Have you wondered where the claim that autistic people lack empathy came from?
-
@KatyElphinstone your analysis of the situation is spot on I think. I really vibe with the blame vs responsibility distinction. Sally is inherently responsible having decided to make her opinion known which influenced her friend’s action. The friend is also responsible for her own actions. It wouldn’t even occur to me to look for blame in a situation like this unless I was forced to.
Before I read the thread, with only the information in the first two posts, my impression of this test was that it trivializes a fairly complex moral conundrum.
I feel this is the case for a lot of assessment type studies that have hypothetical scenarios and questionnaires like this. The questions always leave enormous elephants in the room, begging the reply “it depends”.
@CynAq @KatyElphinstone 'It depends' is the answer to a *lot* of questions.
-
Autistic people, after all, are known for preferring logic (I certainly do).
And we’re also known for thinking outside the box – meaning that if we’re forced to make false decisions based on faulty assumptions, then we are quite likely to make the ‘wrong’ choice.
Interested to hear others’ thoughts on this! And I’ll be looking for another influential study to look closely at.
I really enjoy analyzing things!
End of thread. 🧵
@KatyElphinstone After reading the first two posts, I thought: Of course Janet is to blame! And realised only when reading further that blame is not only meant in a causal sense. I never meant moral blame or punishment. Then I thought about how frustrating it feels to me when people say „X is a true fact“ but I find out later that they didn’t have all the information and simply wanted to appear confident.
-
@KatyElphinstone your analysis of the situation is spot on I think. I really vibe with the blame vs responsibility distinction. Sally is inherently responsible having decided to make her opinion known which influenced her friend’s action. The friend is also responsible for her own actions. It wouldn’t even occur to me to look for blame in a situation like this unless I was forced to.
Before I read the thread, with only the information in the first two posts, my impression of this test was that it trivializes a fairly complex moral conundrum.
I feel this is the case for a lot of assessment type studies that have hypothetical scenarios and questionnaires like this. The questions always leave enormous elephants in the room, begging the reply “it depends”.
Sally Janet
-
Error 1) Presupposition / Loaded framing. The task assumes that when harm occurs, someone usually gets blamed. That assumption isn't tested & is built into the question.
Error 2) False dichotomy. Moral evaluation is reduced to blame vs no blame, leaving no room for partial, shared, or non-punitive responsibility.
Error 3) Category error. Conflation of blame and responsibility. Responsibility for outcomes is treated as identical to moral condemnation, collapsing two very different concepts.
️@KatyElphinstone some good stuff here which is worth keeping in mind more generally when looking at root causes and choice of language
-
@KatyElphinstone some good stuff here which is worth keeping in mind more generally when looking at root causes and choice of language
Yes - I've been fascinated by logic recently. I feel it can be usefully used in a lot of contexts that involve dismantling power structures.
-
Autistic people, after all, are known for preferring logic (I certainly do).
And we’re also known for thinking outside the box – meaning that if we’re forced to make false decisions based on faulty assumptions, then we are quite likely to make the ‘wrong’ choice.
Interested to hear others’ thoughts on this! And I’ll be looking for another influential study to look closely at.
I really enjoy analyzing things!
End of thread. 🧵
@KatyElphinstone really interesting.
My thoughts; the theory of mind impairment interpretation requires the assumption that the only morally relevant feature was Janet's belief state, when in fact participants may have been rating her process of belief formation as a separate moral dimension.
The study did not control for the source of the belief. If Janet made her recommendation to swim based on personal experience instead of relying on a book, I bet the study would have different findings.
-
Yes - I've been fascinated by logic recently. I feel it can be usefully used in a lot of contexts that involve dismantling power structures.
@KatyElphinstone systematic logical thinking with some careful use of language and definitions can be very useful for uncovering things. Making things about a moral judgement, quite possibly unintentionally, too early in the process means you may not find your way to the true root cause.
-
I'm the same.
This thread is actually a byproduct out of an article I'm writing on autistic empathy. I'm nearly done but these are the kinds of things that will go into it.
(And when finished I'll be asking for people's thoughts / feedback!)
@KatyElphinstone I've got to say... it's not a fun time to be empathetic.
-
@KatyElphinstone I've got to say... it's not a fun time to be empathetic.
True
-
Have you wondered where the claim that autistic people lack empathy came from?
The “jellyfish” study (2011) was influential in this, as it concluded that autistic people lacked Theory of Mind & capacity for moral reasoning.
https://medicalxpress.com/news/2011-01-autistic-mind.html
In the fictional scenario given to participants, Sally tells a friend it’s safe to swim with jellyfish. She believes they’re harmless. The friend is stung and dies.
