (knew recognize stimulus
they had seen it), and NS characteristics.
(not seen). When R,
another question was
asked to justify their
answer.
Salmanian et al., 15 ASD (HFA, 12.80 (3.23) NI Recognition memory Pattern Recognition Memory • ASD group had worse
2012 AS) 10.53 (3.04) (PRM), Spatial performance in all
15 TD Recognition Memory memory tests compared
(SRM) - CANTAB with controls.
• When IQ was
considered as a
covariable, no
difference was
observed between
groups.
Lind & Bowler, 53 ASD (49 AUT, 9.26 (2.06) 84.9 Recognition memory Task: cards with figures in • No difference was
MEMORY IN AUTISM SPECTRUM DISORDER

2009 4 AS) 9.09 (1.93) 70 two conditions: the found between groups
50 CG (IQ- experimenter named the in recognition.
matched) figure or asked the
participant to name it.
After 2 min, a recognition
test was performed (words
read by the experimenter).
When the participants
answered “Yes,” they
were asked to say who
they had drawn and
named.
(table continues)
227
 This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.

228

Table 4 (continued)
Age (years) Gender
Article Sample M (SD) (% male) Type of memory Assessment instrument Main results
Molesworth et al., 15 HFA 11.71 (1.65) NI Recognition memory Task 1: image recognition • No difference was
2005 15 TD 11.73 (1.75) (plants and flowers) found between HFA
Task 2: image recognition and TD groups in
(cartoon animals) image and part
Task 3: category similarity (prototype) recognition.
(eight animals and eight
birds)
Salmond et al., 2005 14 ASD (11 AS, 3 12.9 (0.7) 92.85 Recognition memory Children’s Memory Scale • No significant
HFA) 12.6 (0.7) 50 (CMS) - word-list difference was found
18 TD 12.1 (0.7) 100 recognition, word-pair between groups in
13 controls recognition, and story recognition memory.
recognition
Note. AS ⫽ Asperger syndrome; ASD ⫽ autism spectrum disorder; AUT ⫽ autism; CG ⫽ control group; HFA ⫽ high-functioning autism; TD ⫽ typical development; NI ⫽
BORDIGNON, ENDRES, TRENTINI, AND BOSA

not informed.
 This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.

Table 5
Episodic Memory and Learning Assessment in Samples of Children and Adolescents With ASD
Age (years) Gender
Article Sample M (SD) (% male) Type of memory Assessment instrument Main results
Andersen et al., 2013 38 HFA (16 ADHD 12.0 (2.3) 81.57 Learning memory Norwegian version for • HFA⫹, HFA⫺, and ADHD
symptoms 11.6 (2.0) 55.69 Hopkins Verbal Learning group had more impairment
[HFA⫹], 22 11.6 (2.0) 64.00 Test-Revised (HVLT-R) than TD group in
without acquisition on the HVLT-R.
symptoms • HFA ⫹ and ADHD groups
[HFA⫺] had more impairment than
79 ADHD TD group in late memory on
50 TD the HVLT-R.
Erdődi et al., 2013 42 ASD 10.3 (2.8) 90.5 Verbal, auditory, Test of Memory and • ASD group showed deficit
38 TD 10.6 (3.5) 50 and visual Learning (TOMAL) - in rate of visual acquisition
83 ADHD 8.8 (2.6) 90.5 learning visual and word selective compared with ADHD and
17 VCFS 9.7 (2.7) 47.1 memory reminding task TD groups.
• No significant differences
were found in verbal
learning along the trials.
• ASD group showed
consolidation of verbal and
visual information above
the normative sample.
Narzisi et al., 2013 22 ASD (10 AUT, 9.77 (3.65) 100 Long-term verbal List Memory, Narrative • ASD group had worse
12 PDD-NOS) TD-matched 100 memory and Memory (Italian version performance in the subtests.
44 TD narrative of NEPSY-II)
MEMORY IN AUTISM SPECTRUM DISORDER

memory
Chan et al., 2011 21 ASD 10.27 (2.26) 89 Verbal learning Hong Kong List Learning • ASD group had worse
21 TD 9.85 (2.15) 50 Test (HKLLT) performance in total
learning on the HKLLT.
Williams et al., 38 HFA 11.68 (2.46) NI Verbal and visual Verbal learning, visual • No differences were found
2006b 38 TD 12.16 (2.19) learning, learning, and sound between groups in
associative symbol (WRAML) associative memory, visual
memory or verbal learning.
(table continues)
229
 This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.

230

Table 5 (continued)
Age (years) Gender
Article Sample M (SD) (% male) Type of memory Assessment instrument Main results
Salmanian et al., 15 ASD (HFA, AS) 12.80 (3.23) NI Episodic memory Four memory subtests of the • ASD group had worse
2012 15 TD 10.53 (3.04) and learning CANTAB: Paired performance in all visual
Associates Learning memory tests compared
(PAL), Pattern with controls.
Recognition Memory • When IQ was considered as
(PRM), Spatial a covariable, no difference
Recognition Memory was found between groups.
(SRM), and Delayed
Matching-to-Sample
(DMS)
Reinvall et al., 2013 30 AS 13.5 (1.2) 66 Narrative memory Narrative memory (Finnish • No significant difference
30 TD 13.7 (1.0) 66 version of NEPSY-II) was found between groups
in narrative memory.
McCrory, Henry, & 24 AS 3.0 (1.15) 91 Narrative memory Visual story retelling • TD group recalled more
Happé, 2007 27 TD 12.55 (1.12) 88 information than ASD
group in free story retelling.
Accuracy was high in both
groups.
• No difference was found
between groups in general,
specific, and suggestive
BORDIGNON, ENDRES, TRENTINI, AND BOSA

questions.
Zmigrod et al., 2013 40 ASD 15 (2.02) 65 Traces of episodic Manipulation of episodic • Both groups formed
20 TD 15 (2.01) 70 memory files task stimulus characteristics.
• ASD group showed more
repetitions, suggesting lower
control and flexibility in the
memory trace update.
 This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.

