Does giftedness often co-occur with Aspergers?

[Nauti]

I don't know about Aspies in general, but I will say I believe myself, my partner and my youngest son are "gifted" as well as Autistic, although my son displays more gifted traits than autistic traits, in that he fares better socially than I or my guy, ever did.

We all have very high IQ's which play out as deeply inquisitive, thoughtful, reasoning, intellects. My guy is a science and (especially computer) tech "genius", my kid is exceedingly advanced in math, loves science and is kind of too smart for school (doesn't feel challenged enough and they won't allow skipping grades here) and we can have very high level intellectual and thoughtful conversations on a variety of subjects, the kinds of conversations that it would be difficult to find an adult as deep thinking as my kid is (he is 13).

I am a "gifted" artist; music (compositions songwriting, improvisation) and poetry writing, mainly but also find I have talent in painting and drawing.

I have a big family (LOTS of children) and have suffered a lot of adversity though, so my "gifts" haven't necessarily had the fertile ground one needs to excel in a field.

All of our IQ's have tested around 144-145.

 

[Propianotuner]

The title of your post, and the poll are asking two different questions. Plus, if you can't be bothered to explain level five giftedness... then maybe we can't be bothered to look it up.

Congratulations for being born with a high IQ?

These don't seem like very welcoming or charitable responses to another member of the forum, especially a new and young member. Surely we can do better, guys I mean, "congratulations for being born with a high IQ"? It's not very fair to imply that the OP was being arrogant or showing off. Some people have these capabilities that mark them as outliers and contrary to what many might think, it can come with as many negatives as positives so far as challenges in life.

It's high time for society to move away from the mistakes of the eugenics age and revise its culture on the subject of intelligence.

In response to the OP:

Hi, I’m just wondering if giftedness has any co-occurring relationship with Aspergers? I know a few gifted people with AS/HFA, so would there be any connection? I’m level 5 gifted (search if you don’t know), and have close to all Aspergers traits ( extremely likely Aspergers ) and thought that maybe those were related. When tested in yr3, got the highest possible testing results- as it only tested up to certain year levels but would likely be further ahead than the tests could measure. 6 years in reading, 3 in math although it is probably more like 9-10 and 7 -8 (just an estimate).

I think it's perfectly valid for you to be curious about this. Really it's understandable that people would assume this, not only because of popular references to autistic savants but influential academic authors such as Simon Baron-Cohen.

While it really is a promising direction to look in, as evidenced by Baron-Cohen's wonderful piece of work there for the Royal Society, we should have some reservations toward the word "often" in the title of this thread. I answered the poll saying "no" but it's probably more accurate to say that I've suspended judgement on it, and that I simply think the answer is more likely to be "no" than "yes".

Why would I say that it's more like to be "no"? Well, it's hard to point out anything particular to autism itself that indicates it must indicate a higher chance of giftedness. In the article I referenced it covered hyper-systematizing that many people with ASD appear to engage in, but when a person's IQ is being measured it is less their thought process that the proctor is after and more their processing power itself, their G factor.

 

[Crossbreed]

It is not so common for autistics to be geeks, but it is very common for geeks to be autistic. (There is a similar dynamic for savantism.)

When giftedness is accompanied by one or more learning disabilities, it is called "twice exceptional" [abbreviated 2e].*

This happens because many geeks have asynchronous development. That is, while their cognition is highly developed, their other traits are under-developed. If that gap is significant enough, it meets the definition of a Pervasive Development Disorder, a.k.a. autism.

*The following are good for 2e resources,

• US Autism Association
• SENG (directory)

 

[Derp]

No its the same proportion as Neurotypicals.
Aspersers specifically means your on the high functioning side so usually the average "aspie" has a 100 iq. Though people with autism in general usually have below average IQs

What is the average IQ of an autistic person? | AutismSD.com

 

[Misery]

The title of your post, and the poll are asking two different questions. Plus, if you can't be bothered to explain level five giftedness... then maybe we can't be bothered to look it up.

