Is autism a disorder caused by high IQ genes?

Post Reply New Topic

I think tech is referring to technology, like engineers and computer programmers.

Yeah, I'm pretty sure here tech is short for high-tech or technology, not technical.

One last thing: wouldn't superior fluid intelligience and superior memory imply more crystalized knowledge, and therefor superior general intelligience? The best explanation that I have for why Austists would tend to be superior in the former areas, but not always or often the latter, would be that Autists would tend to focus their intelligience in areas that general intelligience does not focus on, or something like that.

No, general intelligence tests measures much more than fluid intelligence. It has been suggested that some autistic individuals have strong memory skills in rote memory, however other studies show difficulties in short term working memory.

Some autistic individuals do great in some areas that suit there strengths just like anyone else in the population that have strengths and weaknesses in different areas of general intelligence.

The only type of intelligence that really counts though is that intelligence that allows one to gain subsistence and survive in life. Unfortunately, per available statistics, and those actually identified as diagnosed, many do not find that niche to focus their strengths in.

Studies on fluid intelligence, provide evidence, that these strengths need to be better understood, to guide individuals with autism, into the pathyways in life, that will lead to success in obtaining subsistence and independence in society. Currently they are not well understood.

But, assuming that I'm understanding the concepts of fluid and crystallized intelligence correctly and my defination of intelligence , wouldn't superior fluid intelligence and superior long-term memory imply imply more intelligence overall? I was referring to long-term memory by the way, I know the studies of autistic working memory can go all over the place, but its usually agreed the autists have better long term memory, I think. If intelligence is the ability to learn, knowledge, and the ability to solve problems, and you are naturally better at learning and solving problems, and you don't forget stuff, wouldn't you have more knowlege, and therefor more overall intelligence?

IMHO opinion fluid intelligence, if I understand it correctly, is the closest to my definition of pure, innate intelligence. I don't care about surviving, I just want to fit my definition of smart, haha.

Per your opinion, and available studies it is evident that some high functioning autistic individuals do better on fluid intelligence tests than control groups without autism, in a small study, but the studies haven't been replicated in larger groups, so the jury is out on whether or not this is going to hold up in a larger study.

At this point it appears that it is possible that at least some autistic people score a little higher than non-autistic people on fluid intelligence, which I agree is considered the best test of innate intelligence.

However, fluid intelligence is only one measure of general intelligence, it doesn't measure crystalized intelligence. Autistic people don't score higher on general intelligence tests that include measures of crystalized intelligence than a non-autistic control groups, per the same studies that have been done on fluid intelligence with autistic individuals and control groups of individuals without autism.

Deficits in short term working memory impact the ability for comprehension that is part of these tests on crystalized intelligence, and many autistic individuals have been studied to have difficulties in the area of comprehension that is directly related to short term working memory difficulties.

So while one may have the intelligence to do a complex mathematical problem, they may not have the intelligence required to prepare meals on demand as a short order cook, or even to waitress.

This is part of comprehension that general IQ tests, test for, however it is measured by reading a paragraph of general knowledge and getting tested for comprehension, instead of reading a recipe and making a meal out of it or listening to several people order what they want and bringing back the appropriate meals.

I've known individuals that became top notch engineers that didn't last a day at McDonalds, because of deficiencies in this area of intelligence; overall they probably did higher than average on a general intelligence test, but if they had better short term working memory and an increased ability for overall comprehension, they would have done even better.

I ranked 11 out of a class of 380, because of that long term memory, and fluid intelligence. I could recognize answers on multiple choice questions through my long term memory almost perfectly, at that point in my life, solve abstract mathematical problems, but take away the guide and the structure associated with this type of intelligence, and I was no longer the smart one in the room. I didn't find that out until I started working in the real world.

I could read 5 times faster than my wife, and feel like I was understanding it as I went, but my wife could tell a person in complete paragraphs what the book was about.

I couldn't verbally express what happened in the book as a whole in more than a couple of sentences, where if someone quizzed me on a certain fact expressed in the book, my long term memory would be stimulated to provide an immediate answer, just like the multiple choice questions in school.

Same thing if I watched a movie, I could tell you what was going to happen next if I watched it again. But, I couldn't tell you in more than a couple of sentences what the movie was about.