Table 5 (continued)
Age (years) Gender
Article Sample M (SD) (% male) Type of memory Assessment instrument Main results
Dunphy-Lelii & 20 ASD (15 AUT, 7.3 (2.2) 90 Visual memory Bead Memory of Stanford • No difference was found in
Wellman, 2012 2 AS, 3 PDD- 3.5 (0.1) 40 Binet (IV) subtest performance among the
NOS) 5.2 (0.3) 68 Self-Other Action Memory three groups in the Bead
25 TD Memory subtest (visual
27 TD memory).
• Three-year-old TD group
had worse performance than
the 5-year-old TD group in
the Self-Other Action
Memory test.
• ASD group had worse
performance than TD
groups in the Self-Other
Action Memory.
Christ et al., 2011 28 ASD 13.1 (2.8) 96 Episodic memory Proactive interference task • No significant differences
49 TD 13.3 (2.7) 79 were found between groups.
Maister & Plaisted- 15 ASD 11.8 (1.5) 100 Episodic memory Delayed free recall • No significant difference
Grant, 2011 15 TD 11.2 (1.2) 73 was found between groups
in the number of words
recalled or the likelihood to
recall the first three words
in the list (primacy).
• ASD group made
significantly more use of
MEMORY IN AUTISM SPECTRUM DISORDER

reorganization the list in the

episodic memory task.
Nemeth et al., 2010 13 ASD 11.7 (3.1) 85 Implicit learning Alternating Serial Reaction • No difference was found
13 TD age-matched 11.57 (3.2) 100 Time (ASRT) between groups for general
13 TD IQ-matched 9.23 (2.59) 85 learning skills and implicit
learning.
• No differences were found
between groups in
information consolidation.
(table continues)
231
 This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.

232

Table 5 (continued)
Age (years) Gender
Article Sample M (SD) (% male) Type of memory Assessment instrument Main results
Åsberg et al., 2008 37 ASD 9.74 (1.87) NI Episodic memory Two free recall tasks: • Control group had better
21 DAMP 9.88 (1.86) (a) 11 lists with 10 words performance than ASD and
19 TD 8.81 (1.34) each (concrete and DAMP groups in object
abstract names) heard recall.
(b) object free recall - • No difference was found
presentation of 10 lists between groups in verbal
with 10 objects free recall.
• When split into reading
proficiency groups, groups
with worse word
understanding had worse
performance.
Williams et al., 56 ASD 11.36 (2.18) 82 Visual memory, Simple Memory Domain: • Children with autism had
2006b 56 TD 11.82 (2.20) 69 verbal memory, Maze Learning Trial 1 difficulty in tasks with
episodic Errors; Verbal Learning, higher demands for
learning Sound Symbol, Visual information integration
memory Learning (WRAML) (e.g., memory for large
Complex Memory Domain: amounts of material, text
Verbal Learning—Delayed, comprehension, or complex
Visual Learning—Delayed, material).
BORDIGNON, ENDRES, TRENTINI, AND BOSA

Picture Memory, Design • No significant differences

Memory (WRAML); were found in the simple
Nonverbal Selective memory domain tasks.
Reminding—Consistent
Long-Term Retrieval
 This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.

Table 5 (continued)
Age (years) Gender
Article Sample M (SD) (% male) Type of memory Assessment instrument Main results
O’Shea, Fein, 21 ASD (14 AUT, 10.9 (1.88) 80 Episodic memory Short stories told by three • ASD group had similar
Clillessen, Klin, & 7 PDD-NOS) 10.6 (1.9) 42.85 different men on video, performance to control
Schultz, 2005 21 TD seven manipulated group for fact recognition.
resources (reader’s face, • ASD group had worse
reader’s outfit, picture performance on identifying
behind the reader, wall information source.
color, type of furniture • ASD group recognized
the reader was sitting on, significantly fewer faces
and book held by the than control group and
reader close to his face) fewer reading items (book
Source Memory Task or folder) used by the
(forced choice test related reader close to his face.
to the seven manipulated
resources), Fact Memory
Task (recognition; 30
forced choice questions
for story context), and
Story Free Recall Task
(recall of what they
MEMORY IN AUTISM SPECTRUM DISORDER

remember about the story)

Note. ADHD ⫽ attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder; AS ⫽ Asperger syndrome; ASD ⫽ autism spectrum disorder; AUT ⫽ autism; CG ⫽ control group; DAMP ⫽ deficits
in attention, motor control, and perception; HFA ⫽ high-functioning autism; PDD-NOS ⫽ pervasive developmental disorder–not otherwise specified; TD ⫽ typical development;
NI ⫽ not informed; VCFS ⫽ velo-cardio-facial syndrome.
233
 234 BORDIGNON, ENDRES, TRENTINI, AND BOSA

With regard to episodic verbal memory, the individual’s personal history (Tulving & Craik,
studies did not find differences in free word 2000), it has not been thoroughly studied in this
recall (Åsberg et al., 2008; Maister & Plaisted- population.
Grant, 2011), although the ASD group used No consensus has been reached on differ-
more mental list reorganization and less control ences between typically developing and ASD
and flexibility in updating episodic memory individuals in metamemory studies. Of the two
traces (Zmigrod, de Sonneville, Colzato, studies analyzed, one did not report any differ-
Swaab, & Hommel, 2013). In a proactive inter- ences between ASD and control individuals in
ference task, no differences were found between the task (Wojcik, Allen, Brown, & Souchay,
the ASD and control groups (Christ, Kester, 2011), and the other one reported less accurate
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.

Bodner, & Miles, 2011). The ASD group had judgment in the ASD group than in the control
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.

