# Question
Title: How will the pet therapy aid the child with autism?
As a **Special Education Teacher at ACCEL**, behaviors of individuals with autism has been remarkably consistent over time with the help of ABA therapy services, which include pet therapy and individualized education program.

What are your thoughts about pet therapy for this population? How is it proven to be beneficial?

# Answer
> 1 votes
There is some evidence that pet therapy are effective for individuals with autism. The studies did not differentiate between children and adult though it is likely that the studies are focused on children.

This 2012 systematic review by O'Haire found increased social interaction and communication as well as a decrease in problem behaviors, autistic severity, and stress. There is a strong suspicion of publication bias and also a lack of control arms for comparison. O'Haire found 14 studies ranging from 1989 to 2012 that had outcome data for her review.

Another interesting 2012 French study by Grandgeorge et al) looked at the prosocial impact of having a pet in 260 families with children. What I thought was interesting was that having a pet since birth had minimal impact on the child which were the same rate as children without pets. However, if the family got a new pet after the age of 5, there was evidence of an increase in prosocial behavior.

**References:**

Grandgeorge, M., Tordjman, S., Lazartigues, A., Lemonnier, E., Deleau, M., & Hausberger, M. (2012). Does Pet Arrival Trigger Prosocial Behaviors in Individuals with Autism? PLOS ONE, 7(8), e41739.

O’Haire, M. (2012). Animal-Assisted Intervention for Autism Spectrum Disorder: A Systematic Literature Review. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders. Vol 43, pg 1606–1622.

---
Tags: learning, autism
---


# Question
Title: Is there any Sleep limit for a human body?
Can we sleep throughout our whole life if we are supplied the necessary things like food,water etc.

# Answer
**Q: Is there any Sleep limit for a human body? Can we sleep throughout our whole life if we are supplied the necessary things like food,water etc.**

**A:** Yes, there is a sleep limit for human (and other animals that sleep). And, no, we can’t sleep throughout our whole life even if all our metabolic requirements are supported. This is because sleep does not occur freely without any control but is under control of a complex neural network. This network limits how long one can sleep or be awake. It also regulates the time when sleep is to begin and to end. (Ref 1 - 4)

Sleep occurs alternately with wake in cycles, called sleep-wake cycle. These cycles are under control of a complex network of neural circuits in the brainstem, hypothalamus, basal ganglia, basal forebrain, and thalamus (see figure below).

(The figure is from Figure 2, Ref 1.)

And the periodicity of the cycles are controlled by circadian rhythm pacemaker in suprachiasmatic nucleus, internal homeostasis, and ambient light. (see figure below)

(This figure is from Figure 3, Ref 1)

In human and animals that sleep, this cycle is about 24 hours, with the mean duration of sleep (in human) of about 7.5 hours (with a standard deviation of about 1.25 hours) (Ref 2.). So, normally we sleep about 7.5 hours and then are set to be awake by these neural mechanisms. Because sleep is under control of these neural circuits, we cannot just fall asleep whenever we want and cannot sleep as many hours as we would like.

**References:**

1. Larson-Prior, Linda & Ju, Yo-El & Galvin, James. (2014). Cortical–Subcortical Interactions in Hypersomnia Disorders: Mechanisms Underlying Cognitive and Behavioral Aspects of the Sleep–Wake Cycle. Frontiers in neurology. 5. 165. 10.3389/fneur.2014.00165.
2. Purves D. Chapter 27 Sleep and Wakefulness. Purves D, Augustine GJ, David Fitzpatrick D, Hall WC, Lamantia AS, McNamara JO, Williams SM, editors. Neuroscience. 3rd ed. Sunderland, Massachusetts: Sinauer Associates Inc; 2004. ISBN-13: 9780878937257 ISBN-10: 0878937250. p659-686.
3. Moore RY. Clinical Update - Circadian Rhythms, Hypothalamus, and Regulation of the Sleep-Wake Cycle. Medscape. 2019 Sep 1.
4. Wikipedia. Sleep
> 4 votes

---
Tags: theoretical-neuroscience
---


# Question
Title: Is "gaslighting" a mainstream concept in the cognitive sciences?
The term "gaslighting" (referring to abusive manipulation of the facts to confuse victims) is common in pop-psychology sources, and I have friends who report that their psychologists or psychiatrists use the term as some form of shorthand.

However, I have looked in a couple of online psychology dictionaries, and they don't define the term.

I have looked on this site, and it only appears once.

I have looked on Google Scholar. While I can find *some* references to the term - especially a "seminal" 1981 paper, *Some clinical consequences of introjection: gaslighting*, there don't appear to be *many* papers referencing it, and I haven't the experience to evaluate whether they are fringe ideas or mainstream science.

Is gaslighting just pop psychology, or is the concept of gaslighting widely accepted in the cognitive sciences?

# Answer
The wikipedia article you linked to regarding the term *Gaslighting* has references to clinical and research literature.

Dorpat, (1996) talks about the incidences of Gaslighting conducted by therapists.

> In treatment, the psychotherapist is in a position of power. Often, this power is unintentionally abused. While trying to embody a compassionate concern for patients, therapists use accepted techniques that can inadvertently lead to control, indoctrination, and therapeutic failure. Contrary to the stated tradition and values of psychotherapy, they subtly coerce patients rather than respect and genuinely help them. The more gross kinds of patient abuse, deliberate ones such as sexual and financial exploitation, are expressly forbidden by professional organizations. However, there are no regulations discouraging the more covert forms of manipulation, which are not even considered exploitative by many clinicians.

Jacobson & Gottman, (1998) talks about wife batterers.

