This website was created to accompany our review article "Linguistic Prosody in Autism Spectrum Disorder—An Overview" (Grice, Wehrle, Krüger, Spaniol, Cangemi & Vogeley, 2023) published in Language and Linguistics Compass. We plan to update all figures and tables as and when new papers on this topic are published. We therefore encourage researchers to inform us of any work that they believe should feature in the online version of this overview, which is intended be updated continuously and indefinitely. Stay tuned!
Submitting a new paper
If you would like to submit a new paper, follow this link to the paper submission form.
First of all, this is how we analysed the different functions of prosody:
Here is an overview of perception of prosody according to function:
Here is an overview of production of prosody according to function:
Here is an overview of general characteristics of prosody:
Here is more information on the papers we reviewed in tabular form:
Table 1 Perception of prosody according to function
Function | Details | Study | Differences found? | Participants | Age range | Language |
| lexical tone | Cheng et al. (2017) | no | 40 | 17-34 | Cantonese | |
| lexical stress | for adults impaired only in association with speech production abnormalities | Chevallier et al. (2009) | no | 34 | 11-17 | English |
| Gargan & Andrianopoulos (2021) | yes | 22 | 12-20 | English | ||
| Grossman et al. (2010) | no | 31 | 7-18 | English | ||
| Kargas et al. (2016) | yes | 42 | 18-53 | English | ||
| Paul et al. (2005) | no | 40 | 14-21 | English | ||
| Zhang et al. (2018) | yes | 31 | 9-10 | English | ||
| syntactic structure | implicit > explicit tasks | Chevallier et al. (2009) | no | 34 | 11-17 | English |
| DePriest et al. (2017) | no | 28 | 21-56 | German | ||
| Diehl et al. (2008) | yes | 43 | 11-19 | English | ||
| Diehl and Paul (2013) | no | 62 | 8-16 | English | ||
| Hesling et al. (2010) | yes | 16 | 21-25 | French | ||
| Järvinen-Pasley, Peppé, et al. (2008) | yes | 42 | 7-16 | English | ||
| Martzoukou et al. (2017) | yes | 40 | 19-39 | Greek | ||
| Paul et al. (2005) | no | 40 | 14-21 | English | ||
| Peppé et al. (2007) | no | 103 | 4-13 | English | ||
| speech acts | younger > older | Chevallier et al. (2009) | no | 34 | 11-17 | English |
| (questions vs. statements) | complex > one word | Diehl and Paul (2013) | yes | 62 | 8-16 | English |
| Filipe et al. (2014) | no | 29 | 8-9 | Portuguese | ||
| Hesling et al. (2010) | yes | 16 | 21-25 | French | ||
| Järvinen-Pasley, Peppé, et al. (2008) | yes | 42 | 7-16 | English | ||
| Paul et al. (2005) | no | 40 | 14-21 | English | ||
| Peppé et al. (2007) | yes | 103 | 4-13 | English | ||
| Wang et al. (2021) | no | 84 | 7-11; 12-15; 18-55 | English | ||
| turn-taking | Heeman et al. (2010) | yes | 48 | 4-8 | English | |
| information structure | givenness | Diehl and Paul (2013) | yes | 62 | 8-16 | English |
| contrast | Globerson et al. (2015) | no | 55 | 20-40 | Hebrew | |
| Grice et al. (2016) | yes | 74 | 21-65 | German | ||
| Hesling et al. (2010) | yes | 16 | 21-25 | French | ||
| Paul et al. (2005) | yes | 40 | 14-21 | English | ||
| Peppé et al. (2007) | yes | 103 | 4-13 | English | ||
| Segal et al. (2017) | yes | 49 | 15-20 | Hebrew | ||
| Zhou et al. (2021) | no | 27 | 6-10 | Cantonese | ||
