Take the Autism Quotient Test(wired.com)
wired.com
Take the Autism Quotient Test
http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/9.12/aqtest.html
22 comments
Well, as they mentioned: "The test is not a means for making a diagnosis". Additionally, some of these questions I'd like to answer differently, but just life didn't teach me the other way. Like the ease of chitchat. I can do it with friends, but it comes much harder with new people if I don't have some obvious interest in common (usually it would end in silence / disaster :) ). However, I'd love to learn how to chitchat if it is possible at all (never seen a way really).
With that in mind, I wonder which way would the results be skewed if the questions were about preference, not self-reflection. For example how would the correlation change if the question was "I like to enjoy social chitchat." (or something more subtle), instead of "I enjoy social chitchat."? I'm sure I'd get lower points and then again I consider myself taught to behave in autistic ways by various situations, rather than behaving like that naturally.
With that in mind, I wonder which way would the results be skewed if the questions were about preference, not self-reflection. For example how would the correlation change if the question was "I like to enjoy social chitchat." (or something more subtle), instead of "I enjoy social chitchat."? I'm sure I'd get lower points and then again I consider myself taught to behave in autistic ways by various situations, rather than behaving like that naturally.
Yeah, in my mind, these kinds of tests, if anything, only succeed in determining what type of person you think you are or, even moreso, what kind of person you want to be.
Now, granted, there's probably something interesting in those correlations as well...
Now, granted, there's probably something interesting in those correlations as well...
44. It seems everyone loves taking these tests. For some of us it's a means of asserting 'I'm normal,' whereas others seem to take pleasure in 'being different.'
I dread these kinds of tests now, because after over a year of therapy, I can still tell the outcome, and I know nothing changed :-| Yet still, it fascinates me.
The Myers-Briggs test follows a similar style. I'm gonna assume that a great many people on HN are going to score INTP on that one… Just a hunch!
I dread these kinds of tests now, because after over a year of therapy, I can still tell the outcome, and I know nothing changed :-| Yet still, it fascinates me.
The Myers-Briggs test follows a similar style. I'm gonna assume that a great many people on HN are going to score INTP on that one… Just a hunch!
43. Well then.
I find that a lot of the questions are things that I can do, I just have to think about it, where other people can do it automatically. For example, telling someone's emotions from looking at their face: all people look pretty much the same to me; I can barely tell two different faces apart, much less one face in different moods, unless I think about it.
I find that a lot of the questions are things that I can do, I just have to think about it, where other people can do it automatically. For example, telling someone's emotions from looking at their face: all people look pretty much the same to me; I can barely tell two different faces apart, much less one face in different moods, unless I think about it.
31, which is a Mersenne prime number, and Marin Mesenne lived to be 59 years old which is also a prime number and 59 is the bus route I take on Wednesdays because I like to sit in the 3rd row, aisle seat, right after I eat my sandwich, and please don't sit next to me, that seat is taken.
20. I often find these kinds of tests hard, since there is too little context. Do I enjoy parties? No, not if I don't know people. Yes, if i have some friends I'll be dancing on the tables.
Background information: https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Autism_Spectr...
29
But I don't care what it means and don't buy the autism hype.
"The Truth Wears Off" http://crayz.org/science.pdf seems relevant here. Many early studies and experiments based on fresh theories produce dramatic results, but decades later, when experiments are repeated the results are still there, but less dramatic.
Hype and bias affect which tests get popularized. Also a good explanation for the ADD/depression medication craze.
But I don't care what it means and don't buy the autism hype.
"The Truth Wears Off" http://crayz.org/science.pdf seems relevant here. Many early studies and experiments based on fresh theories produce dramatic results, but decades later, when experiments are repeated the results are still there, but less dramatic.
Hype and bias affect which tests get popularized. Also a good explanation for the ADD/depression medication craze.
I agree that autism/ADD/depression do get hyped as a 'trendy disorder.' But the 'spectacular' numbers the diagnostic methods receive are in part also to the fact that these methods have improved dramatically.
