Board index › General Discussion › General Autism Discussion

A Theory of Mind? Or A Theory of War....

Page 7 of 15 [ 234 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 ... 15  Next

Previous topic | Next topic

Ganondox
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 7 Oct 2011
Age: 29
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,778
Location: USA

06 Jun 2016, 3:21 am

Chichikov wrote:
Ganondox wrote:
Of course not! If you were paying attention to context, you'd know the implication is failing the Sally-Ann test may be due to language confusion rather than lack of ToM, as seen with other groups.

But let's assume both groups are failing the test because of ToM impairments rather than language problems. So the theory I heard is that deaf people fail the test as deafness makes social interaction hard, and thus it takes longer for them to develope ToM. Well that applies just as easily to autistic people, it's more reasonable there to believe their ToM is impaired due to lack of social interaction because of autism than to believe they are autistic because they lack ToM.

So you're saying that autistic people don't have delayed or impaired "theory of mind", the issue is actually that autistic children (all of them) don't understand what "look for" means?


No, that's not what I'm saying at all. Are you even trying to keep track of what has been going on? I was not the one who thought it was due to the word "look for", but rather it had to do with grammar. This book explains what I'm talking about: https://books.google.com/books?id=ZvQ-C ... ar&f=false , the link takes you straight to the relevant section.

Anyway, I'm not saying ToM isn't delayed or autism, just that the Sally-Anne test isn't conclusive, and other tests have shown like Dot-Midge in the very least there isn't as many ToM impairments as Sally-Anne suggests. I'm also saying that it's actually well-known in at least some circles that ToM is not a defining characteristic or autism, whether or not it is a characteristic, as other groups have problems with ToM.


_________________
Cinnamon and sugary
Softly Spoken lies
You never know just how you look
Through other people's eyes

Autism FAQs http://www.wrongplanet.net/postt186115.html


Chichikov
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 27 Mar 2016
Age: 51
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,151
Location: UK

06 Jun 2016, 3:29 am

Ganondox wrote:
No, that's not what I'm saying at all. Are you even trying to keep track of what has been going on? I was not the one who thought it was due to the word "look for", but rather it had to do with grammar.

So you're saying that autistic people don't have delayed or impaired "theory of mind", the issue is actually that autistic children (all of them) have poor grammar?



B19
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 11 Jan 2013
Gender: Female
Posts: 9,993
Location: New Zealand

06 Jun 2016, 3:38 am

Yet another conflicting variable that SBC ignored in his Sally-Anne test is the known factor that ASD children may interpret language more literally. The three and four year olds in his test may have been interpreting the question "where will Sally look for the marble" in different ways from 1) the NTs and 2) the researcher. (There was no follow up asking what the answer meant from the children's perspective). The ASD child might - for example - have been thinking that Sally would look in the wrong place. If you ask three and four year old autistic children "can you pass the salt", some are likely to respond literally: "Yes, I can".

The question about SBC's designs are not whether they are biased. We know that they are - the Sally-Anne test was normed on NT responses. The question is how much bias, and the answer throughout this thread is: substantial. The other question is fundamental to all experimental psychology: does the test actually measure what it thinks it measures? Other skills are necessary to complete the test. There is no conclusive evidence that theory of mind and only theory of mind was actually being measured. The research design was too simplistic to allow that determination.



Ganondox
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 7 Oct 2011
Age: 29
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,778
Location: USA

06 Jun 2016, 4:25 am

Chichikov wrote:
Ganondox wrote:
No, that's not what I'm saying at all. Are you even trying to keep track of what has been going on? I was not the one who thought it was due to the word "look for", but rather it had to do with grammar.

So you're saying that autistic people don't have delayed or impaired "theory of mind", the issue is actually that autistic children (all of them) have poor grammar?


Not all autistic children fail Mary-Sally, so your implication it applies to all autistic children is a load of BS. And you clearly just ignored half my comment to fuel your trolling as that answered the rest of your question. Cut the crap out.


_________________
Cinnamon and sugary
Softly Spoken lies
You never know just how you look
Through other people's eyes

Autism FAQs http://www.wrongplanet.net/postt186115.html


Amaltheia
Snowy Owl
Snowy Owl

User avatar

Joined: 18 Apr 2016
Age: 63
Gender: Male
Posts: 154
Location: Adelaide, South Australia

06 Jun 2016, 4:35 am

Ganondox wrote:
No, that's not what I'm saying at all. Are you even trying to keep track of what has been going on? I was not the one who thought it was due to the word "look for", but rather it had to do with grammar.

