Research Shows Three Distinct Thought Styles In People With Autism

[Jumpback]

Research Shows Three Distinct Thought Styles In People With Autism

I identify with the first thing that I have quoted very strongly, and the second quote somewhat strongly, but these are picking and choosing parts of this. I don’t exactly fit the general categories though. I’m never sure if anything is appropriate, but just thought that I would share.

“Associative thinkers — Individuals with ASD have an associative rather than linear way of thinking, where one thought connects to another, and another—like a great interconnected web of related and more loosely associated concepts.”

“Analytical thinkers — People with ASD tend to reason in a more logically consistent manner than neurotypicals. There is decreased susceptibility to the framing effect in people with ASD, who demonstrate an ‘unusual enhancement in logical consistency’ [13].The way options are framed can induce bias in decision-making. Options presented in a “gain” frame (you keep $30 of an initial $50) are preferred to mathematically equivalent options presented in a “loss” frame (you lose $20 of an initial $50). ”

 

[Nervous Rex]

It's interesting that Temple Grandin's quote on being an Associative thinker is a great example of an associative thinker - she says the same thing about running virtual simulations in her head twice in one paragraph. An analytical thinker would have considered it sufficient to say it once. As an associative thinker, she said it twice because that's where her thoughts led her in that moment.

I am a very analytical thinker. I understand things best when they are reduced to a system of rules. When there are no rules given, I have to study it on my own to derive the rules. I am also very associative - one thing will remind me of a dozen other things and I have to toss out those that aren't relevant to the conversation - sometimes I fail and wind up going off on my own tangent.

I have no visual abilities whatsoever.

I am good at lateral thinking puzzles, but only because I apply analytical thinking to them. That is, I systematically review the given facts, question the assumptions and find out which assumptions can be rejected to produce an unanticipated solution. This approach has helped me solve some interesting problems at work, too - look at the project requirements, look at the engineering assumptions made in the past, find out what assumptions can be abandoned - use the new, more open framework to formulate a solution.

 

[Tom]

I am still trying to find the 'research' part of this.

It begins only as a question asked on Quora. It then traces to an Aspie couple Blog which identifies themselves as researchers. The medical person who identifies themselves as a psychotherapist and also as a 'Dr' is a Naturopathic Doctor (as opposed to MD - Medical Doctor).

In medicine, as in any science, I expect published, peer reviewed studies to back up any statements/findings/conclusions. So until I can find some actual research support consider it somewhere between theorizing and speculation.

 

[Thinx]

Yes this seems to be based on observations made by Temple Grandin. I have seen from scans and read that her brain is very unusual.

I am an associative thinker, and tend to use logic, and I think outside the box. I think I default to these paths due to so-called normal paths not being available, in my brain. But these paths often aren't available to neurotypical people, so it certainly can be a way one can come up with unusual and novel strategies and ideas.

Unfortunately these will often not be popular, as the majority won't understand how they are arrived at, and/or will feel uncomfortable with the ideas... then it depends how much independence one has as to whether the ideas, solutions or strategies can be used.

 

[Nervous Rex]

I am still trying to find the 'research' part of this.

The article has footnote links to other articles. The majority of them are just "Temple Grandin says so", but others are actual studies (footnotes 12, 13, 14, and 16). And just because I noticed that there are footnotes to academic publications, that doesn't mean that I actually read them.

 

[Giraffes]

I am a associative thinking and also bring a different perspective and approach to problems that many N/T people find unusual,i struggle to explain the path taken to get them, logical and systematic problem solving isn't how my brain is wired, i often have multiple solutions to any given problem, in Maths i know the answer but am unable to show the processes involved to that answer.

 

[Tom]

The article has footnote links to other articles. The majority of them are just "Temple Grandin says so", but others are actual studies (footnotes 12, 13, 14, and 16). And just because I noticed that there are footnotes to academic publications, that doesn't mean that I actually read them.

I looked at those studies. They do not pertain to identifing separate autistic thinking 'styles'. They all look at differences between autistics (as a whole) and neurotypicals.

It seems to me like what these people have is a theory, which can be the starting point of investigation/research, not the end point results.

So the title:
Research Shows Three Distinct Thought Styles In People With Autism

seems to me false. It would be accurate only to say something like 'Person X proposes three distinct thought styles in people with Autism.'

Just as a comment I would suspect that even if there were 'thinking styles' it is odd to me that there would be only three. If such styles are proven it would take very large sample experiments to look for less common or other variations.

As an analogy Blood types were first identified in 1901. But only 4. Many new blood groups were discovered gradually over the next 64 years.

 

[Aspychata]

Very interesting. I have the amazing ability to get to the right answer with the wrong backup in math. Like your answer is right, but your proof wrong so l have to mark it wrong. ( Because you copied somebody- NOT).
True logical thinking gets you in trouble because people start to not want to hangout with you. You have mask logical thinking with emotions. Is this the same associative thinking? I think of solutions like my life depends on it somehow. Maybe it's associative thinking with a OCD slant.

