New theory on empathy and AS

Post Reply New Topic

I do hope this link works.

http://www.autismresearchcentre.com/doc ... C_nyas.pdf

I would be interested to hear from others who have the time to read this article.

Interesting PDF if you want all the minute details. I think that's the same thing as this Wikipedia article, which is much shorter than the linked PDF. It also includes some criticism of the theory if you want to read couter-arguments.

Link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Empathizing%E2%80%93systemizing_theory

Now that I'm reading through the PDF, it seems like he's arguing that autism happens when the mind does not develop empathy but does develop systemizing skills, and this prevents the mind from developing the traditional ToM skills (identifying others' mental states).

But under this research, how does that account for an adult who never developed any empathy (single digit EQ) but still can pass the "eyes test" and identify other people's mental states, or vice versa? Or would that be someone who almost is half-NT, half-aspie having somehow managed to develop an incomplete theory of mind (as opposed to none at all)?

Another complicating factor is that higher functioning autistics can learn ToM or recognition of expressions I can gauge really well an emotion based on person's facial expression, but I have a great deal of difficulty understanding WHY they might be feeling that emotion. It's a relatively easy task to compare an expression to my mental catalog of expression flash cards. But what motivates that expression, which is the important information, still escapes me. Worse is that often a person's emotional state is not entirely congruent with the current situation. My boss can be having a bad day and so agitation shows in his expression but I can't separate generalized agitation from agitation caused by me.

And empathy seems to encompass more than feeling bad when another feels bad. If someone gets hurt, I feel their pain, but I don't know what to DO about it other than put a band aid on the boo boo.

Reading that, my reactions:
- I'm not male.
- I have emotional empathy. I also score very high on systemizing.
- What's his deal with "even" above average?
- Empathy has little to do with responding correctly to people (witness the amount of fake people & sociopaths); more important is knowing what the correct response is. Empathy can't tell you that. To learn what response someone wants, you'd have to either learn it from them, or generalize from yourself or other people you've learned from.
- Gaze tracking has nothing to do with empathy.
- Positive reasons for our interests, well duh. This is supposed to be new?
- Calling the differences "extreme male" is VASTLY underestimating our ability.
- And for gods sake, I'm not masculine. I like wearing skirts, my long hair, and have no interested in masculine stuff like sports, cars, drinking, violence. What the hell is his problem?!
- Sci-fi, fantasy, and other obviously untrue subjects are popular amongst autistics.

I think his point was not that aspie females are masculine and have totally 100% male brains, but rather show male traits only in the specific domain of systemizing and empathy.

I think sci-fi and fantasy are popular as a way of escaping the unpleasantness of this world. I assume that aspies don't commonly get into fiction that is very much like the real world, such as mysteries, romance, etc.? If so then I think the study's claim about aversion to fiction holds true. If aspies weren't tormented by NTs in grade school so much then maybe they'd have less interest in fantasy and sci-fi.

In addition to gaze tracking as the previous post mentioned, I don't see how sensory overload fits into this. Seems to me that if your brain excels at deciphering systems and patterns then being in a noisy room wouldn't be a problem: you should be better at deconstructing the noise into its component parts.

I have a very high score in systematizing and a very low score in empathizing.

That pdf was a great article. I'm also very high S and very low E.

I'm fortunate to be making a career out of studying a special interest and solving problems. The way I'm starting to see it is that NT's take socializing for granted, which for us is difficult, but many with AS take for granted good intelligence and logical patterns of thinking and systematization, which for a lot of NTs is difficult.

It's not all bad....

Yep. But we're always going to be their little obedient, techno geek, run-arounds, because we suck at the social game.

The problem with EQ vs. SQ is that while the two functions measure something when you have a large sample population, it kind of breaks down on an individual level. Based on the common questions asked in the quiz it seems the EQ really measures several different functions that in any individual person will only be semi-related.

In particular, I think someone can be emotionally sensitive and empathetic in terms of detecting emotions, relating to emotions in stories/experiences/etc, or reacting emotionally to things in life, etc... yet still struggle with socialization because of issues related to executive functioning in autism.

Thank you for saying what I couldn't figure out how to say.

this sums it up for me. i know if someone is down compared to usual but i don't know if it's anxiety, exhaustion, illness, irritation or a response to me. what i can't read is the back and forth and the subtleties. i confuse shock / hurt feelings / confusion / disappointment / annoyance / etc and if it's subtle, i will miss it. but i do pick up on situational dynamics between people sometimes, like competitiveness, exclusion.

i doubt the autistic way of thinking can be explained by one theory, or even that there is one precise autistic method of thought. i haven't yet read the article but i did notice at the beginning the mention of different theories, the mindblindness theory, weak central coherence theory, and others.

I have a hard time with this too. I'm not sure of the cause.



I think I can be this way too. Well, it seems I more often may pick on something negative rather than anything specific. And I don't know what to make of it, or do, or not do. I'm not 100% sure, but this seems to be how it may be for me.

marshall~

I'm not certain what is meant by "executive functioning" above in regards to socialization. In another thread it appeared to do with organizing life and even things like washing dishes. I'm saying I don't understand.

I understand Executive Function to be about organisational and planning abilities. At first glance I appear the most organised person in the world. However, this does not come naturally. It is because I have great difficulties in this respect that I have created elaborate systems and strategies to enable me to cope and integrate into the world.

I have a savant type memory for facial details. I love watching peoples expressions, but often I feel like I am watching them through a shoebox where various random holes have been cut. I too might be gifted to get the right meaning in each cut out section, but the narrative (not all the time) often evades me.

However, because of my ability to have felt intense pain and suffering, I feel I have been able to move beyond the mere intellectualisation of my feelings and into the feelings of my feelings........this has enabled me to connect deeply with the suffering world.

When I am able to see that my alienation, loneliness and suffering is linked to humanity as a whole, my suffering has meaning.

that's a very good analogy.