Can a HF person on the spectrum have low IQ?

Post Reply New Topic

I know abbreviations drive me mad, not sure if they do you too, but HF = high functioning.

I was just wondering this, because I know a boy the same age as me with a very low IQ who also happens to be socially awkward, very vulnerable, and struggles to make and keep friends, and he can't seem to cope with friendships either, although he desires to be with people at the same time. He's a lot like me socially, but my IQ swims more around average, whereas his IQ is very low. I thought he had learning difficulties, unless it is possible to have learning difficulties AND Asperger's Syndrome, or perhaps people with learning difficulties can be socially awkward to a degree?

You mean, can someone with mild autism have a low IQ? Yes, they definitely can. People can have a developmental delay from one source, and autism from another source-- autism that would be diagnosed as Asperger's if it weren't for the developmental delay.

I think this is probably the case for the many people with Down syndrome who are also on the autism spectrum. I'm not sure what the rate is, exactly, but it's a great deal higher than the general population. Autism in DS doesn't tend toward extreme traits any more than autism in general does; so what you have is someone with a developmental delay plus mild autism. I don't know if it holds true for people with other varieties of developmental delay, but I don't see why it shouldn't.

I am under the impression "high functioning autism" means someone who has autism and a normal IQ.

I'm high functioning and I don't have the highest IQ. I'm pretty sure my IQ is in the normal range but just barely I think. It's the math skills that bring my score down dramatically. I have dyscalculia and have the hardest time with even basic math. On the contrast, I have exceptional skills with the language arts. I think the last time I took an IQ test I got 114.

Besides, what's IQ really? I have friends who have learning disabilities who don't excel in schoolwork but their social skills are so superior that they function really well out in the real world. Sometimes I wish I had more social skills than anything else just so I could be able to get a job and my own place without having an anxiety attack for once.

This depend on de meaning of "low IQ" and the meaning of "HF".

Possible different meanings of "low IQ": "<100" (below average), "<85" (one standard deviation below average), "<70" (MR level)...

Possible different meanings of "HF": "mild autism", "autism without MR", "autism with gramatical speech", "autism with gramatical speech and without MR"...

If we define "low IQ" as "<70" and "HF" as "autism without MR", it will indeed be impossible (by definition) to be "HF" and to have low IQ. However, it is possible if we adopt other definitions of "low IQ" and/or of "HF".

Oh I don't know how else to ask this then, since there's so many different levels of Autism. I just meant someone like me who has mild AS (the type where I can pass off as NT to other people and only sometimes showing some odd behaviour but not enough to be suspected of AS), and who has an average to higher IQ. My IQ is average, maybe just below average.

But can an Aspie have an IQ of under 70, like mild Mental Retardation sort of thing? If you met the friend who I was talking about, you will know what I'm trying to mean.

They'd not get the diagnosis of AS, they'd get PDD-NOS probably.

Theoretically, a person with a diagnosis of mild mental retardation can/should be diagnosed with AS if their intellectual disability didn't become obvious by a clinically significant language or cognitive delay in very early childhood (meaning for example that they may have just appeared "slow" but that there are enough typical babies that are equally "slow" without having an intellectual disability).

For every one practiser like that who keeps true to the diagnostic guidelines there are probably plenty more who will have their more personally modified idea of AS and IQ, so a diagnosis of PDD-NOS or even autistic disorder/classical autism is probably way more likely to be given to such a person. Confusing, as that gives way to such further claims as that "HFA" demands you have to have a low IQ score and so on.

There's something similar about ADHD. About that people with a diagnosis of mental retardation or whose IQ score is below a certain number can't have ADHD. Of course, the diagnosis of MR doesn't seem to do a good job at keeping ADHD away so there are people who have both (not sure what the DSM says about this, but in the ICD-10 it says that everyone with an IQ below X suddenly can't have ADHD just because).

I consider myself high-functioning. I have an above average IQ, I support myself, I have a long-term relationship, et cetera. But ask me to take one of those "emotional IQ" tests and I'll score much lower than the 50th percentile.

It means very little, actually. "High functioning autism" doesn't have any fixed definition--it's just a term a doctor will throw out pretty much at random, according to his own subjective definition.

Biologically.....yes - I do not see why there could not be people who have mild autistic features (because of the defect in certain brain area) + mild mental retardation (because of the defect in completely different brain area)

Diagnostically....not sure - Since mentally ret*d person with mild form of autism may act as low-functioning autistic individual because of his retardation - it would be very difficult to distinguish which symptoms are caused by autism and which by MR.