 

[Thinx]

I read the book Temple Grandin did about her brain based on the scans that were done, it was interesting to hear her account of how she processes and thinks, with unusual visual abilities. But I don't think her scans are typical of autistic brains.

I do think that the thinking outside the box aspect is a very distinctive feature of high functioning autism, as is use of logic to try to understand the world and process. However, the article doesn't seem to support its title , and I certainly don't fit distinctly into any one of those categories. Perhaps if they are talking about research informally done by Temple Grandin, we can see this as her informed opinion, rather than a fully researched theory,.

I think there would be way more ways we think, depending on the different genes relating to our autism, and other factors.

 

[Matthias]

Research? The "I have observed that there are three different specialized autistic/Asperger cognitive types." sounds like it's nothing more than Temple Grandin's personal opinion. I don't agree with it. Things can be categorized in unlimited ways and most people won't meet rigidly defined categories.

 

[Fino]

Some people just enjoy categorizing. And, of course, the more categorizing the less reality, since with every label information is lost.

 

[Nervous Rex]

The more categorizing the less reality, since with every label information is lost.

That is awesome. I'm stealing it.

 

[WoodWorkingJoel]

I always fear that these types of articles are like horoscopes, so generic that they apply to everyone. Derrin Brown did a great bit where he predicted a room full of people's wants and personalities. The trick was He gave all of them the exact same sheet and they all agreed it fit them.
That's why you need control groups and peer review and externally repeated results.

 

[risootser]

Research Shows Three Distinct Thought Styles In People With Autism

I identify with the first thing that I have quoted very strongly, and the second quote somewhat strongly, but these are picking and choosing parts of this. I don’t exactly fit the general categories though. I’m never sure if anything is appropriate, but just thought that I would share.

“Associative thinkers — Individuals with ASD have an associative rather than linear way of thinking, where one thought connects to another, and another—like a great interconnected web of related and more loosely associated concepts.”

“Analytical thinkers — People with ASD tend to reason in a more logically consistent manner than neurotypicals. There is decreased susceptibility to the framing effect in people with ASD, who demonstrate an ‘unusual enhancement in logical consistency’ [13].The way options are framed can induce bias in decision-making. Options presented in a “gain” frame (you keep $30 of an initial $50) are preferred to mathematically equivalent options presented in a “loss” frame (you lose $20 of an initial $50). ”

Hi. I analyze-synthesized this thread.
Relation to objects and senses

I think this might relate to "aspergersnism" vs "kannerism". Why I think about this? Words have a meaning and many times falsely attributed making people see false patterns and running ahead with premature thinking.

I think the article is errneous. I'm very top down thinker. My mind tends to chop everything into pieces hence it is also analytical. It just can not always reach to normie level and lives in conceptual idealistic level. I had troubles with reading electronic circuit diagrams for example. It took lots of patience to master those at some level. It is like I can make people mad by being too philosophical. I also had troubles with typical detail thinking. I do not like repetition in programming and find it repulsive while I can surely sketch an idea.

Another error: Having an experience means relying association and an experience therefore it is also bottom up thinking. Just more relaxed and therefore lacking rigor which was exactly what the article demonstrated.

 

[Jumpback]

I looked at those studies. They do not pertain to identifing separate autistic thinking 'styles'. They all look at differences between autistics (as a whole) and neurotypicals.

It seems to me like what these people have is a theory, which can be the starting point of investigation/research, not the end point results.

So the title:
Research Shows Three Distinct Thought Styles In People With Autism

seems to me false. It would be accurate only to say something like 'Person X proposes three distinct thought styles in people with Autism.'

Just as a comment I would suspect that even if there were 'thinking styles' it is odd to me that there would be only three. If such styles are proven it would take very large sample experiments to look for less common or other variations.

As an analogy Blood types were first identified in 1901. But only 4. Many new blood groups were discovered gradually over the next 64 years.

Do you, or others, think that we just aren’t to a point yet where they can figure things out?

Like, a number of people on here have said that they have bad memories or maybe aren’t that good at mathematics, but people with incredibly memories who are math whiz’s also tend to have autistic traits.

Or like Temple Grandin has unusual visual abilities but others don’t

Or some people can’t look people in the eyes but others can. Or some are non-verbal where others are very verbal. Etc.

Like if you look at Daniel Tammet, who has amazing math and memory abilities has been diagnosed with Aspergers. He also had epilopesy which confuses things. Tammet doesn’t come across as overly autistic.