worse performance than the control group in the group for episodic material but not semantic
episodic memory domain in the Rivermead Be- material in a Feeling-of-Knowing task (Wojcik,
havioral Memory Test (Salmond et al., 2005). Moulin, & Souchay, 2013). These findings are
One of the articles used several measures for consistent with other articles reviewed herein,
cognitive functions, such as memory assess- which did not report differences between con-
ment (Williams, Goldstein, & Minshew, trol and ASD groups in the assessment of se-
2006a). It reported that performance in children mantic memory (López et al., 2008; Lopez &
and adolescents with ASD depends on the com- Leekam, 2003; Salmond et al., 2005).
plexity of the tasks. Children with autism had In the studies on associative memory, the
difficulty in tasks with higher demands and pre- ASD group presented better performance in
sented similar performance to the control group tasks that associated sounds with animals (Hea-
in simpler tasks. This is an important finding, ton, 2003) compared with the control group and
demonstrating more impairment as the demands similar performance in the association subtest of
required for the task increase. the Wide Range Assessment of Memory and
The complexity of information is a dynamic Learning battery (WRAML, Williams et al.,
concept that is based on the age and general 2006b). In an association task for names and
level of ability of the individual. A standard people, the ASD group had worse performance
memory battery is useful for examining the than the typically developing group (Narzisi et
function of various aspects of memory within al., 2013). These findings are consistent with the
the same individuals. The effect of complexity literature with regard to restricted areas of in-
on memory function can be compared in both terest in ASD individuals and the difficulty they
the auditory and visual modalities and different have in socio communicative behavior
components of the memory system, without the (Baranek, Parham, & Bodfish, 2005; Minshew,
confound of variations in age and ability level Goldstein, & Siegel, 1995; Tager-Flusberg,
that is introduced when attempting to compare 2004; Tsatsanis, 2005).
results from separate studies (Williams et al., In memory-for-action tasks, the ASD group
2006b). presented lower accuracy (Lind & Bowler,
2009; Wojcik et al., 2011). Only one study
Assessment of Other Types of Memory discussed iconic memory and did not report
differences in the number of items recalled, rate
Table 6 summarizes the studies with regard to of information decay, and speed of information
memory assessment that is not often investi- processing between ASD and typically devel-
gated. Of the studies reviewed, only one re- oping individuals (McMorris, Brown, & Bebko,
ferred to autobiographical memory, in which 2013). One study evaluated color memory,
the control group had better accuracy than the showing that children with autism were signif-
ASD group for all questions on the Autobio- icantly less accurate at identifying a colored
graphical Questionnaire. Generally, autobio- target in the two tasks compared with controls
graphical memory in the ASD group showed (Franklin, Sowden, Burley, Notman, & Alder,
more omission errors and a loss of earlier life 2008).
events (Bruck et al., 2007). Although this is an The initial objective of the present study was
important memory category, which refers to the to trace a memory profile for the different au-
recollection of lifetime events that comprise the tism disorders (currently called ASD; American
 This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.

Table 6
Assessment of Other Types of Memory in Samples of Children and Adolescents With ASD
Age (years) Gender
Article Sample M (SD) (% male) Type of memory Assessment instrument Main results
McMorris et al., 2013 18 ASD (5 HFA, .75 (2.11) NI Iconic memory Task - eight letters around a • Groups did not differ regarding
6 AS, 7 PDD- central spot on a the number of items recalled,
NOS) computer screen presented memory trace decay, or speed
21 TD for 100 ms: (a) recall as of information processing.
many letters as possible
and (b) recall the letter
given as a cue
Wojcik et al., 2013 18 ASD (12 AS, 12.6 (2.14) 89 Metamemory Feeling-of-Knowing (FOK) • ASD group had less accurate
6 HFA) 11.83 (2.57) 72 task for semantic and judgment than controls for
18 TD 72 episodic material episodic material but not for
semantic material.
Wojcik et al., 2011 16 ASD (7 AS, 9 11.55 (2.06) 87 Action memory and • Task with five school • ASD group showed less
HFA) 10.95 (3.0) 68 metamemory objects in three colors; accuracy in the action memory
16 TD actions involved touching, task when they had to perform
catching, or placing them their own actions in the task or
somewhere when no action was
• Number of actions, graded implemented during coding.
difficulty level • No group differences in
• Three conditions: metamemory in terms of self-
instructions read by the performance in the tasks.
examiner and read and
MEMORY IN AUTISM SPECTRUM DISORDER

carried out by the

participant
• For each condition, the
participants were asked to
judge how well they
thought they performed in
the task (1–10 scale)
(table continues)
235
 This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.

236

Table 6 (continued)
Age (years) Gender
Article Sample M (SD) (% male) Type of memory Assessment instrument Main results
Freeth et al., 2010 16 ASD 14.8 (1.01) 100 Memory bias Task: • No difference was found
16 TD 14.8 (.68) 100 Phase 1: observation of 11 between ASD and TD groups.
photos (eight target • The person’s gaze direction
photos and three filler caused memory bias in both
photos) shown groups.
sequentially for 5 s each
Phase 2: Photos were
shown, but the position
was displaced so that the
person in the photo was
on the right or left; the
participants were asked to
move the picture so that
the position was the same
as shown in Phase 1, with
20 possible positions
Lind & Bowler, 2009 53 ASD (49 9.26 (2.06) 84.9 Action memory Task: cards with figures in • No difference was found
AUT, 4 AS) 9.09 (1.93) 70 two conditions: the between groups in recognition,
50 CG (IQ- experimenter named the but the ASD group had
matched) figure or asked the significantly lower performance
participant to name it. in the origin (who named the
After 2 min, a recognition figure).
BORDIGNON, ENDRES, TRENTINI, AND BOSA

test was performed (words • Both groups showed better

read by the experimenter). recognition and source memory
When participants for those figures they had
answered “Yes,” they drawn and named.
were asked to say who
they had drawn and
named
 This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.

Table 6 (continued)
Age (years) Gender
Article Sample M (SD) (% male) Type of memory Assessment instrument Main results
Franklin et al., 2008 19 ASD 10.9 (1.7) 100 Color memory Visual search task and • Significant differences in the
14 TD 9.8 (2.2) 100 delayed matching-to- accuracy in both color memory
sample task. In the visual and color search. Children with
search task, the children autism were significantly less
were required to search a accurate at identifying a
grid of colored squares colored target in the two tasks
(15 distractors, one target) compared with controls.
and identify the “odd-one-
out.” In the delayed
matching-to-sample task,
the children were shown a
colored stimulus (target)
and after a delay were
asked to identify the
original stimulus (target)
when paired with another
colored stimulus (foil)
Bruck, London, 30 ASD 7.4 (1.2) 87 Autobiographical Autobiographical • TD group was more accurate
Landa, & 38 TD 7.6 (1.4) 60 memory Questionnaire: questions than ASD group for all
Goodman, 2007 in four areas: current life questions in the
(23), events or facts (8), Autobiographical
childhood things or events Questionnaire.
(12 yes/no questions), and • In general, autobiographical
MEMORY IN AUTISM SPECTRUM DISORDER

four different events memory in the ASD group

(recent, 2 years ago, showed more omission errors
distant, and one that and impairment for distant past
requires a trip to the events.
hospital) • No differences were found
A magic show was between groups in
performed to assess late suggestibility.
memory, suggestibility,
and recognition
(table continues)
237
 This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.