> After their decade of research with more than 200 couples, the authors conclude that not all batterers are alike, nor is the progression of their violence always predictable. But they have found that batterers tend to fall into one of two categories, which they call "Pit Bulls" and "Cobras". Pit Bulls, men whose emotions quickly boil over, are driven by deep insecurity and an unhealthy dependence on the mates whom they abuse. Pit Bulls also tend to become stalkers, unable to let go of relationships that have ended.
>
> Cobras, on the other hand, are cool and methodical as they inflict pain and humiliation on their spouses or lovers (Source: Google Books synopsis)

In the book, it says

> A tactic of emotional abuse that is common among Pit Bulls, but not Cobras, is the phenomenon known as "gaslighting." (The term comes from the film *Gaslight*, in which Charles Boyer convinces Ingrid Bergman that she is going insane.) We gave an example of this phenomenon with Dave and Judy, in which he blatantly denied that he was a batterer. Gaslighting is a systematic attach on the wife's perception of reality.

The term has been used in articles I have read within the last few months including one by Christine Louis de Canonville (2017) who has a B.A. (Hons.) degree in Psychology, and Sarkis (2017) within PsychologyToday.

If you search Google Scholar, the site will return thousands of results including articles in therapy journals, so the concept of gaslighting **is** widely accepted in the cognitive sciences.

## References

Dorpat, T. L. (1996). *Gaslighting, the Double Whammy, Interrogation, and Other Methods of Covert Control in Psychotherapy and Psychoanalysis*. New York:Jason Aronson
ISBN-10: 1-5682-1828-1
ISBN-13: 978-1-5682-1828-1

Jacobson, N. S. & Gottman, J. M. (1998). *When Men Batter Women: New Insights into Ending Abusive Relationships*. New York:Simon and Schuster
ISBN-10: 1-4165-5133-6
ISBN-13: 978-1-4165-5133-1

Louis de Canonville, C. (2017). *The Effects of Gaslighting on Victims of Narcissistic Abuse* \[Online\]
Available at: http://narcissisticbehavior.net/the-effects-of-gaslighting-in-narcissistic-victim-syndrome/

Sarkis, S. (2017) *Are Gaslighters Aware of What They Do?* \[Online\]
Available at:https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/here-there-and-everywhere/201701/are-gaslighters-aware-what-they-do
> 6 votes

# Answer
I would not call it a mainstream concept but it was discussed in some mainstream sources. However, there's a divergence in meaning; some old Commonwealth medical/psychiatry papers mostly use it to denote having someone inappropriately committed to a mental institution... whereas the broader notion you ask about is found in more recent sources and of more marginal impact factor. Furthermore, the original British concept has been re-labeled "tertiary gain of illness" in the US.

First of all, the 1981 "seminal" paper (by Calef and Weinshel) you mention is in psychoanalytical journal, which would immediately give me pause as to its validity/acceptance (unless you're in France). However the Wikipedia page cites an older paper by Lund & Gardiner, 1977, which is just a case report though, but in a mainstream psychiatry journal, the British Journal of Psychiatry. Abstract:

> A case of paranoid psychosis in an elderly female is reported in which recurrent episodes were apparently induced by the staff of the institution where the patient was a resident. The issues raised by this case are discussed.

The actually seminal paper (cited in the previous one) is Barton & Whitehead (1969) "The gas-light phenomenon". Lancet,i,1258-60. but this was also case report (two actually). The Lancet, as you probably know, is a mainstream medical journal (not just psychiatric).

Another paper in the Br. J. Psych is Smith and Sinanan, 1972, The \`Gaslight Phenomenon' Reappears A Modification of the Ganser Syndrome, https://doi.org/10.1192/bjp.120.559.685 starts with:

> In 1969 Barton and Whitehead reported two cases in which there were definite plots to remove an unwanted and restricting relative by securing admission to a mental hospital, and one case of an old lady admitted to a mental hospital following induced faecal incontinence. The old lady was considered a nursing home nuisance and she was given purgatives regularly. Inevitably she had some "accidents" and these were used as an excuse for removing her to hospital. They labelled such attempts 'The Gaslight Phenomenon', inspired by Patrick Hamilton's play Gaslight which was first produced in London in 1939 and later formed the basis for a film. Their survey of the literature uncovered few recent reports of such manipulations. Without the emphasis of Barton and White head's report the following cases might have passed unnoticed. We feel that it is time to stress again the presence of this phenomenon, and, as this report shows, it is not unique to psychiatric hospitals.

And they also discuss a couple of cases.

But nevertheless these paper have few citations, using the Google Scholar count 30 for the 1969 one. So while it was discussed, it was seldom so. It's true that the 1981 paper seems to have more citations (57) but in my experience GS undercounts for the older papers and overcounts the newer ones.

Searching for the "gaslight" term in pubmed returns around 10 papers (a couple of which are clearly false positive) https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=gaslight and https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=gaslighting only 3 hits. Hence my conclusion: discussed in mainstream sources, but seldom, so not a mainstream term.

Also note that the sources from the Commonwealth (there is a paper from Canada as well https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/7093877) use gaslight phenomenon/syndrome, while all 3 hits in pubmed for "gaslighting" are from US authors (and 2 surely are psychoanalytical, including the paper you found.) I find it a little odd that there no hits in any US psychiatry journals; perhaps US psychiatrists called the notion something else... or they did not find worthwhile discussing. Actually, one US (VA) psychiatrist, Dansak, who is citing Barton and Whitehead, proposed to call the concept... "tertiary gain of illness" and he (unlike the British) applied a psychoanlitic lens:

> PSYCHIATRISTS recognize that their patients acquire certain gains from their emotional problems. The gains were originally defined by Sigmund Freud as the primary and secondary gains of illness.’ The primary gain is an intrapsychic gain which the patient obtains as a result of his symptoms, i.e.. a defense against and a reduction of anxiety. The secondary gain is an interpersonal or social advantage attained by the patient as a consequence of his illness In each case, it is noted, the patient is the one who “benefits.” An intriguing variation of the problem of secondary gain is mentioned by Ross’ in his discussion of the “traumatic neuroses” and their relation to compensation. He gives an example in which “the wife of an injured breadwinner may have gone to work while her husband was incapacitated, contributing to the shift in the family equilibrium. This shift may further a regression in which he becomes like a child or a substitute mother in the home, dependent on his wife. or retaliating for her assumption of his role. The wife may then push for compensation to reduce her own load.” This illustration presents the notion that someone other than the patient may seek or achieve gains from the patient’s illness. In this particular example the gain would be some form of financial compensation that would allow the wife to stop working, hire a maid. etc. The author proposes that gains sought or attained from a patient’s illness by someone other than the patient be called the tertiary gain of illness. Furthermore, though the above example highlights the tertiary gain to the wife of the husband’s acquiring compensation for his injury, all tertiary gains are not financial. The following case will demonstrate another type of tertiary gain, that of expelling the patient from his family.
>
> \[case details\]
>
> In keeping with the frame of reference of the patient and his illness, the writer proposes to define this phenomenon, where someone other than the patient gains from the latter’s illness, as the tertiary gain of illness. \[...\] Recent reports in the British literatures have discussed examples of this under the heading of the “Gaslight Phenomenon.”

Also worth noting is that the concept discussed in the medical journals is narrower than what Wikipedia proposes, and it's usually just about having someone committed to a mental institution in inappropriate circumstances. I'm not sure about psychoanalytical papers, I'm not really in a mood to read them now.

However the 2017 hit on "gaslight" in pubmed (from J. Adv. Nurs.) has a quite different tint:

> Conduct in our nursing workplaces remains a curious contrast of overt statements about quality, collegiality and community accompanied too often with the opposite (Cassell 2011, Lampman et al. 2009, MacKay et al. 2008, Twale & De Luca 2008). Known as gaslighting (Sarkis 2017), misalignment of words with actions serves to deny or justify bullying and harassment in a language of legitimacy. This behavior includes verbal and non- verbal actions, from overt aggression to subtle but ongoing undermining via institutional means, including: unfair allocation of work and roles, assignment of heavier teaching loads, unfair performance evaluations, and denial of opportunity (Gloor 2014, Cleary et al. 2016).

So it's possible the notion adopted in the US came by a different route (not the British psychiatry journals), which might explain the different connotation as well as the small number of citations for the British papers. The "Sarkis S. (2017)" reference in that 2017 paper alas is just a PT blog.

Dorpat writes in his 2007 book "Crimes of Punishment: America's Culture of Violence" (p. 179):

> Like the psychoanalysts Victor Calef and Edward Weinshel, I have adapted a broad definition of gaslighting, one that includes not just those who are made psychotic by it, but a wider range of victims. \[...\]
>
> A mild and naive form of gaslighting may be carried out by psychotherapists and others who are unaware that they are gaslighting, and who may also be unaware of the harmful effects of what they are doing. I gave examples of psychotherapists and psychoanalysts who were gaslighting patients and did not realize it. \[citing his older book mentioned in the other answer\]

So I suppose Calef and Weinshel are responsible for broadening the notion, which might explain the number of citations they've got (57 in Google Scholar).

Also note that when applied to therapists this gaslighting clearly falls under iatrogenesis... and iatrogenesis in therapy has been discussed aplenty.

Finally (I hope!) Gass and Nichols (1988) talk about gaslighting in the context of extramarital affairs:

> "The worst part, Harry, is the lying."
>
> "I'm not lying; you're just imagining things."
>
> Such conversations become a vicious part of the interaction between some husbands and wives. The husband gaslights or distorts reality in an effort to convince his spouse that she is crazy, that what she is perceiving is not happening.

They don't cite any other paper for their use of the term.
> 2 votes

# Answer
Came across this article 2018 by Riggs and Bartholomaeus and thought of this question. Gaslighting is more common in casual parlance than in the academic literature. There is great difficulty in studying gaslighting as it is inherently relational and by definition, the individual is being manipulated by the other person. It is a very personal experience making it quite hard to objectively study so making it a very difficult to investigate scientifically. Riggs defined gaslighting -

> Gaslighting is about subtly conveying to a person that their own judgment is not to be trusted and that they are not competent, thus undermining their confidence in being able to trust their own views and experiences.

Riggs illustrates with case examples how gaslighting is an identity-related abuse and uses his experience with transgender clients to illustrate the gaslighting experiences with parents of transgender children.

> gaslighting is centrally about issues of power and control (as is true for any form of abuse), in contexts where power differentials are already significant (such as in parent–child relationships), this can exacerbate the likelihood that control techniques such as gaslighting will occur, and minimise the likelihood that they will be identified by others.

I do like the discussion about the therapeutic approaches that a clinician can take to help ameliorate the impact and validate the impact of gaslighting on the client.

**Reference:**

Riggs, D. W., & Bartholomaeus, C. (2018). Gaslighting in the context of clinical interactions with parents of transgender children. Sexual and Relationship Therapy, 33(4), 382–394. https://doi.org/10.1080/14681994.2018.1444274
> 0 votes

---
Tags: terminology, clinical-psychology, psychiatry
---


# Question
Title: Can schizophrenics who are deaf since birth hear voices?
I am interested in how schizophrenia can be expressed in them, and whether it depends on the perception of the world. Maybe they see text pop-up in the air, or something like that?