*rolls eyes*

Took me exactly 5 seconds to look it up. These days you dont even need to type it (and indeed, I didnt).

And besides: if you cant be bothered to look it up when it takes that little time... why should OP explain it? You DEFINITELY cant be bothered to actually take the time to READ it if posted here. So that's a rather nonsensical thing to say.

Also... both questions are the same. Dont be nitpicky just to put someone down. I think you know full well what these questions mean.

Seriously. There's no call for this sort of rude response on this forum. We all deal with enough of this sort of crap in our daily lives. We dont need it here.

It's not very fair to imply that the OP was being arrogant or showing off. Some people have these capabilities that mark them as outliers and contrary to what many might think, it can come with as many negatives as positives so far as challenges in life.

It's high time for society to move away from the mistakes of the eugenics age and revise its culture on the subject of intelligence.

Aye, I agree with this.

I have a very high IQ myself, as noted by proper testing.

But I tell ya this: When you regularly do stuff like trying to open hotel room doors with your car remote (and taking 5 full minutes to realize the problem) because you're just that spacey all the time, or when you have a memory like a cheese grater... you sure dont feel very smart much of the time, and tend to look a bit derpy to many. For all those IQ points of mine, I still usually describe myself as "airheaded" more than anything else. Or maybe "space cadet".

Someone's IQ is very much not the only thing that's important... there's so much more than just that. That people focus so much on that one stat is definitely a bit outdated. You'd think that the people that create tests related to intelligence would be smart enough to spot that.

 

[Autistamatic]

Being labelled as "gifted" can be a terrible thing for a child. The expectations that are often placed upon them can be highly destructive.
Sheldon Cooper is as unrealistic as characters come. He is portrayed as a genius who is highly aware of it, yet his self awareness is that of a young child. He is arrogant, self aggrandizing, selfish and naïve. In the real world he would not have the small network of supportive, geeky friends to buoy him up and forgive his faux pas. He would most likely be a very lonely man with nought but his whiteboard for company.
The "gifted autistic" is a misleading stereotype and often a figure of fun and ridicule.
Both traits can be socially isolating and rob someone of a rewarding childhood -.in that they certainly have some common ground.

 

[Fino]

I can't stand the separation, mostly, such as in primary school with "gifted" programs or different groups for different testing levels. I purposely read slow for some reading test in fourth grade and was placed in the slow group, I refused to attend the "gifted" programs, and I put random answers in for most standardized testing.

One of my favorite people in fifth grade was this kid everyone called "retarded," even though he wasn't, but he was "slower" and happened to have large front teeth--but he was adorable and sweet and awesome. Then he disappeared mid-year. Where are you, Ed!?!?!?!

 

[Misery]

Being labelled as "gifted" can be a terrible thing for a child. The expectations that are often placed upon them can be highly destructive.
Sheldon Cooper is as unrealistic as characters come. He is portrayed as a genius who is highly aware of it, yet his self awareness is that of a young child. He is arrogant, self aggrandizing, selfish and naïve. In the real world he would not have the small network of supportive, geeky friends to buoy him up and forgive his faux pas. He would most likely be a very lonely man with nought but his whiteboard for company.
The "gifted autistic" is a misleading stereotype and often a figure of fun and ridicule.
Both traits can be socially isolating and rob someone of a rewarding childhood -.in that they certainly have some common ground.

I've known people like Sheldon.

They're more common than you might think, and seem to congregate in groups pretty often. There's a variety of internet memes that have even come into being for that very reason.

When I think about it now, I might say that the problem with Sheldon is the high visibility of the character, and the fact that people are often not very fond of the whole "critical thinking" thing. Leads to LOTS of stupid assumptions that I'm sure many of us are tired of. "You're autistic? DURR HURR BLUUUUURRRRR I WATCHED THIS SHOW ONCE, YOU MUST BE LIKE THAT GUY WITH THE FACE".

I hate when they do that.