238

Table 6 (continued)
Age (years) Gender
Article Sample M (SD) (% male) Type of memory Assessment instrument Main results
Salmond et al., 2005 14 ASD (11 AS, 12.9 (0.7) 92.85 Recognition, Pyramids and Palmtress Test • ASD group had worse
3 HFA) 12.6 (0.7) 50 semantic memory subtests performance than controls in
18 TD 12.1 (0.7) 100 Episodic memory WISC-III or WAIS-III: the episodic memory domain.
13 controls Information, Vocabulary, • No significant difference was
and Similarities Subtests found between groups in
Recall of material presented recognition memory, semantic
several times memory, or memory for stimuli
CMS: Word-list, Word-pair presented several times.
subtests
Recall of material presented
onceCMS: family
pictures, stories
Rivermead Behavioural
Memory Test subtests
Lopez & Leekam, 15 HFA 13.10 (2.4) NI Visual memory and Adapted version of the • ASD group was able to
2003 16 TD 14.4 (0.8) semantic verbal Tager-Flusberg task to integrate words based on
memory test recall of semantic meaning similarly to TD
information in the visual subjects.
and verbal domains • Regarding modality, ASD
BORDIGNON, ENDRES, TRENTINI, AND BOSA

group showed evidence of

connecting semantically related
items in both visual and verbal
domains.
 This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.

Table 6 (continued)
Age (years) Gender
Article Sample M (SD) (% male) Type of memory Assessment instrument Main results
Heaton, 2003 14 ASD 9.9 (mean NI Associative musical Task 1: musical notes were Task 1: ASD group had better
14 verbal IQ- for the memory (pairs) associated with a visual performance compared with
matched three stimulus (animal). control groups.
14 non-verbal groups) Afterward, the participants Task 2: ASD group had better
controls were asked to report performance compared with
which sound was control groups
associated with each Task 3: No significant difference
animal. was found between groups.
Task 2: four musical notes
were associated with each
animal. When three notes
were presented, the
participants were asked to
inform the missing animal
(corresponding to the note
not shown).
Task 3: (a) a complete
figure was shown and
afterward only its
segments. The participants
were asked to inform
whether those segments
were part of the figure,
(b) three segments were
shown and then the whole
MEMORY IN AUTISM SPECTRUM DISORDER

figure. The participants

were asked to judge
whether the figure was in
accordance with the
sequences. This task was
performed with musical
notes (segments) and
chords (whole figure).
Note. ADHD ⫽ attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder; AS ⫽ Asperger syndrome; ASD ⫽ autism spectrum disorder; AUT ⫽ autism; CG ⫽ control group; DAMP ⫽ deficits
in attention, motor control, and perception; HFA ⫽ high-functioning autism; PDD-NOS ⫽ pervasive developmental disorder–not otherwise specified; TD ⫽ typical development;
NI ⫽ not informed; VCFS ⫽ velo-cardio-facial syndrome.
239
 240 BORDIGNON, ENDRES, TRENTINI, AND BOSA

Psychiatric Association, 2013). This was not ASD and typically developing groups with re-
possible because of the heterogeneity of the gard to chronological age or mental age might
samples and use of different memory assess- determine the outcome of the study (Russo et
ment instruments. Autism Spectrum Disorder is al., 2007). A suggestion for future studies would
a heterogeneous condition with differences in be to perform cross-sectional analyses that con-
symptomatology and development. Therefore, sider continuous development, task complexity,
we must consider the variability in the perfor- and the type of stimulus. Likewise, the present
mance of ASD individuals concerning their study found that some articles reviewed herein
functioning, which tends to be a characteristic were limited with regard to controlling for the
of this population (Towgood et al., 2009). IQ of the samples.
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.

The symptoms of ASD present different

This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.

Conclusion forms and dimensions within the spectrum, and

the samples that have been used to investigate
The present study performed a systematic memory function are heterogeneous. This is an
review of the literature on memory in ASD. The important limitation of these studies, which
database searches yielded an expressive body of makes it difficult to identify individual profiles
studies that used different instruments and tasks of the presence of memory impairment. Simi-
to assess several components of memory. The larly, although the database searches that were
examination of this construct is relevant be- performed in the present study revealed the
cause studies in this area present inconsistencies main findings of research in this area within the
with regard to the presence of impairments in past 10 years, a clear profile of memory in ASD
executive functions in ASD, which has major was not attainable. Therefore, we highlight the
implications for individuals with this condition. heterogeneity of the samples, variability of the
When present, these impairments may be re- types of memory investigated, and different
lated to inflexibility and behavioral rigidity, tasks and instruments used in the studies. Nev-
communication problems, and major difficulties ertheless, studies in the field have contributed to
in social interactions (Hill, 2004; Robinson, tracking the types of memory that are impaired
Goddard, Dritschel, Wisley, & Howlin, 2009). in this population, and these difficulties may
The studies analyzed herein suggest impair- reflect deficits in executive function.
ments in ASD compared with typically devel- Finally, a relative increase in the number of
oping individuals in autobiographical memory, publications was found in the last three years,
memory for faces, and prospective and associa- reflecting advances in the field and demonstrat-
tive memory for names and people. Individuals ing the relevance of this issue.
with ASD present better performance in asso-
ciative memory for animals and sounds com-
References
pared with typically developing individuals.
These groups did not differ in recognition mem- References marked with an asterisk indicate arti-
ory. Finally, the findings were not conclusive cles presented in the tables.
with regard to verbal and visuospatial working ⴱ
Alderson-Day, B., & McGonigle-Chalmers, M.
memory, verbal and implicit learning, visual (2011). Is it a bird? Is it a plane? category use in
memory, narrative memory, and metamemory. problem-solving in children with autism spectrum
Understanding memory in ASD is important disorders. Journal of Autism and Developmental
because memory abilities influence the ways in Disorders, 41, 555–565. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/
which knowledge and skills can be acquired. s10803-010-1077-9
ⴱ
This will ultimately be reflected in the anoma- Altgassen, M., Williams, T. I., Bölte, S., & Kliegel,
lous ways in which an individual experiences M. (2009). Time-based prospective memory in
and responds to the external world (Boucher et children with autism spectrum disorder. Brain Im-
pairment, 10, 52–58. http://dx.doi.org/10.1375/
al., 2012).
brim.10.1.52
Notably, the developmental trajectory of American Psychiatric Association. (2013). DSM-5
memory extends into mid-adolescence, which development. Accessed February 14, 2011, from
makes comparisons of results in the studies that http://www.dsm5.org/Pages/Default.aspx
used samples with different ages quite challeng- ⴱ
Andersen, P. N., Hovik, K. T., Skogli, E. W., Ege-
ing. Additionally, whether a study matches land, J., & Oie, M. (2013). Symptoms of ADHD in
 MEMORY IN AUTISM SPECTRUM DISORDER 241