Like it’s just kind of a bizarre thing, where some different traits can get bundled together as one thing in the DSM. Like other things in DSM like depression and anxiety and bipolar and ADHD tend to almost always be negatives, but high functioning autism seems like it can sometimes even just mean that it’s just a different way of thinking that doesn’t match how others think. Like probably a fairly high percentage of computer people have elements of HFA and these people are necessary to modern life. But then there is a secondary confusing factor where it can be just completely disabling. Then there is a third confusing factor in that it seems to somewhat include almost completely different thinking styles and so on all mixed together

 

[Jumpback]

Some people just enjoy categorizing. And, of course, the more categorizing the less reality, since with every label information is lost.

I guess that the big deal about such things to me is that like since I don’t come across as overly autistic and don’t fit the stereotype of someone with Aspergers, I misunderstand myself and people misunderstand me.

Like my dad has tended to get mad at me for being messy, my sister seems to believe that I am now just being lazy because I am having so much difficulty getting organized so I can work. If I go to psychs I tend to get diagnosed with new thing after new thing and very often they go off on some tangent about something unrelated.

So like I would like some way to explain why I think that I must have at least borderline high functioning autism. Like if this was scientifically valid research, and I fit one of these different thought styles almost exactly, I’d email my sister and dad the link to try to explain. Then I would go to a psych appointment and pull out my phone and show them the link, and they would get what I am trying to explain.

I mean what you say about categorizing is completely true, but I’m just tired of all the misunderstandings and confusions and even accusations and me making mistakes all because it’s very difficult when there is no framework at all to understand

Or like on the introversion vs extroversion discussion, it’s pretty confusing just how valid these categories actually are, but it makes things easier to grasp in a basic way. Like, for example, if your friend is always going to parties and doing things and a social butterfly and you prefer to stay home and read or something, it’s much easier for the extrovert and introvert to understand themselves and explain things to each other using this basic, flawed categorization.

 

[Jumpback]

Some people just enjoy categorizing. And, of course, the more categorizing the less reality, since with every label information is lost.

This thing about categorizing at the loss of information is probably very important to how biological creatures can function without going into “does not compute” mode and computers can’t so easily

Like, for example, maybe a domesticated Labrador retriever comes across a wild wolverine. Dog is bigger than the wolverine, so maybe he initially isn’t concerned about the wolverine being a threat, but wolverine has sharp teeth and is aggressive and moves fast and is a serious threat to the dog. If the dog fails to recognize things like sharp teeth and ferocious instincts and this creature is quick, the dog might be in real trouble. Dog has to categorize things like sharp teeth and speed and aggressive behavior in very simple terms and then decide to run away based on very simple categorizations if he doesn’t want to get his/her ass kicked

Or, say as humans, when ever we enter an unfamiliar setting and something looks like a chair and it’s in a place where chairs typically are, we just don’t even think and sit down on the chair. This is because we have over time built a category of “chair” and don’t waste time with endlessly examining each detail of some chair like thing.

Or, like the thing you said “the more categorizing the less reality, since with every label information is lost” is absolutely true, but this categorization thing seems to be absolutely essential to how humans can manage to function. It tends to have horrible side effects, such as racism and whatever else or, at the same time intolerance from the left from generalizing about what rural white people are like and so on. But humans can’t exist without this thing or they’ll become just as useless as a computer stuck in a “does not compute loop”. Like gestimating and overgeneralizing and having intuitions about things and so on are just necessary

Then, in a way, it seems like some autistics are a bit more like computers in being very literal, but therefore in being less inconsistent. Like things about how to approach a girl aren’t completely rational direct things. You can’t go up to a girl and say that I am reasonably intelligent and fairly muscular and I have reasonable income potential and expect this to work. Even autistic men grasp these things more naturally than computers do without some pretty sophisticated algorithms. One has to through crazy numbers of sophisticated categorizations and assumptions and so on just to solve how to go impress a girl, and it sort of does seem to boil down to simplifying the world at the loss of complete accuracy.

Or like there are crazy other things that biological creatures do that seem to go along the lines of like a natural game theory instinct or something, which is also really based upon things along the lines of categorizing

 

[Tom]

Do you, or others, think that we just aren’t to a point yet where they can figure things out?

Like, a number of people on here have said that they have bad memories or maybe aren’t that good at mathematics, but people with incredibly memories who are math whiz’s also tend to have autistic traits.

Or like Temple Grandin has unusual visual abilities but others don’t

Or some people can’t look people in the eyes but others can. Or some are non-verbal where others are very verbal. Etc.

Like if you look at Daniel Tammet, who has amazing math and memory abilities has been diagnosed with Aspergers. He also had epilopesy which confuses things. Tammet doesn’t come across as overly autistic.

