Situations that NTs and Aspies would perceive differently?

Post Reply New Topic

It seemed simpler in my head, but when I actually said them out loud, I had a much easier time with the smaller letters than the larger ones.

And who would say yes to the 10% chance of winning? too low if you ask me...

Thank You Fraac. I also looked at the McGurk effect and I did perceive the words as changing because the way the lips were moving.

I would say yes to the 10% chance of winning (and also the 90% chance of losing). In fact pretty much every lottery and raffle I've ever entered had much worse odds than that. Oddly enough, even though the question is (half) framed as "you have a 90% chance of losing, do you buy a ticket?" I'm willing to bet that literally everybody who answered "no" has bought a ticket with much lower odds than that, unless they've never bought a lottery or raffle ticket at all. The only way to bump things up to 10% of winning (90% of losing) odds is to have tons of teensy little prizes.


I do think it's interesting how the researchers asking these framing questions found that AS people were less susceptible to framing bias than NT people. I know that I am susceptible to framing bias so I try to get around that when confronted with these situations in real life by framing the question both ways in my mind and seeing how I perceive it.

I have never heard of her before today. I was making a joke regarding Frith's quote because she thinks we want to "learn the scenarios" of her tests.

The drink scenario and the extra dollar...

It was intentional because in order to obtain the drink he wanted Joe had to make a decision, or determine, to spend an additional dollar. The fact that he made the decision quickly and that he seems to have had the extra money to pay for it maybe masks the fact that he had to make that decision.

Would people view that scenario differently if Joe only had enough money on him to buy the drink at the old price? He would then have had either to choose a cheaper drink or somehow get an extra dollar to pay for the one he wanted.

Are you saying we should drop advocacy altogether and go live in huts? I'm not a zen master, I have trouble just "accepting unfairness", I know what you mean though and I'm not stupid enough not to see you're right, but I'm still driven to try....at least to keep the balance balanced.....if there is only one voice talking about us and it's not ours, there's no hope.

I would say, for autistics, the fact he decided quickly and had enough money means he had no decision, rather than masks a decision.

If he bought the largest drink he could afford I would say that involved no extra intention. If he left for more cash that would be intentional. Good question, btw!

No.
That's cool on advocacy.

I know of a couple who lost their son to a drunk driver, He was run' over while ridding his bike. Witnesses said driver stopped, kicked over the body in a roll., looked at it, and then drove off to sit on his front porch with his beer can in his hand. The police found him there in that state, and he asked them before they said could say a single thing, " is he dead?" He worked for the county as an employee, and he wa sentenced to 6 months in jail. So, the mother joins MAD (mothers against drunk drivers), and her advocacy got the better of her -- it made her MAD, and instead of healing, it festered a sore. She had to walk away.

So I guess it is individualized, and you have to see if things get the better of you.. I always believe education or knowledge is the best medicine to alleviate these problems, but if hate or anger is the motive, then one should step aside.. (not saying that's you.)

Saw the small letters, noticed that it formed a letter, and went through trying to find a pattern to the small letters comprising the big letters. HH, SH, HL, LH, SS, HS. Seems at first like they're trying to shhh people in a very disjointed and abstract way. >.>

As for the free cup, it's not intentional, he just wants the biggest size, if that's the collector cup, that's purely incidental, the goal is a big cup. Same response to both, it's just so he can get the biggest size, no matter the cost.

In the Lottery case, obviously not, the odds aren't in your favor no matter what spin you put on it.

Also, for the love of God, you're Aspies, spell LOSING right, it's bad enough when NTs do it. I hold y'all to a higher standard of spelling. >.<

I have another two similar, but different scenarios which I have experienced.

Every so often my son and I eat at Pizza Hut. We always order the same meals. When we started doing this and for a long time my son's meal was free and I only paid for the adult meal. The children's menu features characters from a film and is also a colouring/puzzle book to keep.

We arrive one day to be told that the theme of the children's menu has changed and it now features characters from a different film. We take the menus and order our usual meals, for which I pay the usual price.

We arrive another day to be told that the "children eat free" deal is now finished and I will have to pay for both our meals. We order our usual meals and I pay more than I have in the past for the same meals, which we went there to eat.

Thoughts?

I would like to add that since posting the "Cup" and "Extra Dollar" test on my Facebook that my NT friends have chosen the same answers as we did for the same reasons. Some even think that he intentionally got the cup for free. So far, no one has answered these questions in the ascribed "neurotypical" way, which leads me to believe that this and the other formentioned tests are not correct measures.

I have an ethical problem with these tests. It seems that these types of so called "research" are biased with the intention of making us seem less intelligent or less human than NTs. It's a prejudicial attempt at profiling. None of us have the same brain, just like the NTs do not have the same brain. The dangers of these are many, but here are three that stand out:

1. It gives NT people an incorrect view of our aptitudes and humanity. I can't imagine anything more humanity stripping than to have NTs thinking that we would blame someone for an accident, for example. Imagine an employer finding out that his employee has AS and then reading this on the internet. He would think his employee had bad judgement which could cause problems later on.

If there were any Aspies that actually failed the sugar/poison test, I'm betting it was more an issue of semantics. A better way to conduct this test would be to not get hung up on semantics. Show a video, for example, and then ask if the person who gave her the poison sugar should be punished.

2. It's bad for an Aspie's self esteem to think that the world has such a low opinion of who we are, however misguided. I feel sad and angry and I am not misanthropic. ( That's BS, my darling...lol) I actually have good self esteem, but with so many people already depressed, do they really need to see crap like this?

3. God help the poor parents who read things like this after having a newly diagnosed child. Imagine how much anxiety and despair this can cause thinking that their children have been reduced to non human robots.

It's obvious that many researchers have a low opinion of autistic perception, usually assumed rather than stated. That's why I always like to email them. I'm always very engaging and they're just not. You can't easily fight prejudice like that. But the science will prove us out in the end. That's what science does, it's Borgishly relentless.

We need a legal advocate who could demand proof/challenge these so called tests or an Aspie scientist who could conduct the same tests and publish any opposing results. Anything that has been falsified can be subject to a class action lawsuit. Why should we stand for discrimination?

“Prejudice is a great time saver. You can form opinions without having to actually get the facts.” - E.B. White

Don't worry about it. The science will get there in the end.

I think all it measures is how easily people are taken in by corporate promotional sales tactics.