ⴱ
children with high-functioning autism are related Brandimonte, M. A., Filippello, P., Coluccia, E.,
to impaired verbal working memory and verbal Altgassen, M., & Kliegel, M. (2011). To do or not
delayed recall. PLoS ONE, 8, e64842. to do? Prospective memory versus response inhi-
ⴱ
Åsberg, J., Dahlgren, S., & Sandberg, A. D. (2008). bition in autism spectrum disorder and attention-
Basic reading skills in high-functioning Swedish deficit/hyperactivity disorder. Memory (Hove,
children with autism spectrum disorders or atten- England), 19, 56 – 66. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/
tion disorder. Research in Autism Spectrum Disor- 09658211.2010.535657
ders, 2, 95–109. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.rasd ⴱ
Bruck, M., London, K., Landa, R., & Goodman, J.
.2007.03.006 (2007). Autobiographical memory and suggestibil-
Baddeley, A. (2003). Working memory: Looking ity in children with autism spectrum disorder. De-
back and looking forward. Nature Reviews Neuro- velopment and Psychopathology, 19, 73–95. http://
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.

science, 4, 829 – 839. http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/ dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0954579407070058

This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.

nrn1201 Chan, A. S., Han, Y. M. Y., Sze, S. L., Cheung,

Baddeley, A., Eysenck, M. W., & Anderson, M. C. M. C., Leung, W. W. M., Chan, R. C. K., & To,
(2009). Memory. New York, NY: Psychology C. Y. (2011). Disordered connectivity associated
Press. with memory deficits in children with autism spec-
Baddeley, A. (1998). Recent developments in work- trum disorders. Research in Autism Spectrum Dis-
ing memory. Current Opinion in Neurobiology, orders, 5, 237–245. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j
8(2), 234 –238. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0959- .rasd.2010.04.005
4388(98)80145-1 ⴱ
Christ, S. E., Kester, L. E., Bodner, K. E., & Miles,
Baranek, G., Parham, L. D., & Bodfish, J. W. (2005). J. H. (2011). Evidence for selective inhibitory im-
Sensory and motor features in autism: Assessment pairment in individuals with autism spectrum dis-
and intervention. In F. R. Volkmar, R. Paul, A. order. Neuropsychology, 25, 690 –701. http://dx
Klin, & D. Cohen (Eds.), Handbook of autism and .doi.org/10.1037/a0024256
pervasive developmental disorders: Vol. 2. Assess- ⴱ
Corbett, B. A., Constantine, L. J., Hendren, R.,
ment, intervention, and policy (3rd ed.; pp. 831–
Rocke, D., & Ozonoff, S. (2009). Examining ex-
862). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley. http://dx.doi.org/
ecutive functioning in children with autism spec-
10.1002/9780470939352.ch6
trum disorder, attention deficit hyperactivity disor-
Bennetto, L., Pennington, B. F., & Rogers, S. J.
der and typical development. Psychiatry Research,
(1996). Intact and impaired memory functions in
166, 210 –222. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j
autism. Child Development, 67, 1816 –1835. http://
.psychres.2008.02.005
dx.doi.org/10.2307/1131734
Blair, R. J., Frith, U., Smith, N., Abell, F., & Cipo- Cosmides, L., & Tooby, J. (1992). Cognitive adap-
lotti, L. (2002). Fractionation of visual memory: tations for social exchange. In J. H. Barkow, L.
Agency detection and its impairment in autism. Cosmides, & J. Tooby (Eds.), The adapted mind:
Neuropsychologia, 40, 108 –118. http://dx.doi.org/ Evolutionary psychology and the generation of
10.1016/S0028-3932(01)00069-0 culture (pp. 163–228). New York, NY: Oxford
Boucher, J. (1981). Memory for recent events in University Press.
autistic children. Journal of Autism and Develop- Cuttler, C., & Graf, P. (2007). Sub-clinical compul-
mental Disorders, 11, 293–301. http://dx.doi.org/ sive checkers’ prospective memory is impaired.
10.1007/BF01531512 Journal of Anxiety Disorders, 21, 338 –352. http://
Boucher, J., & Bowler, D. M. (Eds.). (2008). Mem- dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.janxdis.2006.06.001
ory in autism. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Uni- Davies, S., Bishop, D., Manstead, A. S., & Tantam,
versity Press. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/ D. (1994). Face perception in children with autism
CBO9780511490101 and Asperger’s syndrome. Journal of Child Psy-
Boucher, J., & Lewis, V. (1992). Unfamiliar face chology and Psychiatry, 35, 1033–1057. http://dx
recognition in relatively able autistic children. .doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-7610.1994.tb01808.x
ⴱ
Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 33, Dunphy-Lelii, S., & Wellman, H. M. (2012). De-
843– 859. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-7610 layed self-recognition in autism: A unique diffi-
.1992.tb01960.x culty? Research in Autism Spectrum Disorders, 6,
Boucher, J., Mayes, A., & Bigham, S. (2012). Mem- 212–223. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.rasd.2011.05
ory in autistic spectrum disorder. Psychological .002
ⴱ
Bulletin, 138, 458 – 496. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/ Erdődi, L., Lajiness-O’Neill, R., & Schmitt, T. A.
a0026869 (2013). Learning curve analyses in neurodevelop-
Bower, G. H. (2000). A brief history of memory mental disorders: Are children with autism spec-
research. In E. Tulving & F. I. M. Craik (Eds.), The trum disorder truly visual learners? Journal of Au-
Oxford handbook of memory. New York, NY: Ox- tism and Developmental Disorders, 43, 880 – 890.
ford University Press. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10803-012-1630-9
 242 BORDIGNON, ENDRES, TRENTINI, AND BOSA

ⴱ
Franklin, A., Sowden, P., Burley, R., Notman, L., & disorders. Autism Research, 4, 347–357. http://dx
Alder, E. (2008). Color perception in children with .doi.org/10.1002/aur.209
ⴱ
autism. Journal of Autism and Developmental Dis- Joseph, R. M., McGrath, L. M., & Tager-
orders, 38, 1837–1847. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/ Flusberg, H. (2005). Executive dysfunction and
s10803-008-0574-6 its relation to language ability in verbal school-
ⴱ
Freeth, M., Ropar, D., Chapman, P., & Mitchell, P. age children with autism. Developmental Neu-
(2010). The eye gaze direction of an observed ropsychology, 27, 361–378. http://dx.doi.org/
person can bias perception, memory, and attention 10.1207/s15326942dn2703_4
in adolescents with and without autism spectrum ⴱ
Joseph, R. M., Steele, S. D., Meyer, E., & Tager-
disorder. Journal of Experimental Child Psychol- Flusberg, H. (2005). Self-ordered pointing in chil-
ogy, 105, 20 –37. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jecp dren with autism: Failure to use verbal mediation
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.

