Dewey :: test what is your score?

Post Reply New Topic

I scored a 6.

It means you have common sense, hehe.

There were quite a few things on that test I wouldn't put past me actually doing, but most I knew whether they would be viewed as weird or not. Many times, if I wanna do it, I just don't care what it looks like. Comfort over peer pressure, etc.

Sometimes I don't mind sitting down in the middle of the floor in a public place if I'm tired and there's no seats. While all the other dopes are stretching their backs and pretending they're doing fine, lol. So silly.

I couldn't really do it at all, I stopped after two questions because I didn't know quite what they meant and I didn't have a clue what the answers should be. I agree, It's not very well thought out.

I got a 6. I answered the questions not based on what I thought, but on what I thought *other* ("normal") people would think. I thought those were the instructions, but it seems like many others answered what they personally thought, so now I wonder.

I could not distinguish between the three "unusual" cases in my answers; I could only distinguish between "NTs would think this was reasonable behavior" and "NTs would think this was weird". So I gave most everything one of the first two options on the test.

I based my decision (on whether NTs would think it was reasonable behavior) on what I think NTs themselves would be likely to do, which is in turn based on all the data I've accumulated over the past 38 years (such as how often NTs go into a checkout line for 10 or less when they have more than 10 items).

Interesting point someone made about the guy with the baby in the park who's crying -- I thought only of what the mother's response would be, not of what a random passerby would think. Those would indeed be two very different responses, but the instructions weren't clear enough to tell the quiz-taker which case to consider. So I don't see how any useful information can be gleaned from that particular question.

I got a 6.

My problem isn't with the questions or with the premise, it's with the way the results are given. Giving a confident-sounding conclusion like "this is not indicative for problems with social interpretation" seems extremely dubious, especially since the background material for the test admits that they're still gathering data to determine what represents the cutoff line. If that information were well known (assuming there's a meaningful answer in the first place), they wouldn't need to gather more information before setting up their neural network.

Plus, just because I'm autistic doesn't mean I can't learn from experience what other people will consider strange. It's less innate ability and more rote memorization, but I don't know if that would really affect test scores. I feel like my eccentric behavior isn't because I don't know what "normal" behavior is, it's more that I either consciously refuse to participate in it, or else I lack the ability/skills to participate properly. Of course, I'm not qualified to say whether this is typical for all aspies/autistics.

Jeremy

yeah, I get the impression that the people making the test don't understand this... which is kinda scary

Yep... I am normal. I got 6.

The test was written in the 70's - I expect that is the reason why most of us are not really indicated as having any problems at all - hence our frustration. I would hope the finalised results indicate that the Dewey system was able to indicate social awkwardness within Austistic People including those with HFA etc, but it isn't able to identify aspergic people.

This test reflects the opinions of the medical community as a whole at that period. Unless it was plain and obvious that you suffered a major social difference then your problems were just put down to personality quirks and not a symptom.

Remember, we were pretty backwards in the 70's.... The medical community has gone on leaps and bounds since then. If you said to a doctor in the 70s that we would map the human genome just over 30 years later they would probably laugh in your face.

This test also indicates current confusion within the autistic world today. I have spotted several people that I consider to have HFA Austism but they believe they have aspergers. I read a book by someone claiming to be an undiagnosed aspergic and to be quite honest they were so extreme they indicated severe HFA autism to me.

I can't remember the book - but the guy had an official HFA austism diagnoses - but they were trying to persuade the world they were aspergic. The book was crap - a self published piece of rubbish I could not even finish. If he did this test I would expect him to score as severe.

I got a 4 -- quite low.

Even if the test is bupkus, I wonder how many of us started out strongly Aspie and now wouldn't be recognized as Aspie anymore because of experience and stuff we've learned to do to compensate for it.

ACG

7. Totally NT. Not indicitive for problems with social interpretation. Yay.

But I know that I've simply learned these things. I am capable of seeming quite NT these days, until people get to know me closely or spend prolonged periods of time around me.

I have to admit, it never occured to me about who's point of view the man looking for the open diaper pin should have been from. That really was an unfair question in retrospect. You'd have to know the whole story to realize his behavior was not socially acceptable. But an onlooker, even a NT one, wouldn't have thought it strange unless they knew the man was a stranger.

Definitely a load of bupkus

Some of the questions were very vague. Taking a nap behind a tree, for example, would be stupidly unsafe in some countries, but might be an acceptable pastime in others. Obviously the test assumes some set of cultural biases - but which?

So I'm NT according to the test, but um, that's because the things in this test were so obvious. It's the subtle things that I have problems with!!

5...... and yes, I too thought the test was very silly

16

I got confused, though I think the girl telling him to buzz off was normal if she didn't know what he was doing ... oh wait, that's what it said oops. But then what he was doing was normal because of his intentions.

I think it should have been more along the lines of 'is this: acceptable, slightly odd, bad, or shocking to you?'

No, it's not normal, because his intentions are not normal. Why would someone want to "protect" someone he doesn't know to prevent others from finding out she breaks some rule that nobody cares about.

Oh OK. I dunno - I went with gut instinct on all of the questions anyway.