I'm the one who pointed out the ambiguity of "look" in the question asked.

Apparently, in addition to delayed language and literalness, reading comprehension isn't that crash hot amongst us aspies.

I wonder if that's related to ToM? Or a separate issue?



Amaltheia
Snowy Owl
Snowy Owl

User avatar

Joined: 18 Apr 2016
Age: 63
Gender: Male
Posts: 154
Location: Adelaide, South Australia

06 Jun 2016, 4:36 am

Ganondox wrote:
Not all autistic children fail Mary-Sally,

Sally-Ann.



Chichikov
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 27 Mar 2016
Age: 51
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,151
Location: UK

06 Jun 2016, 4:41 am

Ganondox wrote:
Chichikov wrote:
Ganondox wrote:
No, that's not what I'm saying at all. Are you even trying to keep track of what has been going on? I was not the one who thought it was due to the word "look for", but rather it had to do with grammar.

So you're saying that autistic people don't have delayed or impaired "theory of mind", the issue is actually that autistic children (all of them) have poor grammar?


Not all autistic children fail Mary-Sally, so your implication it applies to all autistic children is a load of BS. And you clearly just ignored half my comment to fuel your trolling as that answered the rest of your question. Cut the crap out.

You're playing semantics to avoid answering the question. I'll refine the question again...

So you're saying that autistic people don't have delayed or impaired "theory of mind", the issue is actually that the autistic children who demonstrated poor ToM simply have poor grammar?



Amaltheia
Snowy Owl
Snowy Owl

User avatar

Joined: 18 Apr 2016
Age: 63
Gender: Male
Posts: 154
Location: Adelaide, South Australia

06 Jun 2016, 4:49 am

Chichikov wrote:
So you're saying that autistic people don't have delayed or impaired "theory of mind", the issue is actually that the autistic children who demonstrated poor ToM simply have poor grammar?

I think Ganondox is saying that the Sally-Ann test may not be measuring Theory of Mind, it may actually be measuring something else. I think he's been quite clear in that.

If it is measuring something else, then the autistic delay/deficit may be that something else.



B19
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 11 Jan 2013
Gender: Female
Posts: 9,993
Location: New Zealand

06 Jun 2016, 5:03 am

I have been trying to ascertain what the gender ratio of the autism sample was, which is missing from SBC's accounts of the original Sally-Ann test. Does anyone have this information? I do know that the majority of the autistic children were boys, but how many boys were there compared to girls in the total autism sample of his original experiment?

If anyone has a reference that pinpoints this, it would be appreciated. Did Baron-Cohen mention it? I can't find that information from his report.



Ganondox
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 7 Oct 2011
Age: 29
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,778
Location: USA

07 Jun 2016, 1:12 am

Chichikov wrote:
Ganondox wrote:
Chichikov wrote:
Ganondox wrote:
No, that's not what I'm saying at all. Are you even trying to keep track of what has been going on? I was not the one who thought it was due to the word "look for", but rather it had to do with grammar.

So you're saying that autistic people don't have delayed or impaired "theory of mind", the issue is actually that autistic children (all of them) have poor grammar?


Not all autistic children fail Mary-Sally, so your implication it applies to all autistic children is a load of BS. And you clearly just ignored half my comment to fuel your trolling as that answered the rest of your question. Cut the crap out.

You're playing semantics to avoid answering the question. I'll refine the question again...

So you're saying that autistic people don't have delayed or impaired "theory of mind", the issue is actually that the autistic children who demonstrated poor ToM simply have poor grammar?


No, you're asking loaded questions and are getting upset when I won't fall for it (I did answer your question, it's no and you hardly reworded it, it's still no, but that is still misleading). I already sufficiently answered your questions with my previous responses, and everybody else understood what I was saying. Again, cut the crap out. I'm only go to answer questions to points which are still ambiguous, or if you're really somehow still confused, very simple.

B19 wrote:
I have been trying to ascertain what the gender ratio of the autism sample was, which is missing from SBC's accounts of the original Sally-Ann test. Does anyone have this information? I do know that the majority of the autistic children were boys, but how many boys were there compared to girls in the total autism sample of his original experiment?

If anyone has a reference that pinpoints this, it would be appreciated. Did Baron-Cohen mention it? I can't find that information from his report.


Does it really matter? As in, has there been any reported differences between girls and boys on that test in general? I think it might have been all male with both the autistic and control group.