.2009.10.001 in the service of working memory? Neuropsycho-

This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.

Gaigg, S. B., Gardiner, J. M., & Bowler, D. M. logia, 43, 1400 –1411. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j
(2008). Free recall in autism spectrum disorder: .neuropsychologia.2005.01.010
The role of relational and item-specific encoding. Kanne, S. M., Gerber, A. J., Quirmbach, L. M.,
Neuropsychologia, 46, 983–992. http://dx.doi.org/ Sparrow, S. S., Cicchetti, D. V., & Saulnier, C. A.
10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2007.11.011 (2011). The role of adaptive behavior in autism
Gepner, B., de Gelder, B., & de Schonen, S. spectrum disorders: Implications for functional
(1996). Face processing in autistics: Evidence outcome. Journal of Autism and Developmental
for a generalised deficit? Child Neuropsychol- Disorders, 41, 1007–1018. http://dx.doi.org/
ogy, 2, 123–139. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/ 10.1007/s10803-010-1126-4
09297049608401357 Khoe, W., Kroll, N. E., Yonelinas, A. P., Dobbins,
Geschwind, D. H. (2009). Advances in autism. An- I. G., & Knight, R. T. (2000). The contribution of
nual Review of Medicine, 60, 367–380. http://dx recollection and familiarity to yes-no and forced-
.doi.org/10.1146/annurev.med.60.053107.121225 choice recognition tests in healthy subjects and
Griffith, E. M., Pennington, B. F., Wehner, E. A., &
amnesics. Neuropsychologia, 38, 1333–1341.
Rogers, S. J. (1999). Executive functions in young
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0028-3932(00)00055-5
children with autism. Child Development, 70, 817– ⴱ
Kuusikko-Gauffin, S., Eira, J. V., Alice, C., Rachel,
832. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1467-8624.00059
ⴱ P. W., Katja, J., Marja-Leena, M., . . . Irma, M.
Ham, H. S., Bartolo, A., Corley, M., Rajendran, G.,
(2011). Face memory and object recognition in
Szabo, A., & Swanson, S. (2011). Exploring the
children with high-functioning autism or Asperger
relationship between gestural recognition and im-
itation: Evidence of dyspraxia in autism spectrum syndrome and in their parents. Research in Autism
disorders. Journal of Autism and Developmental Spectrum Disorders, 5, 622– 628. http://dx.doi.org/
Disorders, 41, 1–12. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/ 10.1016/j.rasd.2010.07.007
ⴱ
s10803-010-1011-1 Lind, S. E., & Bowler, D. M. (2009). Recognition
Hannon, R., Adams, P., Harrington, S., Fries-Dias, memory, self-other source memory, and theory-of-
C., & Gipson, M. T. (1995). Effects of brain injury mind in children with autism spectrum disorder.
and age on prospective memory self-rating and Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders,
performance. Rehabilitation Psychology, 40, 289 – 39, 1231–1239. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10803-
298. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0090-5550.40.4 009-0735-2
ⴱ
.289 López, B., & Leekam, S. R. (2003). Do children
Hauck, M., Fein, D., Maltby, N., Waterhouse, L., & with autism fail to process information in context?
Feinstein, C. (1998). Memory for faces in children Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 44,
with autism. Child Neuropsychology, 4, 187–198. 285–300. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1469-7610
http://dx.doi.org/10.1076/chin.4.3.187.3174 .00121
ⴱ
Heaton, P. (2003). Pitch memory, labelling and dis- López, B., Leekam, S. R., & Arts, G. R. (2008).
embedding in autism. Journal of Child Psychology How central is central coherence? Preliminary ev-
and Psychiatry, 44, 543–551. http://dx.doi.org/ idence on the link between conceptual and percep-
10.1111/1469-7610.00143 tual processing in children with autism. Autism:
Hill, E. L. (2004). Evaluating the theory of executive The International Journal of Research and Prac-
dysfunction in autism. Developmental Review, 24, tise, 12, 159 –171. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/
189 –233. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.dr.2004.01 1362361307086662
ⴱ
.001 Maister, L., & Plaisted-Grant, K. C. (2011). Time
Jones, C. R., Swettenham, J., Charman, T., Marsden, perception and its relationship to memory in Au-
A. J., Tregay, J., Baird, G., . . . Happé, F. (2011). tism Spectrum Conditions. Developmental Sci-
No evidence for a fundamental visual motion pro- ence, 14, 1311–1322. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j
cessing deficit in adolescents with autism spectrum .1467-7687.2011.01077.x
 MEMORY IN AUTISM SPECTRUM DISORDER 243

ⴱ ⴱ
Mayes, S. D., & Calhoun, S. L. (2008). WISC-IV Nemeth, D., Janacsek, K., Balogh, V., Londe, Z.,
and WIAT-II profiles in children with high- Mingesz, R., Fazekas, M., . . . Vetro, A. (2010).
functioning autism. Journal of Autism and Devel- Learning in autism: Implicitly superb. PLoS ONE,
opmental Disorders, 38, 428 – 439. http://dx.doi 5, e11731. http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone
.org/10.1007/s10803-007-0410-4 .0011731
ⴱ ⴱ
McCrory, E., Henry, L. A., & Happé, F. (2007). O’Shea, A. G., Fein, D. A., Cillessen, A. H. N.,
Eye-witness memory and suggestibility in children Klin, A., & Schultz, R. T. (2005). Source memory
with Asperger syndrome. Journal of Child Psy- in children with autism spectrum disorders. Devel-
chology and Psychiatry, 48, 482– 489. http://dx.doi opmental Neuropsychology, 27, 337–360. http://dx
.org/10.1111/j.1469-7610.2006.01715.x .doi.org/10.1207/s15326942dn2703_3
ⴱ
McMorris, C. A., Brown, S. M., & Bebko, J. M. Ozonoff, S., & Strayer, D. L. (2001). Further evi-
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.

