• Replies 15 replies
  • Subscribers 89 subscribers
  • Views 806 views
  • Users 0 members are here
Options
Related
Hints and tips
  • To quote someone's message, first select/highlight the relevant text, and then use the Quote button that appears
  • To "mention" someone, type @ followed by the start of the forum name, and choose from the list; that person will get a notification of being mentioned

Is this correct and is it a reason for bullying?

Lotus

(I posted this research yesterday on the thread "Is autism an excuse for bad behaviour?")

 I discovered that researchers in a 2011 study gave autistic and neurotypical people this scenario:

"Imagine this: Janet and her friend are kayaking in a part of the ocean with many jellyfish. Janet had read that the jellyfish aren't dangerous, and tells her friend it's alright to swim. Her friend is stung by a jellyfish and dies. - Is Janet to blame?"

Their results showed that autistic people usually said it was Janet's fault while the neurotypical people said it was just an accident . The researchers concluded that this showed that autistic people were focused on the result, rather than the intention of the person involved, and was due to "theory of mind" (not being able to imagine what someone is thinking or feeling)

(Edit: I've just been thinking about this again and I'm not sure if the researchers were wholly correct in their conclusion. Perhaps the autistic participants did put themselves in Janet's place and knew they would feel guilty in that situation, which made them decide Janet was guilty - which means it's about how they would feel, not just about the result of it?)

Although I would feel terribly guilty if I was Janet, factually I do not believe the fault is hers as I believe we all have a responsibility to look after ourselves (apart from children and disabled/vulnerable people, but the scenario did not say the friend was either a child or vulnerable) The friend had a choice to research the area before travelling there, and to decide whether to swim in an area with unfamiliar creatures.

But I've been thinking further about this theory that neurotypical people focus more on intent than outcome, and wondered if this is the cause of bullying? Do bullies not have the intention of hurting people? Those who upset others will often claim it was "just a bit of fun" and they say people should " man up" or "not be such a wuss" but I think that for autistic people the intent doesn't matter, if someone is hurt or upset by someone that is wrong. I know that I'm always horrified to think I've upset or hurt someone.

What are your thoughts on this?

Parents

  • Ok Pixiefox. So I got a bit lost in all this intent thing… I get it until I didn’t got it - but I get it - i think…

    so, jelly fish - if Janet hadn’t have said it , friend doesn’t receive death by jellyfish (how influenced was the friend?? A lot). If Janet was a normy the study says that they’d not struggle for all eternity with guilt.,,, if their intent was to get friend to go swimming , with knowledge Jelly fish could kill - well that’s murder. If no such intent it’s a sad mistake. Autistic/or not. 

    that’s actually all irrelevant!

    I think what I initially got from what you said was that autistics focus on results. If we do something and result (often a reaction from someone) is negative then in our eyes we are to blame.. That’s what I think I’ve understood from what you’ve said - and if we were ‘neuro typical’ we’d realise we’re not to blame for responses/consequences? 

    I don’t have the social savvy to navigate/negotiate others reactions to thing and have always found it easiest to either a) dig my heels in against all else or b) take the blame/fawn/placate 

    c) usually murder is off the list (joke!)

Reply

  • Ok Pixiefox. So I got a bit lost in all this intent thing… I get it until I didn’t got it - but I get it - i think…

    so, jelly fish - if Janet hadn’t have said it , friend doesn’t receive death by jellyfish (how influenced was the friend?? A lot). If Janet was a normy the study says that they’d not struggle for all eternity with guilt.,,, if their intent was to get friend to go swimming , with knowledge Jelly fish could kill - well that’s murder. If no such intent it’s a sad mistake. Autistic/or not. 

    that’s actually all irrelevant!

    I think what I initially got from what you said was that autistics focus on results. If we do something and result (often a reaction from someone) is negative then in our eyes we are to blame.. That’s what I think I’ve understood from what you’ve said - and if we were ‘neuro typical’ we’d realise we’re not to blame for responses/consequences? 

    I don’t have the social savvy to navigate/negotiate others reactions to thing and have always found it easiest to either a) dig my heels in against all else or b) take the blame/fawn/placate 

    c) usually murder is off the list (joke!)

Children
No Data