AS and IQ - More Information

Post Reply New Topic

So, I've seen a number of folks on here say that aspies have no special propensity to be more intelligent than other people... and honestly, I've subscribed for a long time to the idea that there's not much value in IQ scores in general. I still do for that matter... I mean, as an individual number, it has virtually no practical value. Individual competencies are far more useful, which is to say, they're useful to begin with. But it has been shown that people with higher IQ scores tend to do better in school - so there is some positive correlation between the IQ and at least standardized education.

Then of course, you have to decide whether or not you like standardized education.

It's an interesting phenomenon to note that the more formal education a person has in a given subject, the less likely they become to innovate in that subject. This is known as the "outsider effect", which has unfortunately thus far received little publicity. A person who works outside of a given industry is more likely to innovate in that industry, for example, Bessemer who once revolutionized the steel industry was a textiles guy. His technique has since been supplanted by further innovations, but he was only able to innovate that industry at the time by doing something blasphemous and therein lies the critical point, that innovation is generally blasphemous. The reason for this is that, if you're doing things that make sense to others in your industry, the odds are you're not the first one doing it. So usually the path to innovation in an industry is by doing things that others in that industry consider sacreligious, obviously wrong, grounds for termination, etc. This leads to discovering things that others have not discovered because they didn't bother looking for them.

And although the aspie tendency to "do our own thing" may mean that we're more likely to be that innovative outsider, that's not why I started this thread.

I'm not convinced by this notion that the only association between Asperger Syndrome and IQ is due to an arbitrary distinction in the diagnostic criteria that states that the syndrome is characterized by not below average intelligence. And I have several combined reasons for thinking that this is an oversimplified view.

There was a study done a little while ago that showed that there is a correlation between "in vivo brain volume" (size of brain) and IQ scores. In other words "big brained people are smarter", as is the title of the study: http://www.people.vcu.edu/~mamcdani/Big ... rticle.pdf

And then there's a correlation between autism and head/brain size: http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn3 ... rning.html

I know personally I've always had difficulty finding hats. I don't remember the number offhand, but I know the few times I've gone into a store and looked for hats, there weren't usually any (or hardly any) large enough.

And then there is the question of exactly how IQ tests are given... There are currently two major IQ tests available, the Weschler and the Raven. While the Raven is the "gold standard" for IQ testing currently, it is rarely used when someone wants to do a new study on autism. The reason? There's no money in studying smart people in academia. In order to get funding, you have to show a "disability" that you're trying to study in order to help "fix" it and at least currently it seems using the much more language-dependent Weschler test helps to show a more dramatic handicap in your study's target demographic.

One recent study tested a number of both autistic and non-autistic individuals with both tests. With the non-autistics that were studied, the IQ scores didn't change a whole awful lot between these two tests. That's actually not surprising, since part of the idea behind the Raven is to help rule out a number of things that might interfere with an accurate result, such as a particular individual being non-verbal (just like you wouldn't give a heavily visual IQ test to a blind person because that would skew the result). With the autistic people in the study, however, the results were markedly different. Many of the autistics in the study scored in the range of mental retardation on the Weschler test but then scored average or even higher on the more bulletproof Raven. Two people in the study swung not only out of the range of mental retardation, but all the way up to the 94th percentile. The average difference was not small either, it was 30 points. As an average gap between tests, that's HUGE.

So you've got a cross section like this:

NT - Weschler - average
NT - Raven - average
ASD - Weschler - mentally retarted
ASD - Raven - fantastically smart

Amanda Baggs is a good example. From what I've read, I'm pretty sure she's non-verbal, and by all accounts would be described as "low functioning", but she's smart as a whip.

So even if we totally removed the fact that the diagnostic criteria for AS include at least average IQ scores, if the vast majority of them are being tested with the Weschler (which we know they are), then there's a gap between where they've been tested and where the more accurate Raven is likely to have placed them. So if we retested all these folks who have diagnosis using the Raven, their average IQ scores would be higher. I'm not saying they would all be 30 points higher as the difference is liable to be more pronounced amongst those diagnosed with Kanner's syndrome, but still... Even if the average aspie only scores 10 points higher on the Raven, that means our average IQ is actually 10 points higher than advertised.

And then there was the other interesting bit of information they found in a subsequent study (which may still be unpublished)... When given the Raven test while in an fMRI, autistic subjects with the same ultimate score as a comparable non-autistic subject were shown to have completed the task 40% faster than the NT.

