Systemising Quotient

Thanks, Classic Codger - yes, I do feel 'at home' here, and am finding my way around the forum now.

It does indeed 'feel right'.  My sister's input has been invaluable, and it was her observations, combined with the initial AQ results, that made me seek advice on a diagnosis of AS from our GP surgery in the first place.

I'll keep in mind what both yourself and Longman have said, and indeed others who have commented on my posts, and will let that inform my journey through to diagnosis.  If I'm going to get good advice anywhere, it's going to be from people who have already experienced the journey.

Thanks, Telstar, I see where you're coming from.

 Bear in mind that this is my own opinion as a diagnosed AS person, not as a trained professional, but I've read your posts and never doubted for a moment that you're on the spectrum, so I'm glad that you feel you've found your community - I'd be ashamed and appalled if you didn't!

We often get posts on here where people put a list of issues and then ask us if it's AS. Our reply is that we can't tell, and it's precisely because anyone can find a list and think of examples that fit their behaviour at one time or another. This is, of course, dangerously misleading in many cases, hence my comment about internet research versus medical opinion.

You've never done that, but rather got involved in the discussions and found that it just 'feels right' to be here. For me, the most telling things you've done are be open to exploring the suggestion (why you take the tests) and listening openly to your sister. It helps that you not only understand what we say, but, more importantly, that we understand you. For my part, it's the mutual understanding that has, for the first time in my life, given me a comfortable place to be.

Generally, diagnostic tools as they stand appear to be helpful in pointing the way, but unhelpful in that they are sometimes blunt instruments at best. If professionals are going to develop and use such tools, then I feel strongly that we should do our best to inform the process. So, as you are still on the path to diagnosis, and in that 'uncertain' place that seekers of diagnosis inhabit (as I did in my turn), I think that your opinion has more validity than mine, simply because I already know for certain what my results should look like.

Thanks, both Classic Codger and Longman, for your replies.

Classic Codger - I guess I took the SQ test just to confirm what I've already suspected for a long time, so in that sense it can be said to have worked.  However, it has probably not helped as such, because it has just confirmed something I suspected after all.  I can recall buying a book in my twenties which tested all sorts of different "aptitudes", and by far and away my highest score was for logical thinking (91%).  Interestingly, my concentration was by far the worst, rated as poor.  However, as Longman says, some of these questions can evoke answers based on how they are presented - such as with opinion polls.

I certainly think that I'll wait until I get my Full Assessment before doing any more tests, as I know the DISCO is a reliable tool for diagnosis.  I've been trying to keep neutral on my view so as not to influence myself too much before the Assessment is done.  However, I think there is now much evidence, even just reading about others experiences, for me to consider myself as on the autistic spectrum, unless the DISCO shows otherwise (or, of course, validates it).

Longman - I can understand what you mean about the SQ and EQ tests, and as I mentioned to Classic Codger, I already suspected that I was a high systemiser and had lower empathy before I took the tests.  I did find the AQ test useful in as much as it alerted me to something I had never ever considered before, the possibility of being on the autism spectrum, but of course, I know that the DISCO will confirm or disprove this in my case.  I'm aware, too, that there are certain typical assumptions that are made about autism, whereas we know there are many different manifestations of it (hence talk of the "spectrum"), while all sharing core difficulties.

As I mentioned to Classic Codger above, I think my plan now is to wait until I get my DISCO.  I'm still benefiting from reading this forum, and from the sense of community it brings, and understanding the issues of others with an ASC.

There is also another side to this EQ-SQ stuff. It is used to explore the concept of male and female brains. I don't know if the questions are the same, but it does leave me wondering whether the questions can safely be read as indications of autism (with regard to my doubts above).

That is to say autism is being defined by researchers as an extreme male brain - no wonder females have trouble getting a diagnosis!

The same underlying theory considers systemizing to be a male attribute, and empathising to be a female attribute. Empathising here is the desire to identify another person's thoughts and emotions, and to respond to them with an appropriate emotion. Systemizing is about predicting and controlling.

If you are male you should score above average on systemizing and lower on empathising. And women the converse - or do I detect stereotyping here - are women being implied to be more emotional but less good at driving a car? Sorry - but that's how it reads to me.

How you read this across to testing for autism is truly mindboggling. Autism means testing very high on systemizing - so its a high degree of need to understand how everything works - link that back to the Triad if you can - and a correspondingly very ,low score on empathising.

Be more man - become autistic.......

What a load of rubbish..............................

Also, a lot of these questions are blatently stereotyping. Take for example:

"In Maths I am intrigued by the rules and patterns governing numbers"

Apart from the fact that strictly speaking number patters are arithmetic, maths is about abstract problem solving, how many of us are actually obsessed with integer numbers or any other number things? Also some people see numbers as colours (synesthesia) but that's not about maths either.

"I find it difficult to learn my way around a new city"

There is an observed characteristic amongst people on the autistic spectrum that they tend to stick to one route, and would find changing that route very uncomfortable, but that's a change resistance characteristic. Some people also report that they easily get lost. But is that really what the above statement conveys?  Doesn't everyone find it difficult to learn their way around a new city?

Another variant of this is "I find it difficult to read and understand maps" - most people seem to find maps difficult - having taught it as part of a subject for years I can bear witness to how much people get confused about it. What has this statement got to do with autism? Is it extracting a meaningful characteristic? Or is it suggesting that I'm obsessive enough to really understand maps? - well it was my living for years.

Similar again is this one " I find it difficult to understand the information the bank sends me on different saving and investment and saving systems" I sure do - possibly because it seems to hit my sensory overload button. But is that what it is trying to find out? Or does it mean someone with autism would know every detail beforehand?