# Answer
A quick Google search reveals some answers such as Atkinson, J. R. (2006).

> Around half of all deaf people diagnosed with schizophrenia report experiencing “voices,” during which they sense someone communicating with them in the absence of any external stimulus. This closely parallels prevalence rates of auditory verbal hallucinations (AVH) in hearing people with schizophrenia (50–70%). There is no evidence reported for increased frequency of psychotic hallucinations in congenitally deaf people. However, greater proportions of visual and tactile/somatic hallucinations have been noted. Around 50% of deaf people with a diagnosis of schizophrenia report visual hallucinations, and a similar proportion describe tactile/somatic hallucinations, despite the low occurrence of these phenomena in schizophrenia generally (15% and 5%, respectively).

The abstract points out that:

> The study of voice-hallucinations in deaf individuals, who exploit the visuomotor rather than auditory modality for communication, provides rare insight into the relationship between sensory experience and how “voices” are perceived. Relatively little is known about the perceptual characteristics of voice-hallucinations in congenitally deaf people who use lip-reading or sign language as their preferred means of communication. The existing literature on hallucinations in deaf people is reviewed, alongside consideration of how such phenomena may fit into explanatory subvocal articulation hypotheses proposed for auditory verbal hallucinations in hearing people.

## References

Atkinson, J. R. (2006). The perceptual characteristics of voice-hallucinations in deaf people: insights into the nature of subvocal thought and sensory feedback loops. *Schizophrenia bulletin, 32*(4), 701-708. doi: 10.1093/schbul/sbj063 pubmed: PMC2632268
> 3 votes

---
Tags: abnormal-psychology, schizophrenia, hallucinations
---


# Question
Title: Does social psychology include study of human cultures?
Bertrand Russell (1872-1970), not a professional psychologist or anthropologist but a smart thinker and philosopher, believed that jealousy was one of the main sources of the sexual ethics of his time. I'm much interested in this kind of analysis, relating cultures, customs, norms, and traditions to basic human drives and emotions and also to other factors (geographical, economical, etc.). For example, why is there hijab in islamic world? Was it originated as a result of jealousy of men at some period of time at a specific region?

I would like to know if professional social psychologists today deal with such questions at least partially, and how they differ with anthropologists or sociologists in this respect, if at all.

# Answer
> 3 votes
I can see where the confusion may lay as the disciplines are very similar but different in their own ways.

## Social Psychology

> is about understanding individual behavior in a social context (McLeod, 2007).

This field of psychology therefore looks at human behaviour as influenced by other people along with the social context in which this occurs.

McLeod also points out that:

> Topics examined in social psychology include: the self concept, social cognition, attribution theory, social influence, group processes, prejudice and discrimination, interpersonal processes, aggression, attitudes and stereotypes.

Cultural aspects of psychology will affect interpersonal processes etc. but in depth analysis of culture in psychology is covered by cultural psychology, which informs several other fields within psychology, including social psychology, cultural-historical psychology, developmental psychology, and cognitive psychology.

## How they differ with anthropologists or sociologists in this respect.

### Anthropologists

scientifically study human behaviour and societies in the past and present. Social anthropology studies patterns of behaviour and cultural anthropology.

Whilst anthropologists will study the cultures, past and present, they don't analyze the **psychology** of, or within, cultural differences.

> Early anthropology originated in Classical Greece and Persia, and studied and tried to understand observable cultural diversity. As such, anthropology has been central in the development of several new (late 20th century) interdisciplinary fields such as cognitive science (Wikipedia).

### Sociology

is the study of society, patterns of social relationships, social interaction and culture of everyday life. It is a social science that uses various methods of empirical investigation and critical analysis to develop a body of knowledge about **social order, acceptance, and change or social evolution** (Wikipedia). Sociology is also defined as the general science of society.

While culture forms part of society, again *sociology* doesn't deeply examine cultural aspects in the same way as *anthropology* or *cultural psychology*.

To understand more about the differences, please read the Wikipedia articles linked and follow the citations referenced in them.

## References

McLeod, S. (2007). Social Psychology. *Simply Psychology* \[Online\].
Retrieved from: https://www.simplypsychology.org/social-psychology.html

---
Tags: social-psychology
---


# Question
Title: Explanation of "I never thought I'd get this far"
There's a phenomenon where people get to a stage in life they never thought they'd see it and they don't know what to do. Why is that? Why is that when we're faced with a non-foreseeable dilemma we don't know what the right thing is to do? How common is this?

"I Never Thought I'd See the Day!" or "I never thought I'd get this far" from SpongeBob's Plankton T.V. Show are memes.

I'm adding to social psych tag because I've seen related questions in social psych class.

# Answer
This is a good question which cannot really be provided with scientifically proven reasons, so we can only look at possibilities.

From personal experience as a therapist, anecdotally I can say that with some people, the meme would not be complete. With these people the situation would be

> I didn't think I would get this far **so quickly**

and that could be a key point with many others.

When planning for the future, do you plan for things you know you will reach very soon or do you include those points where you cannot envisage getting to right now?

Forward planning can be different from person to person, and if you haven't planned for a particular eventuality, how do you know what you **want** to do, let alone how you **should** do things?

The comment at the bottom of your image:

> I have managed to change my name and gender on ALL of my legal documents! So what's next?

can be a comment of surprise, and maybe despair; or it could be:

> Good! I have that out of the way, now do I have to do anything else?

The processes involved with identity change can be daunting and therefore some choose to take things a step at a time rather than planning the whole process before carrying it out.

Is the person aware of all the things they need to do? Can they cope? Do they have the support of professional organizations to help along the way? Do they have support from friends and family?

All these things and more will affect how the person will be dealing with the situation.
> 1 votes

---
Tags: social-psychology, decision-making
---


# Question
Title: What important psychological results would not have been discovered without experiments on non-human animals?
Many psychological experiments involve shocking animals, playing loud sounds near them, depriving them of social contact, etc. For example, Martin Seligman's studies of learned helplessness in dogs are of this nature.