(2013). An examination of iconic memory in chil- dence of intact working memory in autism. Jour-
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.

dren with autism spectrum disorders. Journal of nal of Autism and Developmental Disorders,
Autism and Developmental Disorders, 43, 1956 – 31, 257–263. http://dx.doi.org/10.1023/A:
1966. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10803-012- 1010794902139
1748-9 Pinker, S. (2004). Tábula rasa. São Paulo: Compan-
McPartland, J. C., Webb, S. J., Keehn, B., & Daw- hia das Letras.
ⴱ
son, G. (2011). Patterns of visual attention to faces Rajendran, G., Law, A. S., Logie, R. H., van der
and objects in autism spectrum disorder. Journal Meulen, M., Fraser, D., & Corley, M. (2011).
of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 41, 148 – Investigating multitasking in high-functioning ad-
157. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10803-010-1033-8 olescents with autism spectrum disorders using the
Millward, C., Powell, S., Messer, D., & Jordan, R. Virtual Errands Task. Journal of Autism and De-
(2000). Recall for self and other in autism: Chil- velopmental Disorders, 41, 1445–1454. http://dx
dren’s memory for events experienced by them- .doi.org/10.1007/s10803-010-1151-3
ⴱ
selves and their peers. Journal of Autism and De- Reinvall, O., Voutilainen, A., Kujala, T., & Kork-
velopmental Disorders, 30, 15–28. http://dx.doi man, M. (2013). Neurocognitive functioning in
.org/10.1023/A:1005455926727 adolescents with autism spectrum disorder. Jour-
Minshew, N. J., & Goldstein, G. (2001). The pattern nal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 43,
of intact and impaired memory functions in au- 1367–1379. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10803-012-
tism. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 1692-8
42, 1095–1101. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1469- Robinson, S., Goddard, L., Dritschel, B., Wisley, M.,
7610.00808 & Howlin, P. (2009). Executive functions in chil-
Minshew, N. J., Goldstein, G., Muenz, L. R., & dren with autism spectrum disorders. Brain and
Payton, J. B. (1992). Neuropsychological function- Cognition, 71, 362–368. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/
ing in nonmentally retarded autistic individuals. j.bandc.2009.06.007
ⴱ
Journal of Clinical and Experimental Neuropsy- Rosenthal, M., Wallace, G. L., Lawson, R., Wills,
chology, 14, 749 –761. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/ M. C., Dixon, E., Yerys, B. E., & Kenworthy, L.
01688639208402860 (2013). Impairments in real-world executive func-
Minshew, N. J., Goldstein, G., & Siegel, D. J. (1995). tion increase from childhood to adolescence in
Speech and language in high-functioning autistic autism spectrum disorders. Neuropsychology, 27,
individuals. Neuropsychology, 9, 255–261. http:// 13–18. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0031299
dx.doi.org/10.1037/0894-4105.9.2.255 Russell, J., Jarrold, C., & Henry, L. (1996). Working
Minshew, N. J., & Payton, J. B. (1988). New per- memory in children with autism and with moderate
spectives in autism, Part II: The differential diag- learning difficulties. Journal of Child Psychology
nosis and neurobiology of autism. Current Prob- and Psychiatry & Allied Disciplines, 37, 673– 686.
lems in Pediatrics, 18, 618 – 694. http://dx.doi.org/ http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-7610.1996
10.1016/0045-9380(88)90017-5 .tb01459.x
ⴱ
Molesworth, C. J., Bowler, D. M., & Hampton, J. A. Russo, N., Flanagan, T., Iarocci, G., Berringer, D.,
(2005). The prototype effect in recognition mem- Zelazo, P. D., & Burack, J. A. (2007). Decon-
ory: Intact in autism? Journal of Child Psychology structing executive deficits among persons with
and Psychiatry, 46, 661– 672. http://dx.doi.org/ autism: Implications for cognitive neuroscience.
10.1111/j.1469-7610.2004.00383.x Brain and Cognition, 65, 77– 86. http://dx.doi.org/
ⴱ
Narzisi, A., Muratori, F., Calderoni, S., Fabbro, F., 10.1016/j.bandc.2006.04.007
ⴱ
& Urgesi, C. (2013). Neuropsychological profile in Saldaña, D., Carreiras, M., & Frith, U. (2009). Or-
high functioning autism spectrum disorders. Jour- thographic and phonological pathways in hyper-
nal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 43, lexic readers with Autism Spectrum Disorders.
1895–1909. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10803-012- Developmental Neuropsychology, 34, 240 –253.
1736-0 http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/87565640902805701
 244 BORDIGNON, ENDRES, TRENTINI, AND BOSA

ⴱ
Salmanian, M., Tehrani-Doost, M., Ghanbari- teristics in autism and related conditions. In F.
Motlagh, M., & Shahrivar, Z. (2012). Visual mem- Volkmar, R. Paul, A. KIin, & D. Cohen (Eds.),
ory of meaningless shapes in children and adoles- Handbook of autism and pervasive developmental
cents with autism spectrum disorders. Iranian disorders: Vol. 1. Diagnosis, development, neuro-
Journal of Psychiatry, 7, 104 –108. biology, and behavior (3rd ed.; pp. 365–381).
ⴱ
Salmond, C. H., Ashburner, J., Connelly, A., Fris- Hoboken, NJ: Wiley. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/
ton, K. J., Gadian, D. G., & Vargha-Khadem, F. 9780470939345.ch13
(2005). The role of the medial temporal lobe in Tulving, E. (2002). Episodic memory: From mind
autistic spectrum disorders. European Journal of to brain. Annual Review of Psychology, 53,
Neuroscience, 22, 764 –772. http://dx.doi.org/ 1–25. http://dx.doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych
10.1111/j.1460-9568.2005.04217.x .53.100901.135114
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.

Scherf, K. S., Behrmann, M., Minshew, N., & Luna, Tulving, E., & Craik, F. I. M. (2000). The Oxford
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.