| intentions | Chevallier et al. (2011) | no | 34 | 13-16 | English | |
| Li et al. (2013) | yes | 26 | 8-12 | Cantonese | ||
| Wang et al. (2006) | yes | 38 | 7-16 | English | ||
| emotional state | complex > basic | Diehl and Paul (2013) | yes | 62 | 8-16 | English |
| higher > lower cue intensity younger > older | Globerson et al. (2015) | yes | 55 | 20-40 | Hebrew | |
| Hesling et al. (2010) | yes | 16 | 21-25 | French | ||
| Järvinen-Pasley, Peppé, et al. (2008) | yes | 42 | 7-16 | English | ||
| Paul et al. (2005) | yes | 40 | 14-21 | English | ||
| Peppé et al. (2007) | yes | 103 | 4-13 | English | ||
Table 2 General prosodic characteristics in production
| Function | Details | Study | Differences found? | Participants | Age range | Language |
| general prosodic characteristics | pitch contours | Edelson et al. (2007) | yes | 33 | 8-19 | English |
| Fosnot & Jun (1999) | yes | 12 | 7-14 | English | ||
| Green and Tobin (2009) | yes | 20 | 9-13 | Hebrew | ||
| Lau et al. (2022) | no | 52 | 8-32 | Cantonese | ||
| Lau et al. (2022) | yes | 66 | 6-35 | English | ||
| pitch range | Baltaxe (1984) | yes | 21 | 2-12 | English | |
| Bonneh et al. (2011) | yes | 83 | 4-6 | Hebrew | ||
| Chan and To (2016) | yes | 38 | 18-33 | Cantonese | ||
| DePape et al. (2012) | yes | 18 | 17-34 | English | ||
| Diehl et al. (2009) | yes | 42 | 10-18 | English | ||
| Green and Tobin (2009) | yes | 20 | 9-13 | Herbrew | ||
| Hubbard and Trauner (2007) | yes | 28 | 6-21 | English | ||
| Hubbard et al. (2017) | yes | 30 | 18-42 | English | ||
| Kaland et al. (2013) | yes | 40 | 18-51 | Dutch | ||
| Nadig and Shaw (2012) | yes | 28 | 8-14 | English | ||
| Wehrle et al. (2022) | yes | 28 | 31-55 | German | ||
| pitch dynamics | Wehrle et al. (2022) | yes | 28 | 31-55 | German | |
| rhythm | Lau et al. (2022) | yes | 118 | 6-35 | English/ Cantonese | |
| pauses | Sharda et al. (2010) | yes | 25 | 4-10 | English | |
| Thurber and Tager-Flusberg (1993) | yes | 30 | 7-14 | English | ||
Table 3 Production of prosody according to function
| Function | Details | Study | Differences found? | Participants | Age range | Language |
| lexical tone | Wang & Ding (2022) | no | 17 | 4-8 | Mandarin | |
| Chen et al. (2022) | yes | 52 | 6-11 | Mandarin/ Cantonese | ||
| lexical stress | Gargan & Andrianopoulos (2021) | yes | 22 | 12-20 | English | |
| Grossman et al. (2010) | yes | 31 | 7-18 | English | ||
| Paul et al. (2005) | yes | 40 | 14-21 | English | ||
| Paul et al. (2008) | yes | 66 | 7-28 | English | ||
| Shriberg et al. (2001) | no | 83 | 10-50 | English | ||
| van Santen et al. (2010) | no | 26 | 4-8 | English | ||
| syntactic structure | Diehl and Paul (2013) | no | 62 | 8-16 | English | |
| Fosnot and Jun (1999) | yes | 12 | 7-14 | English | ||
| Hesling et al. (2010) | yes | 16 | 21-25 | French | ||
| Paul et al. 2005 | no | 40 | 14-21 | English | ||
| Peppé et al. (2007) | yes | 103 | 4-13 | English | ||
| Thurber and Tager-Flusberg (1993) | no | 30 | 7-14 | English | ||
| speech acts | younger > older | Diehl and Paul (2013) | no | 62 | 8-16 | English |
| Filipe et al. (2014) | yes | 29 | 8-9 | Portuguese | ||
| Fosnot and Jun (1999) | yes | 12 | 7-14 | English | ||
| Hesling et al. (2010) | yes | 16 | 21-25 | French | ||