However, to my understanding, studies of learned helplessness in dogs at best provide an analogy to depression in humans, and it seems unlikely that actually shocking and trapping dogs was necessary for insight into human depression.

Similarly, Harry Harlow's studies of deprivation of maternal contact in monkeys seem to give extraordinarily obvious results, telling us what almost anyone already knows - that infants crave maternal contact. I don't think I need socially maladjusted monkeys in a laboratory in order to understand this point.

Is this wrong, or if not, what are some other counter-examples? What experiments involving inflicting physical or psychological pain on animals were necessary parts of important results in human psychology?

# Answer
> 3 votes
I think this necessarily involves some speculation. It's very hard to tell whether certain important findings would have been discovered without studies in non-human animals. We should also keep the hindsight bias in mind, that is, the tendency to retroactively claim that we 'knew it all along'.

Another aspect to consider is that only experiments enable us to investigate the causality of a relationship that we might have already observed in a non-experimental context. For example, we might have already observed that people with depression also show signs of helplessness, but this usually isn't enough to assume a causal link between these two.

Finally, I do think there are a few findings that would have been almost impossible without research in non-human animals. For example, any knowledge that stems from the recording of individual neurons in the brain. It's currently infeasible to record data from individual neurons in humans (apart from a few patients that have medical devices implanted due to neurological disorders). So for example, our knowledge of dopamine neurons signaling reward prediction errors depended critically on research in non-human animals (Schultz et al., 1997, Science).

# Answer
> 1 votes
This question of course deals with hypothetical scenarios, making it hard to give definite, objective answers. However, I would like to make a contribution. I believe that behaviorism, a perspective on the psychology of personality, has been largely shaped by animal experiments in its early days.

It is hard to say what we would know about conditioning (an important part of behaviorism) and how it influnces learning and personality if Pavlov, Thorndike and Skinner had not conducted their famous (animal) experiments. Initial mechanisms that they found in animals were later verified to also exist in humans.

# Classical conditioning

In classical conditioning an unconditioned stimulus (US) is paired with an initially neutral stimulus (Conditioned Stimulus) to elicit a conditioned response (CR). So, a dog naturally salivates (UR) when it is presented with food (US) but if you ring a bell (CR) before you present the food then eventually the dog will salivate after it hears the bell (Gleitman, Gross & Resiberg, 2010). This is exactly the example that Pavlov used during his famous experiments.

# Operant/instrumental conditioning

This form of conditioning uses reinforcers. When an organism shows the desired behavior it is reinforced with a desired stimulus such as food. Thorndike and Skinner put cats in a box and had them learn various behaviors through instrumental conditioning (Gleitman et al., 2010).

Of course this is a real short overview of conditioning and behaviorism. However, these experiments with animals paved the way to a lot of important discoveries in psychology with regard to humans such as the conditioned drug response (craving) for example (Gleitman et al., 2010).

# References

Gleitman, H., Gross, J., & Resiberg, D. (2010). Psychology. New York, NY: Norton.

---
Tags: experimental-psychology
---


# Question
Title: Does denying climate change work similar to believing the earth is flat?
I have a vague idea how believing in a flat earth may work. (Not enough to write it down)

But it still irritates me that an appreciable fraction of the general population in the US deny that climate change is caused mainly by human influences. Even more so as it seems to be a fraction large enough to be politically relevant.

I see that this question has a strong political connotation, which is opinion based. But that is not part of the question.

It is somehow culture-related, as it's different in Europe, at least in Germany.

I would expect it is a fringe group like people assuming a flat earth. There is a related, but different kind of group. People denying that the Holocaust happened. This has a strong political association to extreme right groups.

Is assuming flat earth and denying climate change the same kind of phenomenon?

# Answer
There is serious work on this, despite it being a political minefield. You're probably looking for Lewandowsky, et al. (2015).

If you want to get some distance from the issues of the day (and associated name calling) and into the mechanisms that drive this sort of phenomenon in general you might get more joy out of something like Cook & Lewandowsky (2016).

That will bring you into stuff like Hahn, et al. (2018). That's not directly political at all, but I think the relevance to your question is pretty strong. This is one of those fields that is exploding thanks to ever-better desktop computing, there's a ton of stuff that hasn't been tried yet! Hope you have some fun with it.

## References

Cook, J., & Lewandowsky, S. (2016). Rational irrationality: Modeling climate change belief polarization using Bayesian networks. *Topics in cognitive science, 8*(1), 160-179. doi: 10.1111/tops.12186

Hahn, U., Hansen, J. U., & Olsson, E. J. (2018). Truth tracking performance of social networks: how connectivity and clustering can make groups less competent. *Synthese*, 1-31. doi: 10.1007/s11229-018-01936-6

Lewandowsky, S., Gignac, G. E., & Oberauer, K. (2015). The robust relationship between conspiracism and denial of (climate) science. *Psychological Science, 26*(5), 667-670. doi: 10.1177/0956797614568432
> 7 votes

# Answer
My best guess is that this kind of thinking is most similar to conspiracy theories, which can be created by a combination of confirmation bias, emotionally salient narrative, and overactivity in meaning and interpretation over facts and in critical thinking. Delving deeper into how conspiracy theories and paranoia work could provide some insight into the neurological mechanisms involved.

When we have a strong emotionally salient narrative in our minds, our brains are excellent at cherry picking exactly the right set of events and interpretations (of which there are infinitely many) to support our narrative while omitting or ignoring contrary data - to the point where even the most outrageous narrative can seem 'obvious'. The more intensely we cling to the narrative or idea, the more we will do this. So conspiratorial thinking is in a way a special case of extreme confirmation bias.