Here's a Wired magazine article that talks about the IQ research: http://www.wired.com/images/press/pdf/autism.pdf

Long story short, I think there is some truth after all in the myth that aspies are "more logical".

Although to be specific, genuinely being "more logical" would mean being less prone to cognitive biases which aren't included in the IQ test... and as of yet I'm not aware of anyone having done any cognitive bias studies with autistics, so there's no guarantee that there's any correlation between autism and cognitive bias... we already know that people with higher IQs are susceptible to a wide variety of cognitive biases -- they just usually have different sets of biases than other people rather than actually having fewer.

I find this topic very interesting. While I feel people with AS are intellectually intelligent; we don't pass muster with other types of intelligence. I also have to buy my hats from The Big Hat Store. I have found that the "one-size-fits-all" hats that most stores carry will not fit most AS people. I think this illustrates that if one has large feet they will wear large shoes; if someone has a large brain they will probably wear a large hat.

I agree with the "outsider effect". I believe I come up with very good ideas about a lot of things that are very different than the accepted way of doing things. But I always get mocked and laughed at because some "guru" in the field does it a different way. And since I don't know all the technical field lingo they can't possibly see how my strange idea can be any good.

But, attending that, usually, aspies (I am only talking about aspies, not about autistics in general) have a performance IQ much lower than verbal IQ, should not be expected that aspies should have WORSE results in Raven than in Weschler?

In onther words, perhaps classical autistics are more intelligent than their measured IQ and aspies less inteligent than their measured IQ?

Not every autistic person does better on visually based IQ tests than verbal IQ tests. (That's the major difference between Wechsler and Raven's.) Some are the other way around--and the most likely to be better at verbal than visual are Asperger's autistics, who by definition learn spoken language on time or early.

I think, probably, that many Aspies will score lower on matrix-reasoning IQ tests. I do, for one. So would most people who also qualify for non-verbal learning disorder.

You do have a point that Aspies may come out "smarter" simply because we are better with words than people who had speech delays as children. It makes sense that, when given a test that doesn't require speech, people with speech/language difficulties will score higher because their communication problems will no longer be hampering their ability to communicate their mental agility.

You say a higher IQ correlates with good school performance... but I'm willing to bet that this only holds true for NTs. With autistics, it's more complicated. A higher IQ may correlate simply to a smaller degree of communication difficulty, rather than actual ability. And since IQ doesn't measure an awful lot of things about a person, and for autistic people those other things can be way off their personal norm, it may not predict things about them very well at all.

IIRC, Amanda scored over 130 on the Raven test online (I got 130 several times I took it). KingdomOfRats, who has LFA scored around 30-40 on the same test; she scores around 70 on normal IQ tests.

I've read the paper that provided such; the problem with it is that it doesn't say who scored what and what disorder they had. There was more with HFA in the group than there were with LFA; some scored 30 points or so higher on the Raven one, but it doesn't say who and what they have. By definition, most of those in the group should have probably scored higher on the Raven due to their verbal difficulties, as well as other learning disabilities (abstract thinking and complex equations aren't that great in HFA; they're better in AS). The researcher should have used a whole group of individuals with LFA, a whole group with HFA, another with AS, another with "basic" MR, and a control group, and then go on from there. The individuals with HFA and LFA weren't fantastically smart with the Raven, just better than the other IQ test (they were far closer to the control group as children, and in the adults, those with Autism were a little better than the control adults, but it wasn't that much better).

One thing I liked that I was reading the other day by Simon Baron-Cohen; he put forward that those with LFA just have far more hyper-focus than those who score higher on IQ tests, which means they are more "autistic". This is that systemizing thingy. Conversely, Gillberg will say that how autistic someone is isn't related to their IQ, rather their ability to empathise.

I've never been offerred a Raven test, but 1 year ago a WAIS-III recently had many subtest scores of 1 (bottom 1 %) and matrix reasoning a 14 (I believe this is the top 9%). So if the whole test was like the matrix reasoning I probably would've done at least in the top 10%, which is still a lot worse than when I took a Stanford-Binet test 9 years ago and most of my scores were in the top 1%.

EDIT: except, that top 1%ile is for the visual/spatial score, which was 145, give or take 5 points. the verbal score(s) was about 120; don't remember the %ile.

A lot of the successful and rich people in the world today where outsiders in school.

I consider myself intelligent, as does any adult I talk too (:D) so I don't care what tests say.

