TYPES of ASD individuals from a professional source

Post Reply New Topic

@kfisherx: how did you did you find his paper? - tell us your sources of information )

An aspect how and why I do not have the sense of humor which I supposed to have according to the description. Maybe I have it, anyway.

I believe I'm too much fed up with the feeling of empathy(?) toward the portrayed characters that had to suffer slapstick humor. E.g. the Coyote in Road Runner, Tom in T&J etc. This same goes to jokes. I like jokes best when there is no obvious sufferer in the punchline, e.g.

- 'Hey, Bunny, have you hurt yourself when you just fell down from your bicycle?' - Asked the Pug anxiously. - 'Shut up you buster, I get down my bike this way.'
(Edit: maybe 'Bear' better than 'Pug')

I like Rowan Atkinson as Mr. Been, but not in all stories.

Another cause may be that my memory fails to rote memorize words related knowledge (see: poor narrative), while my visual memory is significantly better. So I understand jokes and humorous situations, AFTER somebody or something made me visualize the situation. Such configuration of visual memory vs. verbal memory is implied in the description of ESC.

WISC pretty much nailed my childhood word for word (down to the mild sensory issues). Now I think I'm closer to a SASC. I think I find this paper fascinating because it describes a social functioning level I can relate to wholeheartedly, a "mild" level of atypical neurology you don't hear much about.

I think it's interesting that many people here (on an AS forum) so closely associate with WISC and not ESC (which is supposed to be where most of the HFA / AS people fall). I wonder if our perceptions of ourselves cloud our judgement, or perhaps that particular statement is misinformed. I also wonder if ESC, CSC, or SCSC are much broader classifications.

I have characteristics of SASC, WISC and ESC.

ESC is a broad class itself:
"The ESC represents the largest range of individuals within the ST-­‐SCP."

mix of SASC and WISC.

Weak Interactive Social Communicator (WISC)


the description of it is right on target for me. Quite impressive.

I believe WISC would fit me the best, somewhat SASC.

ESC reminded me of myself in some instances.

^^^THIS^^^
doesn't surprise me at all given the large percentage of people on this board who are so pro-autism and anti-cure.. The majority of people on this board do not see/experience the more serious consequences of the disorder and enjoy a more "normal" way of being. I am watching the people who are pro-cure versus ESC or less social functionality and the coorelation is there. Just something to think about as "we" have these discussions. We (the WP board) hardly represent autism (the spectrum) and we would do well to keep an eye on our less abled brothers and sisters out there.



Uh... I "might" be ASD which sort of sets me up to be a tiny bit relentless in pursuits of interests. Okay more serioulsy, (but proving the point) one of the professionals in the area that I work with introduced me to Michelle's work (the Superflex book) and I read her blog fairly regularly. There is a WORLD of fascinating stuff happening in the Autism world right now if you tie into it.

The problem with this classification system is that it creates discreet categories that should be independent in their theory but really aren't independent in practice. It doesn't really take into account the fact that cognitive social intuition / social performance difficulties, behavioral difficulties, sensory / information-processing difficulties, and emotional coping difficulties can all vary somewhat independently in degree of severity. Thus there is really four separate dimensions, each of which can be subdivided in terms of severity.

I'd say I fit most with the SASC in terms of strictly social symptoms. However, in terms of non-social symptoms I fit in more with ESC.

I agree that the descriptions of the type of people which fit into which group are oversimplified. You have to keep in mind, however, that the purpose of classification is not to diagnose or document all traits that a person has. Rather, the grouping exists as a way to provide treatment (therapy, whatever you want to call it) for social thinking most effectively for a group situation.

It basically says to put the diagnoses aside and recognize that there are people cross-diagnosis (and even outside of diagnoses) whose social thinking is neurologically atypical but share some of the same approaches to relating and learning. Identifying WISC and SASC as categories at all (as opposed to "neurotypical enough" fills a void where often there isn't help offered.

Thank you for this I agree 100%.

More reading on assesment done at this awesome clinic. PLEASE NOTE that this is for HFA/Aspergers more than severely autisitc.

http://www.socialthinking.com/what-is-s ... ed-skills-

I think I am naturally WISC, supposedly high functioning, but because of how I was treated at school, my behaviour developed as more RSC, if that makes any sense. Im surprised not to see many RSCs on the boards. If I had been left alone and treated nicely I think I would have remained firmly on the WISC side.

Wow. Had I ever had to conduct such an interview as a kid, I can tell you most assuredly that it would've put a spotlight on some of my weaknesses. I certainly would've been stressed out doing the interview. Those weakness are probably why I am much less capable of initiating a conversation with a stranger than if a stranger engages me. I can cope with the latter (when I'm following an established conversation flow) much better than the former (where I'd have to establish the flow).

When I was in school, I definitely flew below the radar... but there really wasn't much radar back then in general. The fact that I had zero peer pressure and few friends went largely unnoticed because I was doing fine academically (even though my teachers knew I was "unusual"). It would have been great to have gotten some assistance with these areas of social thinking that I really didn't even know I lacked.

Well that's all interesting but it still doesn't tell me which one I am. All in all I don't really care which type I am but I do want to know because I want to rectify the problems that I have. If I don't know which problems I can't change them.

But I still think the whole system over-emphasizes the social disability aspect of autism. Autism isn't simply a disored of social interaction. There's a lot more to it.

Maybe I'm just projecting myself too much into it. I don't seem to fit well into their categorization but perhaps I'm atypical. I mean the overall pattern of autism fits, but a lot of my most severe struggles growing up were rather ideosyncratic.