## 2 Materials and Methods
### Stimuli  
EFE data were collected while children played with the prototype of the computer game. The game content was designed on the basis of empirical studies that revealed  
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c} \hline \hline  & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**NT Group**} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**ASD Group**} \\  & \multicolumn{2}{c}{_n = 31_} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{_n = 29_} & \\  & \multicolumn{2}{c}{_18 Male/13 Female_} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{_21 Male/8 Female_} & \\ \cline{2-5}  & **Mean (SD)** & **Range** & **Mean (SD)** & **Range** & \\ \hline Age (months) & 53.2 (8.65) & 38–68 & 57.8 (8.65) & 41–70 & t(58) = \(-\)2.042; \(p\) = 0.046; [PERSON]’s d = 0.26 \\ \hline IQ by Leiter-R Brief & 120.5 (14.04) & 98–147 & 116.3 (13.9) & 91–139 & t(58) = 1.156; \(p\) = 0.252 (ns) \\ \hline TROG-H score (receptive grammar) & 118.2 (14.40) & 83–147 & 111.3 (14.93) & 82–153 & t(58) = 1.156; \(p\) = 0.074 (ns); [PERSON]’s d = 0.23 \\ \hline  & **Median** & **Range** & **Median** & **Range** & \\ \hline SCQ score (ASD symptom severity estimate) & 1 & 0–3 & 21 & 8–29 & \
\begin{tabular}{c} [PERSON]–[PERSON]’s U \(<\) 0.0001; z = \(-\)6.732; \\ \(p\) \(<\) 0.001 ([PERSON]–[PERSON]); \\ effect size (stochastic difference; 68]: 1 (large) \\ \end{tabular} \\ \hline Game total score (number of correct mouse responses out of the total 24) & 24 & 19–24 & 23 & 2–24 &
\begin{tabular}{c} [PERSON]–[PERSON]’s U \(=\) 342; \(z\) = \(-\)1.660; \\ \(p\) = 0.097 (ns); effect size (stochastic difference [68]: 0.239 (large) \\ \end{tabular} \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table}
Table 1: Demographic and psychometric characteristics of subjects. At the results of statistical difference between groups “ns” means non-significant.  
differences in EFEs, visual scanning patterns, or overt intended behavioral responses between neurotypical children and children with ASD of the relevant age. The main theme of the game was based on the story scripts used in an experimental developmental psychology study by [PERSON] and [PERSON] [69], which compared neurotypical vs. autistic children's ability to understand agents' cooperative or competitive intentions, and to manipulate their behaviors by means of sabotage and deception. Accordingly, our game script centered around controlling the behaviors of social agents (cartoon figures) by sabotage vs. deception, in cooperative and competitive contexts. It consisted of eight such scenes, plus an opening scene to elicit potential group-specific attentional biases, two instruction scenes, and a closing scene.  
The game presented predominantly visual stimuli, accompanied occasionally by sounds, such as bird tweets, characters' speech, and various physical noises related to the events shown. Table 2 outlines the scene structure of the game. This section may be divided by subheadings. It should provide a concise and precise description of the experimental results, their interpretation, and the experimental conclusions that can be drawn.  
As progress in a game session depended on some of the player's responses, total play time varied across individuals. Longer response latency resulted in longer game time, and so did erroneous responses, as these resulted in repeating the given trial (up to 3 expositions). The mean total play time was 1482.123 s (SD 88.009, range 1360.933-1688.733). In the ASD group, it was 1502.442 s (SD 102.453, range 1367.233-1688.733); in the NT group it was 1464.426 s (SD 68.387, range 1360.933-1606.933). (Means were calculated only on those subjects who played to the end of the game). The two group means did not differ significantly (independent samples \(t\)-test, 2-tailed, with different variations).