<p>The visual capture score presented here is a difference of gradients. It is calculated by comparing the gradients of reach error (mm) against starting position (mm) in the Mirror and No Mirror conditions (error gradient in the “Mirror” condition - error gradient in the “No Mirror” condition). Open circles indicate individual participants’ visual capture gradient scores. Vertical dashed lines separate the age-groups compared in the analysis. Closed circles with standard error bars indicate the mean VCG scores for each age-group. Asterisks indicate group means which are reliably greater than chance (0) (* = <u>p</u>≤.01, ** = <u>p</u>.≤001).</p
<p>(A) Balancing duration and (B) average absolute pole angle as function of subjects’ ratings. Data...
<p>Fig 4 shows the levels of happiness vs. unpleasant for the CC outcome (blue line), for the DC out...
<p>The three left bars indicate the average change of reach direction (°) for the N = 13 participant...
<p> Panel A: mean tracking error and Panel B: residual intra-individual variability. Error bars repr...
<p>Bars represent the errors within each condition (shaded bars = Mirror, unshaded bars = No mirror)...
<p>A: The participants' overall curvature discrimination thresholds are plotted separately for each ...
Visualization of mean error values obtained as the difference between the predicted and real facial ...
<p>Each tracing is from an actual participant in Experiment 4. Tracings were selected to have a scor...
<p>The results show that the accuracy is high when the stimuli faces belong to age groups and .</p>...
The horizontal line across the graph represents the mean of all subjects. Each diamond plot shows th...
<p>Mean proportion of time spent within 20° of the 90° target mean relative phase across the baselin...
<p>For display purposes children are grouped by age. Bars representing the mean recognition score (p...
Visualization of mean error values obtained as the difference between the predicted and real facial ...
Diagram A is a boxplot illustrating the distribution of the BOT2 corrected point score for age and g...
<p>a) Percent accuracy and age of participants in the ASD, TD eye-tracking and TD non-eye-tracking g...
<p>(A) Balancing duration and (B) average absolute pole angle as function of subjects’ ratings. Data...
<p>Fig 4 shows the levels of happiness vs. unpleasant for the CC outcome (blue line), for the DC out...
<p>The three left bars indicate the average change of reach direction (°) for the N = 13 participant...
<p> Panel A: mean tracking error and Panel B: residual intra-individual variability. Error bars repr...
<p>Bars represent the errors within each condition (shaded bars = Mirror, unshaded bars = No mirror)...
<p>A: The participants' overall curvature discrimination thresholds are plotted separately for each ...
Visualization of mean error values obtained as the difference between the predicted and real facial ...
<p>Each tracing is from an actual participant in Experiment 4. Tracings were selected to have a scor...
<p>The results show that the accuracy is high when the stimuli faces belong to age groups and .</p>...
The horizontal line across the graph represents the mean of all subjects. Each diamond plot shows th...
<p>Mean proportion of time spent within 20° of the 90° target mean relative phase across the baselin...
<p>For display purposes children are grouped by age. Bars representing the mean recognition score (p...
Visualization of mean error values obtained as the difference between the predicted and real facial ...
Diagram A is a boxplot illustrating the distribution of the BOT2 corrected point score for age and g...
<p>a) Percent accuracy and age of participants in the ASD, TD eye-tracking and TD non-eye-tracking g...
<p>(A) Balancing duration and (B) average absolute pole angle as function of subjects’ ratings. Data...
<p>Fig 4 shows the levels of happiness vs. unpleasant for the CC outcome (blue line), for the DC out...
<p>The three left bars indicate the average change of reach direction (°) for the N = 13 participant...