摘要目的:探讨学龄前男性高功能孤独症谱系障碍(high functioning autism，HFA)儿童执行功能的特点，以及与典型发展(typically developing，TD)儿童之间的特征差异。方法:纳入4~5岁男性HFA儿童和生理年龄、性别匹配的TD儿童各26例，采用学龄前儿童执行功能行为评定量表和执行功能任务组程序(EF-TOUCH)考察学龄前男性HFA儿童执行功能特征，并比较两组之间的差异。采用SPSS 22.0软件进行统计分析，统计分析方法包括描述性统计、 χ2检验、 t检验和Mann-Whitney U检验。 结果:EF-TOUCH任务中，HFA组抑制控制任务中箭头任务(Arrow)、动物任务(Pig)、动物叫声反串任务(silly sounds game，SSG)、工作记忆任务(pick the picture，PTP)和认知灵活性任务(something′s the same，STS)的正确率[Arrow：0.76(0.57，0.92)、Pig：0.95(0.90，1.00)、SSG：0.85(0.57，0.94)；PTP：(0.74±0.11)；STS：0.77(0.62，0.90)]均显著低于TD组[Arrow：0.92(0.78，0.95)、Pig：1.00(0.98，1.00)、SSG：0.94(0.82，1.00)；PTP：(0.81±0.09)；STS：0.93(0.82，0.97)]，均差异有统计学意义[Arrow： Z＝-2.278， P＝0.023；Pig： Z＝-2.599， P＝0.009；SSG： Z＝-1.985， P＝0.047；PTP： t＝2.635， P＝0.011；STS： Z＝-3.556， P＝0.000]。抑制控制任务中，HFA组Pig任务反应时间显著长于TD组[HFA组：(1 624.29±234.33)ms；TD组：(1 481.39±220.78)ms， t＝-2.263， P＝0.028]，两组Arrow和SSG任务的反应时间均差异无统计学意义(均 P>0.05)。量表结果显示两组间抑制、工作记忆维度的得分[抑制：HFA组(60.73±10.47)分、TD组(54.73±6.87)分；工作记忆：HFA组(68.04±11.51)分、TD组(61.69±8.44)分]均差异有统计学意义(分别为 t＝-2.443， P＝0.018； t＝-2.267， P＝0.028)，其余维度和因子均差异无统计学意义(均 P>0.05)。 结论:学龄前男性HFA儿童执行功能的抑制控制、工作记忆和认知灵活性均存在明显缺陷，且与同龄典型发展儿童之间差异明显。

abstractsObjective:To discuss the executive function (EF) characteristics of preschool aged male children diagnosed as high-functioning autism (HFA), and to compare the EF differences between HFA and typically developing (TD) children.Methods:Twenty-six preschool male HFA children aged 4-5 years old and chronological age and gender matched TD children were recruited respectively. Parent questionnaire behavior rating scale of executive function-preschool version (BRIEF-P) and executive function battery EF-TOUCH were adopted to explore the EF characteristics and the differences between the two groups. SPSS 22.0 software was used for statistical analysis, including descriptive statistics, χ2 test, t-test and Mann-Whitney U test. Results:EF-TOUCH results demonstrated significant differences with correct proportions of inhibition tasks (Arrow, Pig, silly sounds game (SSG)), working memory task (pick the picture (PTP)) and cognitive flexibility task (something′s the same (STS)) between groups (Arrow: Z=-2.278, P=0.023; Pig: Z=-2.599, P=0.009; SSG: Z=-1.985, P=0.047; PTP: t=2.635, P=0.011; STS: Z=-3.556, P=0.000). The accuracy rate in HFA group were significantly lower than TD group (HFA group: Arrow: 0.76 (0.57, 0.92), Pig: 0.95 (0.90, 1.00), SSG: 0.85 (0.57, 0.94), PTP: 0.74±0.11, STS: 0.77 (0.62, 0.90); TD group: Arrow: 0.92 (0.78, 0.95), Pig: 1.00 (0.98, 1.00), SSG: 0.94 (0.82, 1.00), PTP: 0.81±0.09, STS: 0.93 (0.82, 0.97)). Reaction time(RT) of Pig task was longer in HFA group than TD group (HFA: (1 624.29±234.33)ms; TD: (1 481.39±220.78)ms, t=-2.263, P=0.028). RTs of Arrow and SSG for both groups were not significantly different ( P>0.05). Children of HFA group exhibited worse inhibition and working memory(WM) than TD children in BRIEF-P(inhibition: HFA group (60.73±10.47), TD group (54.73±6.87); WM: HFA group (68.04±11.51), TD group (61.69±8.44))( t=-2.443, P=0.018; t=-2.267, P=0.028 respectively). No significant differences were found in the rest factors and domains for both groups (all P>0.05). Conclusions:Apparent inhibition control, working memory and cognitive flexibility deficiencies were found in preschool aged male HFA children. There are significant EF differences between preschool aged male HFA and typically developing children.