Conspiracies are usually in the form of a positive narrative. But extreme skepticism is a form of conspiracy theory. The reasoning: implied in this thinking is that Global Warming (or the Holocaust, or whatever is denied) is a conspiracy. Is some elaborate fabrication by some people with an ulterior motive.

Overactivity in centers of meaning and interpretation as opposed to facts seem critical to paranoid and conspiratorial thinking. Conspiracy theories and paranoia usually involve weaving a very strong and emotionally salient narrative subscribing negative intentions to powerful actors. Then reinterpreting facts and events with these negative intentions and the grand narrative in mind. Ex: global warming is part of a grand scheme for \[person or group\] to \[establish world domination / make large sums of money / ruin our economy / etc\] by \[keeping us all in fear / making us invest in certain technologies / etc\].

I see a very strong correlation between far right political orientation and conspiratorial thinking. However I also see some conspiratorial thinking on the far left.
> 0 votes

---
Tags: social-psychology, sociology, political-psychology
---


title: Informed Consent Research Question

text:
# Question
Title: Informed Consent Research Question
I am a member of a closed, fairly large private group on Facebook of former game show contestants. Several years ago, another member posted a Google Forms version of the Asperger Quotient test, asking group members to take the test, to report their overall score (anonymous), and to answer a few demographic questions on the form. After collecting about 300 responses, he shared the composite results with the group (who were enthusiastic about the idea).

I've since asked the member who composed the original post if he would be interested in turning this idea into a publishable research brief. I am a psychologist and faculty at a small university and could create the IRB/ submission at my institution. My issue, though, involves about informed consent. The data is collected, but he did not include an informed consent statement with his Facebook post. Should I scrap his data, create an informed consent, and then re-send out the AQ? Or do you think I should submit a request to the IRB asking to use the existing data? Thanks!

# Answer
I'd recommend consulting informally with IRB staff at your institution beforehand, usually (and maybe especially at a smaller institution?) they are willing to help out a bit at the design stage. Once you find the right person to contact, I'd convey to them almost exactly what you've posted here (probably via email), plus a bit more background on the actual current form of the data.

IRBs can vary quite a bit on what they allow; there are minimum standards they are required to follow but I've seen IRBs go well beyond those standards at times. It may be that the IRB decides the data are anonymous enough and low risk enough that you don't even need consent; it may be that they won't allow it in any form unless you start from scratch (and contacting the people who originally participated may similarly not be allowed; you might be able to solicit the group but not the previous responders directly).

There is likely a blanket prohibition on *you* collecting data, then trying to go back and get consent to use it in another way, but your situation is a bit different in that you weren't the one collecting in the first place and the collection does not seem to meet the criteria for "research" at the time of collection.

These flow charts from HHS might help a bit if you are in the US. Following Chart 2 and then Chart 4/5, it is quite *possible* that this work could be exempt from full review (but at least at my institution, *it is still the IRB that decides whether the exemption applies*).
> 6 votes

# Answer
The other issue is whether it is a closed Facebook group or a public Facebook group. If it is a closed group then privacy issues do apply. Public groups are accessible by everyone, so broader social media rules apply.

Having said that, talking to your IRB about retrospective approval is essential. Some IRBs do not grant retrospective approvals full-stop, no exceptions. Not having identifiers or including people who have declared themselves or identified how they answer is also an important distinction as well that needs to be in your ethics application. I know some IRBs if they look at the questions and the fact that it is a survey are usually able to grant retrospective approval despite the lack of consent.

Putting a post and asking permission to do research would definitely be helpful. People can raise your concerns and this can be included in your ethics approval and communication with your IRB. Definitely communicate with the group and be transparent in the type of journals and conferences that you could be publishing in. I find details like that is helpful and encourages further engagement from the community. For some, research is a very new thing and they may never encounter an academic journal before. So having this introduction and being part of the scientific writing process can be quite exciting for the group. In some FB groups that I am in, research legitimizes and validates the difficulties that they are having. It gives them a voice when they previously feel unheard. Also, highlighting and educating about the strict privacy regulation of the journal and the IRB process is a great way to educate your group and the general public about research and scientific journals.

Edit: Not sure how I missed the comment about GoogleForms. GoogleForms is not universally accepted as confidential and adequately de-identifying for research purposes. Sometimes when people fill in the GoogleForm, their Google sign in might be collected which then makes the survey not confidential (make sure this setting is off and that this data has not been collected by accident). It is much harder to disprove data manipulation as the survey can be altered as well after being filled in or manipulated by the researchers without any metadata evidence, all of which makes IRBs and ethic boards very nervous and hesitant to approve research using GoogleForms. For countries which insists that the server of the data storage be in the same country, GoogleForm does not have this option - Google Support Question
> 4 votes

---
Tags: ethics
---


# Question
Title: Do we have a psychological need to talk to people?
Do we have a psychological need to talk to people?

I don't believe it's in Maslow's hierarchy, but surely.

# Answer
It’s worth remembering that Maslow proffered a THEORY with very little experimental evidence to support it. Since then lots of experimental research has been done with a number of primary needs being identified. Primary needs are often those that take place implicitly and/or evoke visceral responses (typically via the amygdala) when threatened or rewarded (there’s more to it than that but just a starter for 10).

A neat summary of those primary needs can be found in David Rock’s Your Brain at Work (2009). The need I believe you’re referring to is RELATEDNESS. Neuroscientific research in this area has found that being excluded from say a conversation or group hurts us more than physical pain. Also have a look at:

The neural bases of feeling understood and not understood Sylvia A. Morelli, Jared B. Torre, Naomi I. Eisenberger

Naomi Eisenberger in addition has lots more great research in this area - too much to list here

Hope this helps!
> 1 votes

---
Tags: communication, needs
---


title: Find volume of lesion mask

text:
# Question
Title: Find volume of lesion mask
I have drawn a lesion mask using FSLeyes on a T1-weighted image for MS patients. Is there tool to get the lesion volume from the mask?