"After meeting someone just once or twice I find it difficult to remember precisely what they look like"

There is a phenomena where people on the spectrum dont recognise people in a different context, or have difficulty remembering faces, but it isn't unique to autism, and affects a lot of people with dyslexia. I really do wonder if this statement achieves anything.

"When I learn about historical events I do not focus on exact dates"  Another stereotype I think. Does it really imply an over obsession about dates?

"I would never break a law, no matter how minor" and "I tend to have very strong opinions about morality". Yes there's a hint of autism traits there but isn't that simply stereotyping?

The tests are frankly worrying. They are designed to make people question their self identity and go scurrying off for lengthy treatments in an expensive clinic. Do they really indicate autistic spectrum?

I'm familiar with the integrated eq/sq test (Baron Cohen).

It asks leading questions, along the lines of psychometric testing. These questions are supposed to be able to gauge your personality in certain specific respects, from which deductions can be made. This type of testing is also used by employers to screen candidates for a job. It needs to be used carefully. Unfortunately analysts tend to take their deductions ridiculously far.

All these tests do is qualitatively assess usually three personality vectors and then draw something from the interplay of these vectors. As soon as you've assigned the scores it becomes a game of numbers, not an understanding of real people.

If you look at some of the questions it ought to make you stop and think - does any of this make sense in relation to autism? What it tests is aspects of the Triad, but it is qualitative and inferential and impersonal. The test warns people not to place any reliance upon it without professional guidance (that'll cost you!) - it should really warn you that the whole exercise is very approximal and hard to verify scientifically.

The Social/Empathy ones are particularly fraught. What do these questions mean:

"When I talk to people I tend to talk about their experiences rather than my own"

"In a conversation I tend to focus on my own thoughts rather than on what my listener might be thinking"

"I find it hard to know what to do in a social situation"

"I prefer to read non fiction rather than fiction"

I can see what they are trying to deduce from the answers, but is there enough in these questions to really describe autism?   The first one is the opposite of the autism stereotype of going on and on without giving others a way in, but I know lots of people who do that who are not otherwise autistic. The second one really is tautological - it refers of course to being self absorbed and unaware of other people, but the phrasing has to be meaningful, and I think they way it is written is too ambiguous. The third one could be describing shyness or social anxiety. The fourth covers two angles, but is so black & white as to be ambiguous.

This brings me to all those knowledge questions - like reading non-fiction.

"When I hear the weather forecast I am not very interested in the meterological patterns"

 "When I am on a plane I do not think about the aerodynamics"

"When I'm walking in the country I am curious about how the various stands of trees differ"

"I am interested in knowing the path a river takes from its source to the sea"

I know what this is trying to guage - an in-depth interest in something no-one else would be interested in. Trouble is I'm not seeing car number plates, or battery designs, or indeed anything that obsessive. The answers to these just indicate an interest in meteorology, aerospace engineering, ecology or fluvial dynamics. Believe it or not these are all university degree related specialisms. None of this sheds any light on obsessive interests! And the wording is so ambiguous. If you HEAR the weather forecast are you seeing patterns? If you are walking in the country are there any trees around? 

A lot of them are just downright weird. I can guess what they are trying to measure, but I can see so many other ways of reading them.

"I prefer practical jokes to verbal humour"

"When I am in a restaurant I often have a hard time deciding what to order"

"I often make resolutions but find it hard to stick to them"

"If there was a problem with the electrical witring in my house I'd be able to fix it myself"

"I do not read legal documents very carefully"

"I really enjoy caring for other people"

The first is about autistic humour or else abiout visual versus verbal but I'm puzzled as to whether it gives any insight to either. The second is about food routines and fads - supposedly someone with autism would just ask for beans and sausages (not touching)....? The third is always the first questiion on these things, and should warn everyone in advance that this is what the whole silly exercise is like. The others likewise, what do they really mean?

The tests are only as good as the questions asked. I seriously doubt enough thought has been given to formulating these questions. In my view the EQand SQ tests are a load of nonsense.

Personaly, I've avoided such tests. I place far more faith in the observations of a trained professional simply because the stories of people getting into a state through self-diagnosis are myriad. I have, for instance, taken Mensa tests in the past and scored highly enough to be invited to join, yet all I can think about those tests is that they're culture biased and middle class in perception and execution. If anyone asks, I'll tell them what I mean by 'middle class'.

I'm a whole person, not a sum of parts. OK, so my brain can process a Mensa test. Great. All it tells me is that my brain can process a Mensa test, it tells me absolutely nothing about me, they're just a series of logical puzzles, and the answers are often so obvious that they don't even challenge me to think. I still take great exception to some of their 'correct' answers to language questions, but then again, I DO have a very different take on life anyway.

I'm with you all the way on what you're trying to do. You're still in unknown territory as far as diagnosis is concerned, so in that sense you can do online tests untill you drop from exhaustion, and you still won't have a diagnosis untill you are properly assessed. I see the value for you in online tests, but I do generally take a dim view of self-diagnosis. The number of people who turn up at the Doctor's with stomach cancer, and it turns out to be excessive wind, if you get my drift? I just think it's a natural human tendency to 'fear the worst', and I think that proper diagnosis (by which I mean independant assessment by a properly trained professional) takes away a lot of fear.

Like you, I believe that you are AS. It strikes me that the things you say are common experiences for us, and it's obvious to me that this revelation has struck you in the same way as it seems to for most of us - suddenly, someone switched the light on and we realise just how we've been struggling in the dark.

I would be very interested in your opinion of this particular test as a diagnostic tool. Do you think it works, helps, or simply highlights and confirms something that, inside, you already knew or suspected? Most of all, has it helped you?