_________________
Cinnamon and sugary
Softly Spoken lies
You never know just how you look
Through other people's eyes

Autism FAQs http://www.wrongplanet.net/postt186115.html


Chichikov
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 27 Mar 2016
Age: 51
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,151
Location: UK

07 Jun 2016, 1:51 am

Ganondox wrote:
No, you're asking loaded questions

I'm not. The reason you're not answering is because when stripped to its bare essentials your argument seems quite ridiculous, doesn't it?



Ganondox
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 7 Oct 2011
Age: 29
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,778
Location: USA

07 Jun 2016, 1:52 am

Chichikov wrote:
Ganondox wrote:
No, you're asking loaded questions

I'm not. The reason you're not answering is because when stripped to its bare essentials your argument seems quite ridiculous, doesn't it?


No, because that was not my argument, which I why I said no. That question was loaded as answering it implied taking one of two stances, neither of which I was taking. Again, cut it out. This is your last warning. So are you going to ask a real question, or passive-aggressively resort to rhetorical trolling?


_________________
Cinnamon and sugary
Softly Spoken lies
You never know just how you look
Through other people's eyes

Autism FAQs http://www.wrongplanet.net/postt186115.html


B19
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 11 Jan 2013
Gender: Female
Posts: 9,993
Location: New Zealand

07 Jun 2016, 1:57 am

I think the gender difference might have mattered, but we can't know if it wasn't explored, and missing information can sometimes be very highly relevant. It would have been a simple task to do three further analyses on the raw data he already had:

-compare the autistic girls' scores with the NT girls' scores
-compare the autistic boys' scores with the NT boys scores
-compare the autistic and NT boys' scores (as a combined set of scores) with the autistic and NT girls' scores as a combined set of scores.

It is possible that he may then have found some intra-group differences, which could then be compared with the inter-group differences. Whether these exist and whether they are significant if they do exist is not irrelevant information.



Eloa
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 9 Jun 2011
Gender: Female
Posts: 1,223

07 Jun 2016, 2:58 am

A German replication study from 2002 of the Sally and Anne test does not confirm SBC's findings:

Quote:
Summary: Objectives: In order to test the hypothesis that a theory of mind deficit is specific for autism, the present study presents the first replication of the Sally-Anne test (Baron-Cohen, Leslie & Frith, 1985) in the German-speaking countries. Methods: The Sally-Anne test was administered to 16 autistic, 24 probands with Down’s syndrome and 20 normal preschool probands. The intelligence of the autistic group and that with Down’s syndrome was measured by the CPM/SPM. In addition, the ADI-R was used with the principal caregivers of the autistic and Down’s syndrome subjects. Results: With regard to the clinical diagnosis, theory of mind deficit turned out to be not specific for autism. Six of 16 (37.5%) autistic subjects passed the theory of mind tasks. Thus performance in the autistic group surpassed that of both control groups. Out of 16 autistic subjects, autism could be confirmed in only 8 on the basis of the ADI-R diagnostic criteria, only one of whom showed a theory of mind. The autistic individuals with a theory of mind differed significantly in their mean IQ from those without this ability. Conclusions: Spectrum and specificity of a theory of mind deficit in autism remain controversial. For further research it seems important to administer the ADI-R during the diagnostic process. The findings suggest that the clinical diagnosis of autism is not precise enough to distinguish between autism and nonautistic mental handicap.


The gender ratio was as follow:

Kanner autism: n 16 13 male (81%), 3 female (19%)

Down Syndrome: n 24 9 male (38%), 15 female (62%)

normal preschool: n 20 5 male (25%), 15 female (75%)


_________________
English is not my native language, so I will very likely do mistakes in writing or understanding. My edits are due to corrections of mistakes, which I sometimes recognize just after submitting a text.


B19
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 11 Jan 2013
Gender: Female
Posts: 9,993
Location: New Zealand

07 Jun 2016, 3:27 am

Thank you Eloa.

Re the percentages:
Which study do the gender breakdowns refer to, I'm assuming SBC though am not quite sure?



Eloa
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 9 Jun 2011
Gender: Female
Posts: 1,223

07 Jun 2016, 3:58 am

B19 wrote:
Thank you Eloa.

Re the percentages:
Which study do the gender breakdowns refer to, I'm assuming SBC though am not quite sure?


No, they refer to the replication study.
But to me it would be logical that the conditions of a replication study have to comply with the original conditions, especially age and gender, but I can also be mistaken because I do not have enough knowledge of it.
I cannot find any gender breakdown of SBC's study anywhere.


_________________
English is not my native language, so I will very likely do mistakes in writing or understanding. My edits are due to corrections of mistakes, which I sometimes recognize just after submitting a text.