 

[Nauti]

Being labelled as "gifted" can be a terrible thing for a child. The expectations that are often placed upon them can be highly destructive.
Sheldon Cooper is as unrealistic as characters come. He is portrayed as a genius who is highly aware of it, yet his self awareness is that of a young child. He is arrogant, self aggrandizing, selfish and naïve. In the real world he would not have the small network of supportive, geeky friends to buoy him up and forgive his faux pas. He would most likely be a very lonely man with nought but his whiteboard for company.
The "gifted autistic" is a misleading stereotype and often a figure of fun and ridicule.
Both traits can be socially isolating and rob someone of a rewarding childhood -.in that they certainly have some common ground.

I'd have to agree with this. From my experience my high IQ "giftedness" has been just as much a liability as it has an asset. I am faring less well, socially and economically, than the average person. I crave complexity, so simple rote jobs are untenable for me (just the thought is kind of like a horrific mental torture) . I am, similarly, to Misery, a "space cadet".

I also identify and test as "INTP" on.the Meyers Briggs personality tests, a "rare" type of overly intellectual female, who is fairly hopeless at keeping house and many a practical task, although I am "gifted" in the kitchen, with cooking, but messy and disorganised as well.

Being a heady type who craves constant mental stimulation and complexity is not always great, and finding people to relate to, is even harder, in my sociosphere, anyway.

I do like being me (finally, it's taken a long while to get to this) but I don't think it's brought me any kind of an "easier" life, it's just that complexity and intergrating (certain kinds of) new information, pattern recognition and certain kinds of logical process are obvious and easy for me, but then I have to cope with the shocking reality that most people around me are not at all like me, so that's dismaying and "fish-out-of-watery" for me.

It can feel like a burden as well as feeling like, being so cognitively "capable", I should be achieving great things, instead I'm just trying to raise my children well, and am still trying to "find my place" out in the career world.

 

[Fino]

Many people have told me I remind them of Sheldon, having no clue anything about Autism.

 

[Pinkie B]

Many people have told me I remind them of Sheldon, having no clue anything about Autism.

Same here. I find it rather offensive.

 

[Crossbreed]

Many people have told me I remind them of Sheldon, having no clue anything about Autism.

You remind ME of that AFLAC character...

 

[Progster]

I've always thought its named should be changed, as it doesn't exactly seem like a "gift" to me. It has good to it, but "gifted" makes it sound all good.

"Gift" in German means "poison"

 

[Crossbreed]

"Gift" in German means "poison"

So, "they" were wrong? We should beware of Germans, not Greeks, bearing "gifts...!?"

 

[Propianotuner]

Aye, I agree with this.

I have a very high IQ myself, as noted by proper testing.

Not to pry but it'd be great if you could possibly share your own test. I'm happy to share my own most recent results:

The state required me to take WAIS IV because it was looking to dispute my disability status. Gladly I've been employed for two years since and it's not much of an issue now, I have my challenges but still am fortunate in being able to provide for myself.

On the test my full scale IQ was reported as 111, my verbal comprehension was 103, my perceptual reasoning was 107, my working memory was 133, and my processing speed was 84. However, looking deeper into the subtests it begins to show just how unclear it is where the G factor lies in all of this and how inconsistent my scores were in the subtests which were simply averaged to come to the scores that I listed.

For example my overall verbal comprehension score ended up being just above average, but in the subtests I performed poorly in similarities (really it makes perfect sense for someone autistic to have trouble with things like metaphors and similes), while at the same time scoring a 14 on verbal comprehension of information, which is considered fairly far outside of average.

In the working memory area I scored an 18 on the digit span test and a 14 on the arithmetic test. On the other hand my score on the coding test for processing speed was a 7.

So, we're left with a total score of 111 but the subtests are all over the place and it seems unclear where, if anywhere, there is some indication of a G factor. Not only is it a fair question to ask whether WAIS, Raven's Matrices, or the Stanford Binet tests can be considered very accurate so far as correlating a total score with the G factor when testing a person with some form of mental illness, but the more I've studied this outdated, primary theory of intelligence (that there is a G factor representing a person's general ability to process abstract information and that various areas of abstraction can be tested with the average correlating to a reasonable measurement of that G factor), the more I've found that it's just as poorly justified and vague as the recently popular Multiple Intelligences Theory.