# Answer
Assuming your mask is in NIfTI format (nii or nii.gz extension), you can use the fslstats command line tool for that. Just type `fslstats` on the command line to see the help text for command syntax and arguments. For your specific case, you can use:

```
fslstats <input> -V

```

where `<input>` is the path to your mask NIfTI file. The returned numbers will be the mask volume in voxels and mm^3.

### FSL install

Since you said you used FSLeyes to draw your mask, I'm assuming you have the full install of the FSL package as well. If not, see their wiki for instructions.
> 2 votes

---
Tags: neuroscience, neuroimaging, software
---


title: Exercise for Mental health

text:
# Question
Title: Exercise for Mental health
We do lot a physical exercise for keeping body in shape and strong. I have not heard about any exercise for mental health. Is there any thing like mental exercise or physical exercise also include mental exercise ?

# Answer
There is enough evidence to tackle the issue of exercise and depression. I am not sure about the rest of the psychiatric spectrum and disorders. A 2013 review by Cooney et al found differences in the methodological rigor of the trials.

> For the 35 trials (1356 participants) comparing exercise with no treatment or a control intervention, the pooled SMD for the primary outcome of depression at the end of treatment was ‐0.62 (95% confidence interval (CI) ‐0.81 to ‐0.42), indicating a moderate clinical effect.

However, when they examined a smaller more methodologically rigorous group, the effect size lessened but was still significant.

> 6 trials (464 participants) with adequate allocation concealment, intention‐to‐treat analysis and blinded outcome assessment, the pooled SMD for this outcome was not statistically significant (‐0.18, 95% CI ‐0.47 to 0.11). Pooled data from the eight trials (377 participants) providing long‐term follow‐up data on mood found a small effect in favour of exercise (SMD ‐0.33, 95% CI ‐0.63 to ‐0.03).

So yes, definitely exercise is very helpful for depression with meaningful improvements.

**Reference:**

Cooney GM, Dwan K, Greig CA, Lawlor DA, Rimer J, Waugh FR, McMurdo M, Mead GE. Exercise for depression. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2013, Issue 9. Art. No.: CD004366. DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD004366.pub6.
> 2 votes

---
Tags: exercise
---


# Question
Title: What is this stratagem called when someone talks to you like you're a slow-witted kid?
What is this conversational stratagem called when someone wants to fish out certain information from you but, because they don't want to ask you about it directly (as they expect you might get uncomfortable, distressed or angry), they ask you simple innocent-looking questions instead; answers to these questions will make up for them a picture of what they actually want to know, whilst you are supposed to NOT comprehend/realize their sly plan?

That stratagem is often employed by parents on their small kids not yet witted enough to get that they're being puppeted, psychiatrists on their patients, or simply by someone mistakenly thinking they're smarter than their interlocutor and so their tricks won't be comprehended.

# Answer
> 3 votes
There are a few terms which can be used for this. The answer from @AlwaysConfused could describe the situation if you are actually talking to them like a child as stipulated in the title, but therapists should not sound patronising or condescending so I wonder if you may be referring to a form of "circumnavigation".

The use of circumnavigation may not necessarily be a case of being sly. Therapists may do this to build a complete picture of a situation as you suggest, but it can also get their client to look at things from a different angle too.

Maybe looking directly at the situation is going to be too psychologically painful right now so circumnavigating the direct path can help.

Other than this, when a therapist "wants to fish out certain information from you", there can be certain protocols which need to be followed, for example, if therapy is being given due to a situation which may lead to a court case.

A therapist in this situation cannot be seen to be leading a potential witness in a court case, so they must ask open and indirect questions.

Again, this can be see as circumnavigation of a sort, but it is more a case of open and indirect questioning.

# Answer
> 2 votes
it is sometimes called as infantilization, which is common towards children as well for some people with impaired social communication, so apparently considered as childish people. Infantilizing is harmful because

1. The person may have a childish communication style which may be unwantedly appreciated by public but the communication difficulties may be ignored.
2. it ignores the actual intellectual capabilities, and also disqualifies the apparently "childishly communicating person" from having high targets as well as high support at the same time. It creates low expectation and more chances to miss opportunity. Society often does not understand its not being childish rather it is a communication difficulty that may co-occur with autism, nonverbal learning disorder, ADHD etc.

---
Tags: terminology, communication, behavior
---


# Question
Title: Is there a neutral term for people who tend to avoid face-to-face or video/audio communication?
Imagine a person who:

* Mostly prefers written communication (email, instant messaging) to making phone/video calls or seeing face-to-face
* Hardly ever watches videos on the internet. Prefers reading
* At college/uni, instead of attending lectures/seminars, would successfully study things on their own using the recommended materials, and would always pass the exams
* Would rather sort things out themselves instead of asking for help/directions
* Are great at working from home
* Generally does not socialise and are very happy to stay on their own / keep to themselves
* Avoids living in cities and prefers rural low-to-zero populated areas
* Does not hate people but just finds most of them rather boring or being nuisance
* Despite all the above, are very positive and friendly when communicating face-to-face and are very valued within their professional circle

I have been trying to find a term to describe such a person but so far all terms that I found seem to bear a negative connotation or identify a disorder. There is no negativity or disorder here as the person does not feel stress or disability and are very happy with what they are.

