Sally-Anne test

Post Reply New Topic

There's a name for this.
It's called: "Gaslighting".

Anne's deliberately trying to alter Sally's perception of reality.

In short: she's messing with her head.

I've read in numerous sources that ToM does not seem to be much of a problem for Aspies but mostly for those with autism. According to one study (info can be found in the book Asperger Syndrome), Aspies scored the same as NT controls for ToM, while those with autism tended to be severely impaired. There is likely always exceptions, but generally speaking, that is how it works.

It doesn't take much functioning to use a computer. I use one, and I am not mild. My niece and nephew use one--they are both borderline mental retardation. Low-functioning autistic people and people with other less functioning conditions are also able to use the computer. Just because I know how to type does not mean I don't have a severely impaired ToM.

According to the different social thinking profiles of AS (more info found at http://www.socialthinking.com/what-is-s ... on-profile), the age when Aspie kids pass the Sally-Anne tests depends on their level of social impairment, regardless of intelligence. There are AS people with genius IQs who fail the Sally Anne test as an adult and there are mild AS kids of average intelligence who pass the Sally-Anne test at age 5.

Kids who are classified as Weak Interactive Social Communicators (very mild AS; just some trouble with social nuances) usually pass the Sally-Anne test at the same age that NT kids do-they understand that different people have different prospectives but struggle to apply it in the moment- kids in this category seem charming and well behaved to adults but somewhat awkward (but not totally off) to peers. They often have one or two close friends but are rarely popular and are subject to some bullying by the "cool" kids. Even in today's day of AS awareness, they often go undiagnosed and are just seen as "nerds".

Kids who are classified as Emerging Social Communicators (moderate AS- really struggle with behave and social emotional control due to not people able to put things in prospective and truly have trouble seeing things from other people's points of view until taught. Kids in this category can appear to be rigid and stubborn to adults and it's pretty obvious to their peers that there's something way off about them. Kids in this category usually fail the Sally-Anne test at age 5/6 but are likely to pass it by age 10-12. Before the days of AS awareness, they were often classified as emotionally disturbed (such as myself) and shunned by all their peers. Will often have meltdowns in elementary school and are seen as emotionally and socially immature by others.


Those who are classified as Challenged Social Communicators often never pass the Sally-Anne test, even as adults, unless explicitly taught. They are stuck in their own minds with very limited awareness of others around them. They literally cannot comprehend that other people have thoughts differently from their own. Even before the days of AS awareness, they were likely to be diagnosed with classic autism.

I certainly find the Sally-Anne test easy as an adult but I probably wouldn't have passed it until around age 10 or so as I didn't realized my mind had borders until that age- I thought everything thought exactly like me and had no awareness when I was having a meltdown at school, that I was being perceived as 'bratty' by the other kids. I am an emerging social communicator.

Part of what people are overlooking here is whether these questions are being answered intuitively or after analysis and logical thought is actually also part of ToM.

I didn't realize this at all until after my diagnosis, but I "failed" the Theory of Mind parts not because I gave the wrong answers - I gave the correct answers, but I didn't intuitively answer. My mannerisms and the time delay before answering suggested that I was thinking about it logically to come up with these answers. The fact that I was able to say "She was being sarcastic" after analyzing still meant I had "impaired Theory of Mind, and thought processes that more matched autistic individuals"

Of course there are people who can't even think about these logically because of not being able to see what the relevant information to analyze is, but answering these questions correctly doesn't mean NT theory of mind.

I'd never heard of this test until today. My reaction wasn't, "Duh, Anne has it." It was, "This doesn't make any sense. What's the point of this stupid BS question?"

Yes! This is me. I have no problem with theory of mind but I do have to analyse and rationalise through the issues. I have to analyse and rationalise everything. Until I found out about AS, I thought that everybody had to do this.

Sometimes, I can logic through this test. Other times, I'm just baffled. I get frustrated then and give up. I am an ESC, for the most part, though I have traits of CSC.

Yeah, I didn't realize even when I knew about AS and had been self diagnosed for years that not everyone did this. I actually rejected the self-diagnosis for a while because of the fact that I have "too much empathy" - though I decided I must have PDD-NOS because I clearly had large numbers of traits to diagnosable levels. It wasn't until after I had gotten my diagnosis and was reading The Complete Guide to Asperger's Syndrome that I realized that not everyone did this. I was really confused when the evaluation with my diagnosis had said I had Theory of Mind issues because I knew I'd gotten the questions right... And then I got the description of intuitive vs. analyzing and suddenly it all made sense.

I just made an online test of ToM:

http://www.classmarker.com/online-test/ ... 3f58cb5151

Enjoy.

You know what I don't like about the Sally-Anne test?

Nobody ever asks WHY the child might say, "in the box!"

I've asked a few Autistic kids to do it (who had never done it before), and got the following explanations:

• She'll look in the box, because she can see through the basket, see it's not there, and it can't be anywhere else.
• She'll look in the box.
  
  • Q: Why?
  • Because she looked in the basket first, and it wasn't there, so the only place left is the box!
• She'll look in both.
• She'll look in the basket. (Sometimes if you just sit there and not say anything, they'll follow up with, "And then she'll look in the box."

I do think that sometimes conclusions are drawn about Autistic kids way too quickly by professionals.

Limit exceeded.

There is no test there.

This makes a lot of sense to me. The first time I saw this test, I had to think about the answer, but it was just because I wasn't sure that I understood the question. I knew Sally wouldn't KNOW it was in the box, but she needed to look there if she was going to find it. It didn't make sense to say that it was in the basket, because obviously once she reentered the room, she could see that the ball was not in the basket. Why would she be looking for the ball at all if it was right in the basket where she left it? Normally people don't start looking for something before they realize that it's lost. It was hard for me to tell whether the test taker wanted to know where she SHOULD look for the ball, or if he wanted me to tell him where she would have expected the ball to be before reentering the room.

I didn't have trouble knowing what was going on in Sally's head. I just had to think about what was going on in the test takers head. I think the question could easily be fixed by using more precise language, but as I read it, I can think of a lot of reasons that someone could get it wrong without making a TOM error, especially people who are prone to overthinking things.

Regarding the last "strange story," maybe the guy thought the glasses were left at the post office because there was something weird about the flowers? (Like she bought wilted ones because she couldn't see.)

First, Theory of Mind is junk; it's a nonautistic explanation for autistic clearsightedness, so don't let anyone tell you that you lack it.

I just found Happé's Strange Stories and this topic. I found the lost glasses question interesting. I guess he went to the post office because even though the gym is most likely, the standard form of interaction at the post office involves making an inquiry and being helped, whereas the gym has glossy receptionists and personal trainers none of whom will have much time for assisting you with lost glasses, and the florist is both girly and unlikely. Basically he's most comfortable asking in the post office. Now, I score off the charts on all 'Theory of Mind' tests (which are, as I said, junk) but there's no way my answer matches the nonautistic answer. I'm not even certain what the expected answer is. Perhaps at the post office you would most likely use reading glasses so you'd know you weren't missing them at some stage there, but that doesn't prove anything.

For the question with Sarah snarking about the picnic being spoiled by bad weather I answer that Tom was failing to satisfy her sexually because of his loser attitude so when he said it would be a good day she chose to misinterpret that as him having godly powers over the weather so she could use it against him later. This is clearly the correct answer, but again I doubt it's textbook.

Fascinating stuff.