pandabear wrote:
No, I was talking about the test that Hypermorphic saw in a used book.
Which, does give me an idea--maybe I could check out the public library for psycho tests.
Sorry, pandabear, long day at work
![Smile :)](./images/smilies/icon_smile.gif)
I was hoping to find the exact wording or Look Inside the Book, but I fail.. The test was a short paragraph similar to this:
Quote:
A man decides to take his girlfriend to a expensive French restaurant for her birthday. They make a reservation well in advance and get dressed up for the occasion, but when they arrive, they have a long wait for their table, the waiter is extremely rude, and their food arrives cold. The woman says to the man, "Why, isn't this a fine restaurant you took me to on my birthday!"
Is what the woman said true? (with an implied "why?")
According to the book, the average NT would respond that her statement is untrue because she is being sarcastic, while an autistic person would be more likely to say that it was untrue but she was trying to spare man's feelings. They had the answer first in the book, so I don't know how I would have interpreted it, but (for accuracy's sake) my first thought after reading it with a sarcastic expectation was "what a b***h, she
should have spared the man's feelings instead of complaining about it"
![Smile :)](./images/smilies/icon_smile.gif)
Perhaps it does betray a difference in social philosophy still. Would an NT assume that either: 1. She expected that the man was equally annoyed, 2. She expected that the man would assume it was outside of his control and not be offended, 3. She really was a b***h and didn't care about the man's feelings?
![Wink ;)](./images/smilies/icon_wink.gif)
** edit 4. She gave him the magic NT I-appreciate-what-you-did-for-me-but-I-really-need-to-vent-in-a-non-offensive-way-and-not-be-construed-as-mean-to-you-or-the-people-around-us look
Perhaps after years of offending people we become overly sensitive to the effect that our literal words have on other people? I was surprised by how much such a simple test made me think and was hoping someone knew of more. It seems to me to be more reliable than self evaluation as well, since it seems difficult to "cheat" at.
There was another visual perception test that I could probably find or create in Photoshop if you're interested.
*******
Hmm.. did some searching and doesn't look like this line of testing ever gets beyond extreme basics. Maybe there are other ways to test for hard-wired perceptual differences..
Last edited by hypermorphic on 28 Jan 2008, 11:44 pm, edited 1 time in total.