B. (2008). Atypical development of face and handbook of memory. New York, NY: Oxford
greeble recognition in autism. Journal of Child University Press.
Psychology and Psychiatry, 49, 838 – 847. http:// Tulving, E., & Pearlstone, Z. (1966). Availability
dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-7610.2008.01903.x versus accessibility of information in memory for
ⴱ
Sinzig, J., Morsch, D., Bruning, N., Schmidt, M. H., words. Journal of Verbal Learning & Verbal Be-
& Lehmkuhl, G. (2008). Inhibition, flexibility, havior, 5, 381–391. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/
working memory and planning in autism spectrum S0022-5371(66)80048-8
disorders with and without comorbid ADHD- Wallace, S., Coleman, M., & Bailey, A. (2008). An
symptoms. Child and Adolescent Psychiatry and investigation of basic facial expression recognition
Mental Health, 2, 4. http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/ in autism spectrum disorders. Cognition and Emo-
1753-2000-2-4 tion, 22, 1353–1380. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/
Snow, J., Ingeholm, J. E., Levy, I. F., Caravella, 02699930701782153
R. A., Case, L. K., Wallace, G. L., & Martin, A. Weigelt, S., Koldewyn, K., Dilks, D. D., Balas, B.,
McKone, E., & Kanwisher, N. (2014). Domain-
(2011). Impaired visual scanning and memory
specific development of face memory but not face
for faces in high-functioning autism spectrum
perception. Developmental Science, 17, 47–58.
disorders: It’s not just the eyes. Journal of
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/desc.12089
the International Neuropsychological Society,
Weigelt, S., Koldewyn, K., & Kanwisher, N. (2012).
17, 1021–1029. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/
Face identity recognition in autism spectrum dis-
S1355617711000981
ⴱ orders: A review of behavioral studies. Neurosci-
Souchay, C., Wojcik, D. Z., Williams, H. L., Crath- ence and Biobehavioral Reviews, 36, 1060 –1084.
ern, S., & Clarke, P. (2013). Recollection in ado- http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.neubiorev.2011.12.008
lescents with Autism spectrum disorder. Cortex, ⴱ
Williams, D., Boucher, J., Lind, S., & Jarrold, C.
49, 1598 –1609. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cortex (2013). Time-based and event-based prospective
.2012.07.011 memory in autism spectrum disorder: The roles of
Steele, S. D., Minshew, N. J., Luna, B., & Sweeney, executive function and theory of mind, and time-
J. A. (2007). Spatial working memory deficits in estimation. Journal of Autism and Developmental
autism. Journal of Autism and Developmental Dis- Disorders, 43, 1555–1567. http://dx.doi.org/
orders, 37, 605– 612. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/ 10.1007/s10803-012-1703-9
s10803-006-0202-2 Williams, D. L., Goldstein, G., & Minshew, N. J.
Strauss, E., Sherman, E. M. S., & Spreen, O. (2006). (2005). Impaired memory for faces and social
A compendium of neuropsychological tests: Ad- scenes in autism: Clinical implications of memory
ministration, norms, and commentary (3rd ed., p. dysfunction. Archives of Clinical Neuropsychol-
471). New York, NY: Oxford University Press. ogy, 20, 1–15. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.acn.2002
Tager-Flusberg, H. (2004). Strategies for conduct- .08.001
ing research on language in autism. Journal ⴱ
Williams, D. L., Goldstein, G., & Minshew, N. J.
of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 34, (2006a). Neuropsychologic functioning in children
75– 80. http://dx.doi.org/10.1023/B:JADD with autism: Further evidence for disordered com-
.0000018077.64617.5a plex information-processing. Child Neuropsychol-
Towgood, K. J., Meuwese, J. D., Gilbert, S. J., ogy, 12, 279 –298. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/
Turner, M. S., & Burgess, P. W. (2009). Advan- 09297040600681190
ⴱ
tages of the multiple case series approach to the Williams, D. L., Goldstein, G., & Minshew, N. J.
study of cognitive deficits in autism spectrum dis- (2006b). The profile of memory function in chil-
order. Neuropsychologia, 47, 2981–2988. http://dx dren with autism. Neuropsychology, 20, 21–29.
ⴱ
.doi.org/10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2009.06.028 Wilson, C. E., Palermo, R., & Brock, J. (2012).
Tsatsanis, K. D. (2005). Neuropsychological charac- Visual scan paths and recognition of facial identity
 MEMORY IN AUTISM SPECTRUM DISORDER 245

in autism spectrum disorder and typical develop- abilities in children with autism spectrum disorder
ment. PLoS ONE, 7, e37681. http://dx.doi.org/ using the Let’s Face It! skills battery. Autism Re-
10.1371/journal.pone.0037681 search, 1, 329 –340. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/
Wilson, C. E., Palermo, R., Schmalzl, L., & Brock, J. aur.56
ⴱ
(2010). Specificity of impaired facial identity rec- Yerys, B. E., Wallace, G. L., Jankowski, K. F.,
ognition in children with suspected developmental Bollich, A., & Kenworthy, L. (2011). Impaired
prosopagnosia. Cognitive Neuropsychology, 27, Consonant Trigrams Test (CTT) performance re-
30 – 45. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/02643294.2010 lates to everyday working memory difficulties in
.490207 children with autism spectrum disorders. Child
ⴱ
Wojcik, D. Z., Allen, R. J., Brown, C., & Souchay, Neuropsychology, 17, 391–399. http://dx.doi.org/
C. (2011). Memory for actions in autism spectrum 10.1080/09297049.2010.547462
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.

ⴱ
disorder. Memory (Hove, England), 19, 549 –558. Zmigrod, S., de Sonneville, L. M., Colzato, L. S.,
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09658211.2011.590506 Swaab, H., & Hommel, B. (2013). Cognitive con-

ⴱ
Wojcik, D. Z., Moulin, C. J. A., & Souchay, C. trol of feature bindings: Evidence from children
(2013). Metamemory in children with autism: Ex- with autistic spectrum disorder. Psychological Re-
ploring “feeling-of-knowing” in episodic and se- search, 77, 147–154. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/
mantic memory. Neuropsychology, 27, 19 –27. s00426-011-0399-3
http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0030526
Wolf, J. M., Tanaka, J. W., Klaiman, C., Cockburn, Received August 4, 2014
J., Herlihy, L., Brown, C., . . . Schultz, R. T. Revision received February 23, 2015
(2008). Specific impairment of face-processing Accepted March 5, 2015 䡲