It's what people called book smart in those days. It's a common thing that was certainly never considered part of a disorder at that point in time. But there is no question that it can be disabling when one is in a situation that requires the type of intelligence that good short term working memory and comprehension of the "big picture" provides.

It's pretty disturbing to get the good grades in school and feel like you understand everything, and get out in the real world, and struggle with things that the C students, have no problem with, and wonder why?

When I was going to school, there were hardly any measures of comprehension tested through output, it was almost like they were testing computers for input using output punch cards with multiple choice tests.

It's part of why it is so important that autistic people get in fields that relate to their intelligence strengths instead of weaknesses. The difference between a highly successful research scientist and a person that doesn't last a day at Mcdonalds, and even potentially a diagnosis vs. no diagnosis of autism for many people.

This really explains alot; why some autistic people need so much structure in life, rely on routines, and stay focused on special interests. It's an adaptation that is required for some to deal with this cognitive difference.

Overall intelligence is a relative issue, it depends on the task at hand that must be accomplished, and this is part of what general intelligence tests, test for as compared to tests for fluid intelligence like the Raven matrices test.

What's even more interesting is how much of these strengths and weaknesses in intelligence may be influenced by neuroplasticity through teaching methods and what individuals in modern culture feed their brains on an everyday basis.

The way humans receive and process information in their environment through technological devices, is much different than it was several decades ago, without those technological devices.

It only makes since that our brains would adapt and change to these novel environmental stimuli, through neuroplasticity, impacting the way we receive and process information from the rest of the environment.

It's also probably part of the reason that people neither make or read posts that are this long.

There are no pictures for reinforcement that provide instant gratification, that one normally is overwhelmed in life.

Provided through almost every aspect of life through TV, video games, the internet, smart phones, billboards, merchandising, commercialization etc. A whole new world and a brain that has accommodated the changes associated with that world..

IQ has no independent existence outside of IQ tests.

Define "innate intelligence". Trust me, it won't be easy; the psychology profession has been trying to do it for half a century and still hasn't succeeded.

Re. fluid intelligence: High-functioning NTs do better than low-functioning NTs, too. I don't know that it's really related to neurotype...

I do think that we're selecting for autistic-like traits in our population because they are traits necessary to interact with technology, and that technology is probably making it easier for autistic people and people with autistic traits to succeed. However, I don't think that autism makes these people superior; just that these are traits which have been floating around in our gene pool for ages, and have simply found their niche. Autism wouldn't be the only beneficial trait with detrimental effects when expressed to an extreme degree; that's why we have the autism spectrum as a diagnosis, but don't diagnose nerdy people in general with anything.

Autism may be what happens when the nerd genes get too concentrated in one person. I don't think these nerd genes are really "intelligence" so much as people who are capable of narrow focus, intense interest, and extreme specialization. I've met nerds who've gotten all sorts of IQ scores, from the 40s to the 180s, but they have that focus/specialization combination in common. I think that's where autism must come from--the extreme of what we think of as "nerd". Not technology nerd, really, because autistics don't necessarily focus on tech and aren't any better at math than NTs; just that tendency to focus narrowly, to specialize. They might specialize in anything from theology to computers to the life of Princess Diana.

What's changed isn't the existence of nerds and autistics; it's just that the world's changed to favor specialists.

Well, I am not an English-speaker, but never had the idea that "nerdiness" has anything to do with specialization - usually the stereotype of "nerd" that appear in the movies (perhaps not a good source?) is a guy who knows almost anything about almost anything (except social skills and sports) and is an A student in all class except PE - in Myer-Briggs terminology, more INTP than INTJ. Btw, the nerd-like people that I know in real life appears to be like that (however, I admit that in practice could be difficult to differentiate between "people with broad interests" and "people with constant changing narrow interests").

About the poll: my father is indeed an engineer (well, "technical engineer" - the name that he use in our country for people who have only 3 years-degree of engineering - "engineer" is only for people with 4 or 5 years degree). However, there is nothing "BAP" or "nerd-like" about him (and he was not a particularly good student at school) and he spent much time in his professional life in commercial and direction jobs.

It is my mother (an elementary school teacher more interested in history and literary fiction than in science or technology, and a former A-student in school) that is the "social reclusive bookworm with sensory issues", and is from her side of the family that we have the "strange uncles" (including some that were clinically "crazy" - for example, my uncle-grand-grandparent was initially considered a "genius", but, when he was in college, he apparently lost his mind).