️ #Autism #Empathy #Neurodiversity #Psychology #TheoryofMind #ActuallyAutistic
@KatyElphinstone Wikipedia was around in 2011. Sounds like the questions were developed by an allistic person, as it does not consider whether Janet should have shared knowledge on jellyfish to a friend.
"Did you know that some of the most dangerous animals on Earth are the box jellyfish and the man o' war? We should probably get out of here."
versus
"I don't really know much about jellyfish. Did you know kayaks were originally seal skin and whale bone? These plastic ones are lighter."
-
I like your angle
-
@KatyElphinstone
Wow ok I have so many thoughts and want to research this back clinically. I’m happy to see this thread getting some action I’ll see what I can throw on and see what others have to say. Keep in mind.
The whole lack of empathy thing is least
. 86-90 years old at least. Plus there’s another angle I have to run down thanks for the thread!
Great
-
@KatyElphinstone I like to say there's always another option in a forced binary choice. Like the trolley problem - group A or group B gets killed: you choose. What about slipping the points so the trolley doesn't hit either group? These contrived problems often assume there is no 3rd option, without ever considering if there is one. I think Autistics are much more likely to identify the "3rd option". I've often found myself in work situations where management have identified the "two possible" solutions, and I've been called awkward for asking about the (to me) third option they never even identified.
-
@Kierkegaanks I think you're missing the point tbh.
-
Have you wondered where the claim that autistic people lack empathy came from?
The “jellyfish” study (2011) was influential in this, as it concluded that autistic people lacked Theory of Mind & capacity for moral reasoning.
https://medicalxpress.com/news/2011-01-autistic-mind.html
In the fictional scenario given to participants, Sally tells a friend it’s safe to swim with jellyfish. She believes they’re harmless. The friend is stung and dies.
️ #Autism #Empathy #Neurodiversity #Psychology #TheoryofMind #ActuallyAutistic
@KatyElphinstone Reading through the article this part stood put to me.
”””
The researchers tested 13 autistic adults and 13 non-autistic adults on about 50 scenarios similar to the jellyfish example.
”””This sounds like a small sample to me.
I also wonder how they partitioned the sample? If they sorted individuals on behaviour typically seen as ”autistic”, and then tested if the cohort had a higher likelihood of the property they partitioned on, then thet have proven nothing.
-
Ooh beautifully put!! I'm bookmarking your post so I don't forget.
@KatyElphinstone Thank you for saying so, it's nice when "makes sense to me" translates for other people too.
-
Autistic people, after all, are known for preferring logic (I certainly do).
And we’re also known for thinking outside the box – meaning that if we’re forced to make false decisions based on faulty assumptions, then we are quite likely to make the ‘wrong’ choice.
Interested to hear others’ thoughts on this! And I’ll be looking for another influential study to look closely at.
I really enjoy analyzing things!
End of thread. 🧵
@KatyElphinstone I don’t think it’s necessarily involuntary manslaughter, but speaking as an authority on jellyfish when she wasn’t led to a tragic, fatal consequence. It certainly proves incorrect that infuriatingly pernicious axiom, “Sticks and stones may break my bones, but words will never hurt me.” #actuallyautistic
-
@KatyElphinstone I don’t think it’s necessarily involuntary manslaughter, but speaking as an authority on jellyfish when she wasn’t led to a tragic, fatal consequence. It certainly proves incorrect that infuriatingly pernicious axiom, “Sticks and stones may break my bones, but words will never hurt me.” #actuallyautistic
@multipass @KatyElphinstone and the second sentence is vague. Was Janet making statements about a subject she knew nothing about? Or did she “know” for certain that jellyfish are harmless? Did someone lie to Janet? Did Janet have a past experience with some hypothetical stingerless jellyfish?
-
@KatyElphinstone Reading through the article this part stood put to me.
”””
The researchers tested 13 autistic adults and 13 non-autistic adults on about 50 scenarios similar to the jellyfish example.
”””This sounds like a small sample to me.
I also wonder how they partitioned the sample? If they sorted individuals on behaviour typically seen as ”autistic”, and then tested if the cohort had a higher likelihood of the property they partitioned on, then thet have proven nothing.
So it's a form of selection bias I suppose. If that were the case, yes.
-
Have you wondered where the claim that autistic people lack empathy came from?
The “jellyfish” study (2011) was influential in this, as it concluded that autistic people lacked Theory of Mind & capacity for moral reasoning.
https://medicalxpress.com/news/2011-01-autistic-mind.html
In the fictional scenario given to participants, Sally tells a friend it’s safe to swim with jellyfish. She believes they’re harmless. The friend is stung and dies.
️ #Autism #Empathy #Neurodiversity #Psychology #TheoryofMind #ActuallyAutistic
Allistics never seem to notice that the less detail they have in front of them, the more assumptions they make. They mentally add information into scenarios & then extrapolate based on what they assumed but did not specify.