ICD-10 bluebook about Aspergers and IQ, http://www.who.int/classifications/icd/en/bluebook.pdf

DSM-IV about Aspergers and IQ:


..so I guess that can be summarized as "People with Asperger's Syndrome have normal or higher IQ". Normal IQ is considered to be the highest point on a bell curve, aka the average, aka 100.

The discussion whether HFA and AS is the same thing or not is up next.

This quote from the DSM is important too when talking about the topic of a low IQ score:

All people with mental conditions can be socially awkward to a degree. I used to work at a club for mentally challenged teenagers and they didn't all have an ASD but their conditions still affected them socially maybe not in the same way as people on the spectrum but still to a degree depending on their condition.
There were twin boys who did have very low intelligence and had to have a carer with them and they never really spoke, only babbled the odd few words mostly to eachother, but they weren't diagnosed with autism but whatever they had still affected their social abilities and their behaviour.

And there was a 19-year-old boy in a wheelchair who was social but obviously not to a 'normal' degree. All he could say was 'hey ya' and he used to smile and say it to every person that passed and if they spoke he would wave his hands excitedly and point at them happily. He was also very affectionate, he always liked to reach his arms out and give you a cuddle. Obviously he needed 24 hour care and he may never be able to be independant and have a job, and he was in nappies and even needed help eating and drinking.

And there was a girl with downs syndrome who had a mind of a 5-year-old. She didn't ever speak to anyone, she only liked playing with toys and mucking around, and even sometimes tormented strangers (like splashing them in the swimming-pool). We had to stop her from doing that. She always needed to be watched because if she wasn't watched enough she would run off even into the road.

These people didn't have autism but their conditions still affected them socially. This may not prove what you titled your thread but it still proves what you said about can people with other conditions still be socially affected and the answer is yes. There was a diversity of all different neurotypes, and their parents put them in this club so that they could mix a bit without being with people who are likely to judge them for being different.

Yes--kind of. There's more to it.

First of all, though, I need to make sure to note that IQ tests and autism don't really mix. The validity of IQ tests is lower and lower the further from average you get, and they're normed on neurotypical populations. That means you're starting out with the assumption that the person you're testing has the typical developmental trajectory, only either faster or slower. That's not an assumption you can make with autistics.

Anyway, lemme explain the numbers. 100 is the most common IQ score, but 99 and 101 are nearly as common, and 98 and 102 nearly as common as that... and so on. So to figure out what sort of IQ score could be considered "below normal", we have to have a way to talk about how far away you have to get from the average before the score becomes a lot less common.

The way we measure "a lot" is to find a number that describes how much the data spreads out around the average. That's the standard deviation, which for IQ tests is usually 15 or 16. The larger the standard deviation, the more stretched out the graph of the scores would look.

Scores within one standard deviation make up about two-thirds of the data; so, about two-thirds of the population will score within the range of 85 to 115. That still leaves one-third, though, and you can't really say that someone who's the most unusual out of a group of three is particularly unusual.

So usually we use two standard deviations to say something is "unusual". Two standard deviations represents about 95% of the population, and for IQ tests that's a score below 70 or above 130. At those extremes, you can say with some confidence that someone has an unusual score on an IQ test. That's why many people put giftedness at 130 and intellectual disability at 70.

Three standard deviations (55 and 145) have also been used to define moderate MR/highly gifted. Scores that extreme represent about a half-percent of the population, and that's the point at which you tend to be obviously different. A statistician would call a score this extreme an "outlier", which means that depending on how small the data set is, he might be justified in excluding that data point to prevent it from pulling the statistics one way or the other. It's also the point at which IQ testing breaks down pretty badly, because of how many ceilings or floors you're hitting (i.e., being unable to answer any question on a section, or else being able to easily answer all of them).

If I had to put a number on it I'd say the normal range is from 70 to 130. Narrower than that and you leave out one out of three people; wider than that and you start including truly unusual scores. Schools can be designed to serve 19 out of 20 people's academic abilities; the 20th person is gifted or delayed and needs special education. Sounds about right to me.

So yeah, officially, I'd say that you probably won't be getting an AS diagnosis unless you score above 70 on an IQ test; but as a psychology student, I can go on the usual rant about why IQ tests don't really apply to autistic people nearly as well as many people--even doctors--think they do.

My understanding is that you need to have an IQ of 70+ to get a diagnosis of HFA/AS but am subject to correction. Also, as some have mentioned, true IQ's are difficult to establish in people on the spectrum