Btw, I am a strange case in this question, because my special interest is politics, but I earn my living more or less as a computer programmer.

Heh.

I heart you and you win the thread.

Primates ARE intelligent.

Dolphins are also intelligent, as are elephants. But neither of these species uses tools. About brain size verses body size in animals, from Wikipedia:



As for "intelligence," humans are not alone in their ability to plan, solve problems, think ahead, or use tools.

I can demonstrate the existence of a cat. The concept of "cat" has several well-defined physical properties I can measure.

"Intelligence," much like "kindness" or "love".................not so much.

"Intelligence" gets to be whatever we say it is in any given context. Having a high IQ tells me very little about what you can do and comprehend. We can define "kindness" too, and we can even develop tests for the traits we have decided demonstrate "kindness," but it's of limited practical use. And I eagerly await the discovery of the "IQ" gene that can accurately predict human performance in every area that we currently consider intelligence.

General intelligence measures, particularly those that measure crystalized intelligence measure cultural influence and knowledge acquired. The brain is changed through environmental influence from the time it is exposed to environmental influence.

Raven Matrices measures of fluid intelligence attempt to exclude this influence, by using visual symbols, but it's impossible to completely exclude environmental influence from a measure of anything associated with human.

The idea of innate intelligence excludes this cultural influence, but from an objective standpoint there aren't any functioning brains or any type of intelligence that isn't influenced by environment, in some way.

There is no such thing as pure innate intelligence, in black and white terms, however there are intelligence tests that attempt to exclude environmental influence in an approximation of a human construct called innate intelligence.

It's a gray area, just a phrase used to describe intelligence less influenced by environment. It is commonly used in reference to fluid intelligence. And it is commonly understood that Raven Matrice tests are the best measure of what is called innate intelligence.

There is research at Harvard ongoing that suggests that our modern reliance on technological devices for communication rather than face to face communication is changing the way the human brain functions through neuroplasticity.

The hypothesis is that this may be impacting the way human beings interact with each other and how they process information. So, part of the issue may not be genetics; the factors of modern technological influence and neuroplasticity, may be changing the way the brain functions, approximating many of the symptoms associated with autism.

Not to suggest that technology is causing autism, but it is very possible that it is changing the brain, in a way that strengthens some functional abilities and weakens others, like the abilities associated with social interaction, focus, attention span, patience, deep thought, empathy, and many other traits speculated to potentially be affected by the environmental impact of technology on neuroplasticity and the way the brain processes information from the environment.

So it may be a gray area also as to how much techology is selecting for autistic traits or how much the environmental influence of technology is strenghening the propensity for autistic traits or approximating autistic traits as a result of neuroplasticity.

It's kind of a common sense thing too. In the computer classes in the 80's there were signs in the computer labs that warned students "Don't forget, you are human! Not a computer!"

It will be interesting to see the results of the studies on this from Harvard. The research is just starting. The signs may eventually go up again.

This whole thread is pretty silly.

Intelligence can't be absolutely quantified, described, measured in a way that allows us to make unfailing predictions, etc. When it comes to pinning it down absolutely, intelligence is a sort of diffuse idea--so what?

We all know what it is.

For a group of people who should have wrapped their heads around the word "spectrum" about a thousand times over, you sure don't seem to understand it very well.

XFilesGeek, when someone says the word "intelligence", do you have absolutely no idea what it's supposed to mean? Is it simply a nonsense word stuck in the middle of an otherwise intelligible sentence?

What happened just then, when I used the word "intelligible"? Did it just look like hieroglyphics to you? Were you unable to understand what I said?

Here's a hint: it doesn't matter if it conjures up a number of possible "meanings". Try a little gestalt for a change. I know our people aren't suited to it, but...

No, I don't know what "intelligence" means, especially not in the context of this thread.

What are "high IQ genes?"

So how can you even begin to discuss it in ANY way, even to discuss why it's not a valid/"real" thing or concept?

Say I walk up to a group of people who speak my language, but were discussing the validity (or invalidity) of something that was named with word that I simply did not know the meaning of. How could I even begin to participate in the conversation?

You couldn't participate in this thread if you didn't know what "intelligence" is.