We have no point of comparison. It's just been some 20 years or so that it has been feasible and reliable to diagnose a lot psychiatric disorders; and people adapt even more slowly. Many are afraid of going to psychotherapy or even a psychiatrist in order to get a diagnosis. It carries a certain stigma.
There's a medication craze, no doubt. But that doesn't change that there's a lot of people who are undiagnosed, but could benefit from therapy. Be it psychotherapy or pharmacological therapy (most likely both!) By discounting it as a craze, you're also stigmatising valid diagnoses that could help people.
If someone in your circle of friends shows up as depressive or autistic or ADD, don't run in their shrink's office, guns blazing. It is often difficult to realise someone is suffering from a mental disorder, as they might still be highly functioning.
(Says the guy who lived with a heavy clinical depression and as many as 3 different personality disorders for over four years, before finally consulting a doctor.)
We have no point of comparison. It's just been some 20 years or so that it has been feasible and reliable to diagnose a lot psychiatric disorders; and people adapt even more slowly. Many are afraid of going to psychotherapy or even a psychiatrist in order to get a diagnosis. It carries a certain stigma.
There's a medication craze, no doubt. But that doesn't change that there's a lot of people who are undiagnosed, but could benefit from therapy. Be it psychotherapy or pharmacological therapy (most likely both!) By discounting it as a craze, you're also stigmatising valid diagnoses that could help people.
If someone in your circle of friends shows up as depressive or autistic or ADD, don't run in their shrink's office, guns blazing. It is often difficult to realise someone is suffering from a mental disorder, as they might still be highly functioning.
(Says the guy who lived with a heavy clinical depression and as many as 3 different personality disorders for over four years, before finally consulting a doctor.)
>the fact that these methods have improved dramatically.
That article shows that bubbles are not exclusive to markets, they happen in academia, even in areas where empirical data should be easier to collect than in psychology and social science.
This test is backed up by correlations to other diagnoses made during a bubble. "Eighty percent of those diagnosed with autism or a related disorder scored 32 or higher." It's a feedback loop, and science might move along faster if there was increased skepticism during bubbles.
Bubbles have a higher ratio of waste, 90% of the science might be waste, and 10% will stand the test of time. That 10% may have helped you, but the 90%, the sharp increase in prescription will ruin many lives.
That article shows that bubbles are not exclusive to markets, they happen in academia, even in areas where empirical data should be easier to collect than in psychology and social science.
This test is backed up by correlations to other diagnoses made during a bubble. "Eighty percent of those diagnosed with autism or a related disorder scored 32 or higher." It's a feedback loop, and science might move along faster if there was increased skepticism during bubbles.
Bubbles have a higher ratio of waste, 90% of the science might be waste, and 10% will stand the test of time. That 10% may have helped you, but the 90%, the sharp increase in prescription will ruin many lives.
I got a 28. My wife works with kids with autism in an elementary school and she often talks about how I'm towards that end of the spectrum.
I tend to answer questions towards the extremes which is the only thing this test scores as "points", but I guess that's a legitimate marker for someone being more autistic than average.
I tend to answer questions towards the extremes which is the only thing this test scores as "points", but I guess that's a legitimate marker for someone being more autistic than average.
Actually the test scored the "slightly" answers as well.
"How to score: "Definitely agree" or "Slightly agree" responses to questions 2, 4, 5, 6, 7, 9, 12, 13, 16, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 26, 33, 35, 39, 41, 42, 43, 45, 46 score 1 point. "Definitely disagree" or "Slightly disagree" responses to questions 1, 3, 8, 10, 11, 14, 15, 17, 24, 25, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 34, 36, 37, 38, 40, 44, 47, 48, 49, 50 score 1 point."
I'm the opposite of you, I answered mostly "slightly" answers. I too scored 28.
I'm the opposite of you, I answered mostly "slightly" answers. I too scored 28.
