Aspies and Rote Memory vs Reasoning

Post Reply New Topic

Which view do you think is more accurate?

1. Aspies have really good rote memory but poor understanding/generalization (see the trees but not the forest).

2. Aspies of similar IQ as their peers are much worse at rote memory, but much, much better than their peers at remembering things they have reasoned out.

I don't if others are good at memorizing things. I cannot memorize very well, and therefore must always go back to first principles to figure things out, time and time again.

I REALLY REALLY suck at rote memory.

I am analytical to the point where it even irritates other aspies.

i'm very good at reasoning things out and have a terrible (and terrible disinterest in) rote memory. i can't speak for anyone else.

i overfocus on details but i wouldn't equate rote memory with attending to details.

i do this too.

I don't think you can generalize this.
PPR debunks 1.

I've heard/read that abstractions are rare in AS, but I haven't seen this here. I'd likely assume that it runs the gamut as in NT's, but the ratio's of this may diverge.

The only tangible thing is there's a pattern of verbal IQ that is superior to performance IQ , but not always. I've also read that 25% score at least in the superior range: over 120-- I don't know if this really validated, though.

You can't generalize, no. We are quite diverse, and either can be true of any given individual; or they might have equal strengths in both. There's not even a general tendency.

The one general tendency I do see is that autistic people tend to be detail-oriented, building up from small parts to get the big picture; but this has little to do with reasoning vs. memory. Of course there are a significant number of autistics who don't fit that trend.

Depends what you call reasoning.

I have a great deal of trouble with abstract idea-based reasoning -- not sustainable for me at all. What I use instead isn't precisely memory but isn't precisely not either.

I do not know/understand all the related terms and concepts here, but I do know I rely a lot on doing things "by rote" (as I understand that) rather than figuring things out "on the go", so to speak, and that it took a very long time to finally accumulate enough "rote stuff" to finally have much of anything at all to even employ there.

Statement 2 is truer of me.

Statement 1 does not describe me at all.

I was exceptional at multiple choice tests at university, but if given the same test without the choices, I would struggle. This was especially true in my life science courses. In chemistry, I was much better in theory and terrible in the labs. In math I was terrible at work or applied problems. In philosophy, I'd have re-word and re-write the essay over and over because I was very poor at expressing myself on intial passes.

So, I think there is some truth that "I couldn't see the forest for the trees." This suggests to me that I was better at rote memory but what's so strange is I also have a poor memory. I tried searching through pubmed on memory and AS but there seems to be some disagreement. I'm just trying to understand why I'm so poor at work at my job (pharmacist) when other pharmacists I work with are so much better at their job than I am and yet in university, it wasn't even close. I got much higher grades. It's really confusing me. It doesn't seem to be only an anxiety issue as I used to think.

It probably doesn't matter so much about how you learned or understood the theoretical end of your trade, if there's something wrong at the application stage.

I know very well how to keep my house tidy, it just doesn't seem to happen...

I do things from first principles, almost every time. I read things that I have written, or see things that I have done, and have absolutely no idea how I did them without studying the problem from first principles again.