| Paul et al. (2005) | no | 40 | 14-21 | English | ||
| Peppé et al. (2007) | yes | 103 | 4-13 | English | ||
| Wang et al. (2021) | no | 84 | 7-11; 12-15; 18-55 | English | ||
| turn-taking | Fine et al. (1991) | no | 76 | 7-32 | English | |
| Heeman et al. (2010) | yes | 48 | 4-8 | English | ||
| Ochi et al. (2019) | yes | 79 | 18-48 | Japanese | ||
| information structure | focus | Baltaxe and Guthrie (1987) | yes | 21 | 2-12 | English |
| DePape et al. (2012) | yes | 18 | 17-34 | English | ||
| Fine et al. (1991) | no | 76 | 7-32 | English | ||
| Shriberg et al. (2001) | yes | 83 | 10-50 | English | ||
| contrast | Baltaxe (1984) | yes | 21 | 2-12 | English | |
| DePape et al. (2012) | yes | 18 | 17-34 | English | ||
| Diehl and Paul (2013) | no | 62 | 8-16 | English | ||
| Fine et al. (1991) | yes | 76 | 7-32 | English | ||
| Hesling et al. (2010) | yes | 16 | 21-25 | French | ||
| Kaland et al. (2013) | yes | 40 | 18-51 | Dutch | ||
| Nadig and Shaw (2015) | no | 26 | 8-14 | English | ||
| Paul et al. (2005) | yes | 40 | 14-21 | English | ||
| Peppé et al. (2007) | yes | 103 | 4-13 | English | ||
| Van Santen et al. (2010) | yes | 26 | 4-8 | English | ||
| givenness | McCaleb and Prizant (1985) | yes | 4 | 4-14 | English | |
| emotional states | original > mimicked | Hesling et al. (2010) | yes | 16 | 21-25 | French |
| Hubbard and Trauner (2007) | yes | 28 | 6-21 | English | ||
| Hubbard et al. (2017) | yes | 30 | 18-42 | English | ||
| Paul et al. (2005) | no | 40 | 14-21 | English | ||
| Peppé et al. (2007) | yes | 103 | 4-13 | English | ||
Table 4 Overview of all studies
| Study | Year | Perception | Production | General Characteristics | Participants | Age range | Language |
| Cheng et al. (2017) | 2017 | lexical tone | 40 | 17-34 | Cantonese | ||
| Chevallier et al. (2009) | 2009 | lexical stress, syntactic structure, speech acts | 34 | 11-17 | English | ||
| Gargan & Andrianopoulos (2021) | 2021 | lexical stress | lexical stress | 22 | 12-20 | English | |
| Grossman et al. (2010) | 2010 | lexical stress | lexical stress | 31 | 7-18 | English | |
| Kargas et al. (2016) | 2016 | lexical stress | 42 | 18-53 | English | ||
| Paul et al. (2005) | 2005 | lexical stress, syntactic structure, speech acts, information structure, emotional state | lexical stress, syntactic structure, speech acts, information structure, emotional states | 40 | 14-21 | English | |
| Zhang et al. (2018) | 2018 | lexical stress | 31 | 9-10 | English | ||
| DePriest et al. (2017) | 2017 | syntactic structure | 28 | 21-56 | German | ||
| Diehl et al. (2008) | 2008 | syntactic structure | 43 | 11-19 | English | ||
| Diehl and Paul (2013) | 2013 | syntactic structure, speech acts, information structure, emotional state | syntactic structure, speech acts, information structure | 62 | 8-16 | English | |
| Hesling et al. (2010) | 2010 | syntactic structure, speech acts, information structure, emotional state | syntactic structure, speech acts, information structure, emotional states | 16 | 21-25 | French | |
| Järvinen-Pasley, Peppé, et al. (2008) | 2008 | syntactic structure, speech acts, emotional state | 42 | 7-16 | English | ||
| Martzoukou et al. (2017) | 2017 | syntactic structure | 40 | 19-39 | Greek | ||
| Peppé et al. (2007) | 2007 | syntactic structure, speech acts, information structure, emotional state | syntactic structure, speech acts, information structure, emotional states | 103 | 4-13 | English | |
| Filipe et al. (2014) | 2014 | speech acts | speech acts | 29 | 8-9 | Portuguese | |
| Wang et al. (2021) | 2021 | speech acts | speech acts | 84 | 7-11; 12-15; 18-55 | English | |
| Heeman et al. (2010) | 2010 | turn-taking | turn-taking | 48 | 4-8 | English | |
| Globerson et al. (2015) | 2015 | information structure | 55 | 20-40 | Hebrew | ||
| Grice et al. (2016) | 2016 | information structure | 74 | 21-65 | German | ||
| Segal et al. (2017) | 2017 | information structure | 49 | 15-20 | Hebrew | ||
| Zhou et al. (2021) | 2021 | information structure | 27 | 6-10 | Cantonese | ||
| Chevallier et al. (2011) | 2011 | intentions | 34 | 13-16 | English | ||
| Li et al. (2013) | 2013 | intentions | 26 | 8-12 | Cantonese | ||
| Wang et al. (2006) | 2006 | intentions | 38 | 7-16 | English | ||
| Globerson et al. (2015) | 2015 | emotional state | 55 | 20-40 | Hebrew | ||
| Wang & Ding (2022) | 2022 | lexical tone | 17 | 4-8 | Mandarin | ||
| Chen et al. (2022) | 2021 | lexical tone | 52 | 6-11 | Mandarin/ Cantonese | ||
| Paul et al. (2008) | 2008 | lexical stress | 66 | 7-28 | English | ||
| Shriberg et al. (2001) | 2001 | lexical stress, information structure | 83 | 10-50 | English | ||
| Van Santen et al. (2010) | 2010 | lexical stress, information structure | 26 | 4-8 | English | ||
| Fosnot and Jun (1999) | 1999 | syntactic structure, speech acts | pitch contours | 12 | 7-14 | English | |
| Thurber and Tager-Flusberg (1993) | 1993 | syntactic structure | pauses | 30 | 7-14 | English | |
| Fine et al. (1991) | 1991 | turn-taking, information structure | 76 | 7-32 | English | ||
| Ochi et al. (2019) | 2019 | turn-taking | 79 | 18-48 | Japanese | ||
| Baltaxe and Guthrie (1987) | 1987 | information structure | 21 | 2-12 | English | ||
| Baltaxe (1984) | 1984 | information structure | pitch range | 21 | 2-12 | English | |
| DePape et al. (2012) | 2012 | information structure | pitch range | 18 | 17-34 | English | |
| Kaland et al. (2013) | 2013 | information structure | pitch range | 40 | 18-51 | Dutch | |
| Nadig and Shaw (2015) | 2015 | information structure | 26 | 8-14 | English | ||
| McCaleb and Prizant (1985) | 1985 | information structure | 4 | 4-14 | English | ||
| Hubbard and Trauner (2007) | 2007 | emotional states | pitch range | 28 | 6-21 | English | |
| Hubbard et al. (2017) | 2017 | emotional states | pitch range | 30 | 18-42 | English | |
| Edelson et al. (2007) | 2007 | pitch contours | 33 | 8-19 | English | ||
| Green and Tobin (2009) | 2009 | pitch contours, pitch range | 20 | 9-13 | Hebrew | ||
| Lau et al. (2022) | 2022 | pitch contours, rhythm | 52 | 8-32 | Cantonese | ||
| Lau et al. (2022) | 2022 | pitch contours, rythm | 66 | 6-35 | English | ||
| Bonneh et al. (2011) | 2011 | pitch range | 83 | 4-6 | Hebrew | ||
| Chan and To (2016) | 2016 | pitch range | 38 | 18-33 | Cantonese | ||
| Diehl et al. (2009) | 2009 | pitch range | 42 | 10-18 | English | ||
| Nadig and Shaw (2012) | 2012 | pitch range | 28 | 8-14 | English | ||
| Wehrle et al. (2022) | 2022 | pitch range, pitch dynamics | 28 | 31-55 | German | ||
| Sharda et al. (2010) | 2010 | pauses | 25 | 4-10 | English |