Did anyone else find it disagreeable that Q.24 asks whether you'd rather go to the theater than the museum? I really like both - if I had to choose in a real life situation, I'd have to know what's showing at the theater and compare it to what exhibitions are on at the museum before making up my mind. Libraries and parties (Q.13) was also difficult for me; it all depends on which library we're talking about vs. who's throwing a party and who'll be there.
I ended up with a score of 34; same as last time I answered the questionnaire.
I ended up with a score of 34; same as last time I answered the questionnaire.
I got a 26, but I answered the questions as my current self and not who I used to be. If I had answered them as I was when I was a freshman in college I would have scored much higher.
32 and I had the exact same thought while I was going through the quiz. Its funny at how much can change, if you take a few risks and chances.
such bs.
issue 1 w/ test: >> I prefer to do things with others rather than on my own. Well, it depends. I may like to code by myself and but prefer group s*x. Context is everything.
issue 2 w/ test: Can be totally gamed. A prerequisite for a good test is that you should not be able to guess the right/wrong answer.
issue 1 w/ test: >> I prefer to do things with others rather than on my own. Well, it depends. I may like to code by myself and but prefer group s*x. Context is everything.
issue 2 w/ test: Can be totally gamed. A prerequisite for a good test is that you should not be able to guess the right/wrong answer.
10.
This quiz has the benefit of actual experts on the condition involved. A lot of "autism tests" online basically test for being an introverted geek, and a lot of the pop psych discussion strikes me as an effort to dismiss introversion, geekiness, and intellectualism as medical conditions.
This quiz has the benefit of actual experts on the condition involved. A lot of "autism tests" online basically test for being an introverted geek, and a lot of the pop psych discussion strikes me as an effort to dismiss introversion, geekiness, and intellectualism as medical conditions.
Im slightly more autistic than the average :P I think its more that Im just an introvert though...
At first I misread the start of the first paragraph as "Psychologist Sasha Baron-Cohen" and wondered what kind of test I was about to see.
34, anyway. I was diagnosed with HFA about eight years ago and probably would have scored considerably higher at that time.
34, anyway. I was diagnosed with HFA about eight years ago and probably would have scored considerably higher at that time.
Scored 27, should I be worried? I remember doing this test before but my score must have lowered, since I have changed the answers to some questions with time
I scored a 40, function in what I would call a normal way (normal job, normal pay, normal ... I guess) should I have reason for concern? should I see a doc?
15. My son is autistic and would score quite a bit higher.
I'm a programmer but I love talking, jokes, and making friends.
I'm a programmer but I love talking, jokes, and making friends.
Scored 20. Am ADD (whole family, all my children are). High functioning high-output person, whole family is.
35. Get the hell off my lawn.
26, just for the record
scored 22
I'd be interested to see how the average HN reader compares to the average person. On the one hand, the answers that pointed towards autism were answers that I would associate with "geek," but on the other hand, the answers that pointed away from autism were answers that I would associate with "entrepreneur."
31, for what that's worth.
Had I taken this 10 years ago, I imagine I would have easily scored above 40.
Had I taken this 10 years ago, I imagine I would have easily scored above 40.
I scored identically, and my experience mirrors yours; it's amazing what a decade can do, and social skills can be learned like any other, which I suspect affected the score quite significantly.
Yet, while my confidence in social situations has improved as a result, they still wear me down very quickly. And, teaching myself to recognize when I'm being paralyzed by social anxiety doesn't make pushing through it any easier, it just speeds the process up a bit.
We humans are odd animals.
Yet, while my confidence in social situations has improved as a result, they still wear me down very quickly. And, teaching myself to recognize when I'm being paralyzed by social anxiety doesn't make pushing through it any easier, it just speeds the process up a bit.
We humans are odd animals.
In addition, these questions are always asked in terms where you should really somehow evaluate every situation in your life that applied to the question, and somehow arrive at a "mean" answer that then informs your response. I find it absolutely impossible to not just think of anecdotes and base my answer on them. Which would be fine, if all my anecdotes lined up, but there's always "Well, that one time I did this, but this other time I did that, which is basically opposite!"