Even more strange is how inconsistent my history with IQ tests is. I scored better on Raven's Matrices and my subtests were even more inconsistent when they measured my intelligence (I'm not aware with what tests) at an age closer to the OP.

 

[Fridgemagnetman]

So, "they" were wrong? We should beware of Germans, not Greeks, bearing "gifts...!?"

I thought it was fish.

 

[Propianotuner]

Someone's IQ is very much not the only thing that's important... there's so much more than just that. That people focus so much on that one stat is definitely a bit outdated. You'd think that the people that create tests related to intelligence would be smart enough to spot that.

This culture on intelligence which hasn't gone away since intelligence testing and state enforcement of eugenics both bloomed into popular practices, is a culture that presupposes intelligence must offer professional and social advantages as well as an improved ability to achieve self actualization as defined by Maslow in Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs theory. The statistical data gathered from psychologists at Jneurosci and other assocations hasn't been able to support this much so far, and with the advent of the internet there are a growing number of people who've tested as outliers sharing that with higher intelligence scores seems to come feelings of isolation, cynicism, dissociation, depression, and profound existential dread.

 

[Misery]

Not to pry but it'd be great if you could possibly share your own test. I'm happy to share my own most recent results:

I dont exactly have that info at hand, and my memory of the whole event is a mess. When I said I "have a memory like a cheese grater", well... that's what I meant. Cheese graters are full of holes. I know that the score was high, but that's as far as my memory of the results goes... part of this is that frankly, I didnt really care all that much. And the less interested I am in something, the less likely I am to remember it.

The main thing I do remember, aside from "it was high" is that family members kept treating me like I was Einstein or something after it was done. You know, if Einstein was as airheaded as a helium balloon and had a tendency to do things like make sandwiches out of toothpaste, or lose track of the 2-foot long, loudly jangling keychain that was, in fact, draped over the back of his neck the whole time (I do that one alot). Reminds me of this line I saw in a meme once: "My daughter couldnt find her lunch box, and it was in her other hand". Yeah, that sort of thing. Clearly very Einstein-like.


Now one thing about the test I do remember though, is the main thing that really bugged me about the process. Which is that many parts of it assume that you bothered to learn a particular thing... which has nothing at all to do with intelligence. For example, I never really learned math. I haaaaaaaaated the subject in school... I usually just spaced out even harder than usual when in that class. And I was an AWFUL student to begin with... traditional school works in the direct opposite way to how I learn things best. In addition, the moment my family got a computer... and that happened early enough that I dont remember ever NOT having one... I started learning how to make use of it, and one thing computers taught me is that THEY do the math for you... it's just up to you to use logic to determine what math you want them to do, and what you want them to do with the results. Even when I took part in game development, I didnt need to be able to perform division myself, or know how to solve an algebra problem... I just needed to logic my way to figuring out when to tell the machine to do so.

So, all of that together means that, for the most part, I havent the foggiest clue how to do most types of math. I simply never bothered to learn it in school, and I've never had a reason to do so since then. Yet there was math involved in the testing, I seem to recall. Not crazy complicated stuff, but still there was enough "I dont know what I'm looking at" content there to be rather concerning. And this is probably the same for many people... if there's a subject that is covered on the test, but they either never bothered to learn about that subject, or were never given the opportunity... it seems rather off to me, that it should factor into that type of testing. Surely there's got to be a better way. It just screamed "flawed method" to me.

 

[Propianotuner]

Now one thing about the test I do remember though, is the main thing that really bugged me about the process. Which is that many parts of it assume that you bothered to learn a particular thing... which has nothing at all to do with intelligence.

Yes, precisely. The tests often measure crystallized intelligence when fluid intelligence has, on the face of it, a more straightforward potential relationship to the G factor.

 

[WildCat]

I'm going to leave this here since the subject involves intelligence testing once again:

The Level and Nature of Autistic Intelligence II: What about Asperger Syndrome?