Like it’s just kind of a bizarre thing, where some different traits can get bundled together as one thing in the DSM. Like other things in DSM like depression and anxiety and bipolar and ADHD tend to almost always be negatives, but high functioning autism seems like it can sometimes even just mean that it’s just a different way of thinking that doesn’t match how others think. Like probably a fairly high percentage of computer people have elements of HFA and these people are necessary to modern life. But then there is a secondary confusing factor where it can be just completely disabling. Then there is a third confusing factor in that it seems to somewhat include almost completely different thinking styles and so on all mixed together

I think we will get closer to understanding in time, as more research is done at the genetic level, but I am not sure how defined it will be. There will still be the individuals and external influence. Outside of the brain's preset code the brain also has an ability to modify and even expand itself. An amazing machine really.

I look at the genetic code for blue eyes as an analogy. There are about 8 gene variants identified as involved. But then it gets fuzzy. You don't need all 8. Just some of them. You could have 5 and blue eyes for example and I could 4 and blue eyes but we don't have all the same ones. It is more like a threshold is reached.

With autism 102 gene variants are known (I was in error earlier stating 120 - just memory mistake) and they hit two areas known to control certain areas of development.

What I don't know is how many of these variants Aspies typically have and if NTs also have some. I can't get that out of the studies.

My guess (and that is all it is) is that it may be similar to the situation with blue eyes. Let's say I have 30 and so do you but not the same 30. We could even have completely different sets. Others have 50, and most everyone, including NTs have at least a few perhaps. The more you have the more likely you are to present symptoms, but which area they hit will determine which symptoms. And there may be many with too few to present symptoms but coming close and borderline. Imagine a combination lock with 3 numbers and how many possible combinations are possible. Now imagine a lock with 102 numbers. The ammount of variation possible is huge.

 

[Jumpback]

I think we will get closer to understanding in time, as more research is done at the genetic level, but I am not sure how defined it will be. There will still be the individuals and external influence. Outside of the brain's preset code the brain also has an ability to modify and even expand itself. An amazing machine really.

I look at the genetic code for blue eyes as an analogy. There are about 8 gene variants identified as involved. But then it gets fuzzy. You don't need all 8. Just some of them. You could have 5 and blue eyes for example and I could 4 and blue eyes but we don't have all the same ones. It is more like a threshold is reached.

With autism 102 gene variants are known (I was in error earlier stating 120 - just memory mistake) and they hit two areas known to control certain areas of development.

What I don't know is how many of these variants Aspies typically have and if NTs also have some. I can't get that out of the studies.

My guess (and that is all it is) is that it may be similar to the situation with blue eyes. Let's say I have 30 and so do you but not the same 30. We could even have completely different sets. Others have 50, and most everyone, including NTs have at least a few perhaps. The more you have the more likely you are to present symptoms, but which area they hit will determine which symptoms. And there may be many with too few to present symptoms but coming close and borderline. Imagine a combination lock with 3 numbers and how many possible combinations are possible. Now imagine a lock with 102 numbers. The ammount of variation possible is huge.

I took a quick look at the state of genetic testing options for people who have autism or might have autism, and I get the general impression that they aren’t very helpful at this point

Genetic testing for autism, explained

I’m really at a crossroads about what to next with my life, everything I had planned depended on things staying the same with my ex-girlfriend due to financial reasons (A mortgage split between 2 people is a lot less expensive than an apartment and storage units paid for by one person) and because I don’t seem to be doing so well completely isolated with zero structure So I am starting to doubt that I can get to the real point of this which was to make some money selling things off so I could trade futures, etc so I can trade on my own.

I could really use a great explanation about how exactly my brain works so I can describe to other people and use it to decide what to do next. Having a general idea about probably autism spectrum is really helpful, but it would be even better to specific idea within autism spectrum. Like if I found something like I my way of thinking is ‘associative-analytical hyperactive’ and someplace had a board suggesting things that people like me tend to find happiness with, I might try that

There are personality tests, but they are too generalized and having unusual autism type traits confuse things further

I guess what I am looking for in terms of a genetics test or brain imaging or thorough thought style explanation is about 30-50 years away.

 

[Jumpback]

My guess (and that is all it is) is that it may be similar to the situation with blue eyes. Let's say I have 30 and so do you but not the same 30. We could even have completely different sets. Others have 50, and most everyone, including NTs have at least a few perhaps. The more you have the more likely you are to present symptoms, but which area they hit will determine which symptoms. And there may be many with too few to present symptoms but coming close and borderline. Imagine a combination lock with 3 numbers and how many possible combinations are possible. Now imagine a lock with 102 numbers. The ammount of variation possible is huge.

My guess is that you are right on this. Or at least it’s something along these lines.

This talks about there being many genetic variations between people with ADHD under the “causes,” but I would still guess that it has to be more complicated than this with Aspergers, etc. Or if it isn’t more complicated biologically the effects from genetic variations are greater. I mean there might be 7,000 different tiny variations within ADHD, but the effects have a great deal of similarity. Like the theory behind the 3 types of autism at the top are almost entirely different ways of thinking.

Attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder