(PS2-57) Examining Hot and Cold Executive Functioning in Autistic and Non-Autistic Youth: Task-Based vs. Everyday Contexts

Executive functioning (EF) challenges are common in autistic individuals (Wallace et al., 2016), and can contribute to social difficulties as they demand flexible adjustments depending on the situation or context (Lacroix et al., 2022).Conceptualizations highlight “hot” EF tasks as being more demanding due to the added emotional context (Hooper et al., 2004), rather than the exclusive emphasis on decision-making in contexts devoid of social-emotional motivation (“cold” EF). In day to day situations, decision making rarely occurs without significant social and emotional influences (Zelazo et al., 2012).Therefore, it is possible that autistic individuals will perform significantly more poorly in hot EF and/or day-to-day contexts due to the added cognitive demands around emotional processing (Kouklari et al. 2024). To better target EF challenges in CBT interventions, investigating how EF performance mightdiffer in autism for emotionally salient (hot EF) versus neutral (cold EF) contexts manifest is crucial. This study examined the relationship between task-based and day-to-day EF in autistic and non-autistic youth and assessed whether autistic youth performed worse in hot EF task-based contexts compared to non-autistic youth.

Youth (N=63, Mage=12.03, SDage=2.73; 58.7% male; 37 autistic)completed the Delis-Kaplan Executive Functioning System (D-KEFS; Delis et al., 2001) and the Executive Function Challenge Task (EFCT; Kenworthy et al., 2020) to assess task-based cold and hot EF, respectively. Caregivers completed measures of everyday EF (Behavior Rating Inventory of Executive Functions[BRIEF-2]; Gioia et al., 2015; Flexibility Scale [FS]; Strang et al., 2017). Independent samples t-test (normally distributed scores) or Mann-Whitney U test (non-normal measures) was used for diagnostic group comparisons. To compare performance within groups, a paired-samples t-test (normally distributed scores) or Wilcoxon Signed-Rank Test (if normality assumptions were violated) was used.

Greater EF challenges were observed in autistic youth on everyday behaviors of EF than non-autistic youth (all p</span><.001), while there was no difference between groups in task-based hot (EFCT) and cold (DKEFS) measures of EF, except in DKEFS verbal fluency and EFCT Steps (p<.01). When comparing task-based measures of hot vs. cold EF within groups, there were no significant differences (all p>.08).

Our findings suggests that everyday EF is more challenging in autistic youth than non-autistic youth, even though their performance is largely comparable on structured task-based measures except verbal EF and stepwise planning skills. The lack of significant differences between hot (emotionally-driven) and cold (cognitively-driven) EF within groups suggests that hot and cold EF challenges may be equally present in autistic and non-autistic youth. Results emphasize the importance of assessing factors that impact EF challenges in real-world contexts and why autistic individuals may struggle to translate task-based EF skills to everyday situations. This approach reframes EF deficits as multifaceted, highlighting the importance of understanding their real-world impact and developing interventions prioritizing improving real-life EF skills.