Is this typical with autism?

Post Reply New Topic

This is from someone I know .



Formula used. https://assessingpsyche.wordpress.com/2 ... odNl7rnA3U


Several years before he died my father had mentioned that my pre-teen IQ was around 150 (147?)

No, it really shouldn't. There's a lot of people with undiagnosed learning disorders or just can't be bothered to spell check because they've got lives.

Plus, I've met an awful lot of dumb people that can spell, it means very little. That's especially the case with automatic spell check and the increased legitimacy of other vernacular Englishes.

uneven neurological development shows clearly and best when we test super high in some things and super low in others. Neurotypical individuals tend to score in similar ranges "across the board" so, yes, if we are autistic, that can be typical with autism.

I tested off the charts for vocabulary, word use, and comprehension, but have only 25th percentile visual processing and only 35th percentile audio processing for example. Our measurable performance shows itself as peaks and valleys on the charts. It has become something professionals look to as useful in screening for autism (for giving a diagnosis).

I used to test super low across the board for non-verbal ability. Some of that was down to a defeatist attitude. I was, and still am to some degree,though better than I used to be, the kind of person who flounders if they can't answer something quickly. Now the situation is more complex. My pattern recognition is good- very good, but my mental rotation/matrices ability in the borderline to average range. I don't think it helps that my visual memory is very poor. For example,on the human benchmark visual memory test I've only got to level 7 a few times.

I should add that non-verbal ability is significantly lower for a person my age than for the average, in terms of age, 30-35 year old who's a member of the FB high IQ community or the cognitive testing subreddit. Only some of my non-verbal scores are age adjusted.

I have an (autistic?) interest in reaction time as a measure of intelligence . The standard deviation,consistency in reaction speed, being more important than the actual reaction speed. Choice reaction tests being more g loaded than simple reaction tests. Reaction time increases with age, as does the standard deviation.

This is today's effort at https://cognitivefun.net/task/cogfun-17-go-nogo-visual



A younger person,of quite high cognitive ability, would probably do better than that.

that's interesting. I will take a look!
I tend to freeze when suddenly asked to perform, whether to speak, answer a question unprepared, perform some test of skill, so I fail miserably at almost anything that is spoken direction or questions (slow visual and audio processing)
I can do much better if reading and performing written directions and explanations.
I simply don't process very fast or very completely when visual or audio ( or both) instructions, commands, requests are given. It is not a problem with memory as much as it is for me a problem of processing ... most information I get through visual demonstration or audio explanation does not lodge in my brain to begin with.

I don't believe that rapid response is a test of intelligence. (at least in my case).

See also PDA, Freeze as response to trauma, lots of reasons we may not be able to respond rapidly to commands, demands, perform in an instant.

I've heard this over and over and over in my life.

Speed of response is less 'g' loaded than consistency of response ( standard deviation)

Some people think I'm a genus and other people think I'm a Godtard.

Yes it is a common thing for individuals to be above averge in certain intelligences, but below average in practical horse sense.

And folks on the autism spectrum are often like that I would imagine.

op i also recommend not putting too much stock into iq tests and similar. they often are very limited in scope and don't account for the person's life circumstances and day to day behavior

i think a big thing with nt people towards us is that, like a few other people in this thread have noted, that there are many different ways people can be smart depending on different tasks and adeptness at interacting with the world, but its often kind of lumped together into a general thing. this seems more imbalanced then most for autistic folks, but i don't really think this generalization benefits people who aren't either. i've seen a lot of nt people downplay their intelligence because they aren't good at school, for example.

I guess a lot of mine is due to the insecurity that comes with ' bullying related trauma'. Being able to have at least one thing in the plus column, even though it has little practical value, is important to me . I performed well enough at first, but nosedived academically after mumps at nearly 9.5. That's just a factual statement I'm not saying it was due to the mumps. Two words stood out when it came to school reports- 'disorganised' and 'messy' . Nowadays that would be a red flag for EF difficulties, but back in 1961- 1975 that wasn't the case. What I knew and thought was at a higher level than what appeared on paper.
I don't know whether it's an autistic thing or not, but multistep tasks have always been problematic for me.

I'm an accepted member of the FB high IQ community. Their biggest gripe with me is that I'm semi regularly seeking validation in a 'Am I really good enough?' kind of way. This 'doubting I'm good enough' is a very deep rooted feeling. One that's hard to completely cast aside.