I think this is a link to the study you are referring to in the above paragraph:

http://psych.wisc.edu/lang/pdf/Dawson_AutisticIntelligence_PS_2007.pdf

On the topic of PIQ and VIQ differences between AS and HFA: still no firm conclusions on that. Many studies suffer from group contamination (eg, not ruling out autism in their AS group). Another concern: if they use diagnostic criteria that include motor clumsiness (for AS), they could get more individuals with visual-spatial deficits because the two are often associated. This would not be the case if they used DSM IV criteria, for example, which does not require motor clumsiness.

I think there is far too much circular reasoning in studies comparing AS and HFA. They cannot yet determine the validity of having separate diagnostic constructs.



The rigid/black & white thinking style associated with AS would lead to such.

However, in other ways, there may be less susceptibility: http://www.wrongplanet.net/postt79964.html

Even non-verbal areas of intelligence can be uneven. I am horrible at block design, finding random objects in the house (such as keys), and unfolding objects in my head but I am extremely good at predicting visual patterns, thinking in pictures related to the higher forms of science, and have a love for higher mathematics. I have won contests in which I have constructed mini race cars and rockets (the former for being the fastest, the latter for traveling the highest).

Yes, I hate that "one size fits most" approach to hats. Even the places that sell S-L-XL typically don't have anything that fits. I'll walk in, put on the XL size hat, and it just rests on top of my head, looking too small. A clerk will walk by and I'll say "do you have anything larger" and she will say "Yes, we have Xtra Large!" And I'll say "that's what this is!" <sigh>

I've found that the XXL size will sometimes fit. Although in some cases they make the hat big enough around but don't make it deep enough. (A larger head typically means a taller head as well.)

My hat size is somewhere between 7 7/8 and 8. Most hat companies don't make anything larger than 7 1/2. I have found some hats at The Village Hat Shop which are in a large enough size to fit. Typically I wear a Greek Fisherman's style of hat.

No my understanding is that the Raven is designed to help prevent something like a verbal deficit from skewing the result. So in theory if you have a verbal deficit, then your score should improve on the Raven.

Thanks Callista...

I wouldn't be surprised if there are a lot of aspies who don't do as well in school as their IQ scores might indicate, merely because much of school is pretty subjective. Teachers are usually NT and subject to a variety of biases, and when you're grading a term paper for example, the grade is almost purely subjective. If the teacher happens to like the student, they generally give better grades and vice versa if they dislike the student. But then I always got along better with teachers than I did with my own age group and I wonder too if that's not common amongst kids with AS. But in general, it's pretty well known that school grades are anything but tamper proof -- teachers even literally cheat on the grading for a wide variety of reasons ranging from having been offered sex to fudging the numbers to keep themselves from getting fired under government regulations that require a certain percentage of passing students. But when everything is said and done, we seem to still be able to count on the generality holding true for NTs at least that IQ is predictive of scholastic achievement.

So as generalities go, I'm fairly comfortable currently with the notion of big brain = higher IQ and the idea that other influencing factors tend to result in people on the spectrum being passed over for opportunities where our particular neurological strengths would actually be an advantage. This may or may not result in poorer grades in school, although I don't think that was an issue in my case. Probably also heavily influenced by the fact that I was sent to private schools with small student-teacher ratios. Better environment for an aspie kid even if the condition is unknown.

I seem to have somehow missed the HFA diagnosis and the differences in diagnostic criteria. So I didn't realize that a general lack of verbal deficit was a criteria for AS -- I was under the impression that the verbal criteria was only the onset of verbalism, without regard to how that verbalism develops later... and in glossing over my reading had somehow come to the notion that people with AS were generally held to have a verbal deficit -- which seems to be where the researchers are drawing their line in the sand between AS and HFA.

Then, if you have a verbal "superavit", like sometimes ocur with aspies, your score should be reduced on the Raven.

Actually, you were right to begin with; it is a speech delay and not how it develops later on that determines the difference between Asperger's and Autistic diagnosis. It's just that starting out with a delay gives you more to catch up on; so you've probably been developing your non-verbal skills longer than your verbal skills, and even after you learn to talk the difference could still be there. I know one Kanner's guy, mid-20s engineer, who's very good with speech--but even better with non-verbal stuff like visual processing and spatial reasoning. That's part of what makes him a good engineer. For me, it'll be verbal strengths like logic and verbal problem-solving that come in handy.

Yep, you're right... I figured it out after I read some of the other responses from callista and daniel. Thanks for the feedback.