Examples of terms that are close but do not match for reasons explained:

* Autism spectrum and Asperger syndrome are both defined as "disorders" with "difficulties". The person does not have any difficulties: they do appear socialising and communicating just fine — when they need it for some purpose other than socialising/communicating itself;
* Misanthrope actually hates people (which makes the term regarded as rather negative). The subject person does not. They simply avoid seeing people unnecessarily;
* Recluse is a very close call, but it describes a person who *does* live that way without conveying anything of whether they *want* to live that way. A very social party goer may hide away and be a recluse if a gang is after them. Conversely, the subject person who, despite their preference, lives in a big city and participates in social drinks at work just because it secures their career cannot be called "recluse";
* Loner is another good word but it is not sufficiently neutral. As the linked article says, "*the modern term "loner" can be used with a negative connotation in the belief that human beings are social creatures and those that do not participate are deviant.*"

# Answer
I agree with @AlwaysConfused that this sounds very like someone with Asperger's.

However, if you want a more "neutral" term, would Introvert help?

Such a person - an `Ixxx` on the Myers-Briggs scale \- typically finds their "energy levels" drain when in groups of people, and recharge when they are on their own.
> 6 votes

# Answer
The description strongly matches with Autism, Autism spectrum disorder and Asperger syndrome.

See also:

1. Asperger syndrome
2. Autism spectrum condition
3. Autism

Classically, Asperger syndrome was characterised by no obvious delay in language development, and in some cases Aspergers tend to have a very vast vocabulary.

I did not understand what is meant by a neutral term.

Autism is not a bad word at all. Many autistics consider autism as their identity, or the right term to explain who are they and what does the typically developing people require to know about them.
> 5 votes

---
Tags: social-psychology, terminology
---


# Question
Title: how to train our brain to always use left part for thinking & deciding things?
how to train our brain to always use left part for thinking & deciding things? How do I not take emotional decisions

# Answer
> 3 votes
**Q: how to train our brain to always use left part for thinking & deciding things? How do I not take emotional decisions?**

**A:** For the second question, you can train to take rational rather than emotional decisions by trying to use reasons and logic over emotions every time you make a decision. This can be trained and you’ll succeed in the long run; it will become your trained habit. It does not matter which side of the brain is dominating in the process of making those rational decisions, so you do not have to worry about it. The brain will find its way to achieve the goal if you train yourself consistently. The desired habit will form.

For the first question, we have no control over which side or which area of the brain to use when we perform any mental task. It all occurs automatically by the wiring of the brain, which is determined both by our genetics and environmental factors (both nature and nurture, that is). These wiring can be modified to some degree by environmental factors; training is one of them. And as others have pointed out in their answers, the brain lateralization is not simple and clear cut – the language (symbol), rationality, and order are not 100% on the left hemisphere, nor are art, emotion, and creativity 100% on the right hemisphere.

> One popular example is Betty Edwards' Drawing on the Right Side of the Brain, first published in 1979 but now in its fourth edition \[7\], which epitomizes the popular view that the right hemisphere is responsible for creativity. Brain imaging shows, though, that creative thought activates a widespread network, favoring neither hemisphere \[8\]. A more recent example is Iain McGilchrist's 2009 book The Master and His Emissary, which draws on cerebral asymmetry in a sweeping account of the forces that shaped Western culture, and provocatively declares the right hemisphere to be the dominant one (“the master”) \[9\]. Although widely acclaimed, this book goes far beyond the neurological facts. Polarities of left and right brain are broadly invoked in art, business, education, literary theory, and culture, but owe more to the power of myth than to the scientific evidence \[10\]. \[Ref 1\]

In the end, you can train yourself to make rational decisions and to do many other things without having to demand (or to concern) which side of the brain is mainly doing that for you, just by training and training.

**References:**

1. Corballis MC. Left Brain, Right Brain: Facts and Fantasies. PloS Biol. 2014 Jan; 12(1): e1001767. doi:10.1371/journal.pbio.1001767
2. Editorial. The Neural Basis of hemispheric specialization. Neuropsychologia. 2016; 93: 319-324.

# Answer
> 4 votes
Unfortunately this question is based on a false premise. Thanks for asking. The oversimplified view on brain lateralisation is so stubbornly persistant and it invaded so many meditation guides, self help blogs, pseudoscientific faith healing and even job interviewer criteria, that it is now a part of "viral" phenomenon.

Yes, brain lateralisation exists. But it does not work in the oversimplified way they describe.

Interestingly, M. Gazzaniga shown sometimes the "random versus linear" relation work in sort of \[opposite\]\[1\] way than the popular myth.

> Writing an overview of the split-brain research in a 2002 article for Scientific American, Gazzaniga concluded, based on the interpreter phenomenon and other findings, that the left hemisphere is “inventive and interpreting,” whilst the right brain is “truthful and literal.” This seems at odds with the myth invoked by Rabbi Sacks and many others.

\[1\]\[https://www.psychologytoday.com/intl/blog/brain-myths/201206/why-the-left-brain-right-brain-myth-will-probably-never-die\]

# Answer
> 2 votes
I think you are sadly asking for the impossible. Your primitive brain is in charge of decisions, because your survival in a dangerous situation still depends (as it did in early evolution) on your quickest reactions (jumping out of the way of a speeding car for instance). There isn't time for you to rationalise that it could be practical to remove yourself from the path of the car, you just need to jump, so fear (emotion) fuels your movement before your conscious brain is aware of needing a reaction. (Also explains why phobias seem so consciously irrational) There is research showing that your emotional decisions are made a split second before the conscious (rational) mind is even aware of the issue. Humans make emotional decisions, then provide rational justification for why those decisions were made. Here is one ref on these lines, though there are many more, https://www.annualreviews.org/doi/full/10.1146/annurev-psych-010213-115043

---
Tags: cognitive-psychology, brain, brain-training
---


# Question
Title: Are self-described "socially conscious" individuals less likely to show implicit bias as measured by the implicit association test (IAT)?
Many individuals, in particular young progressives, incorporate their attitudes on gender and race into their identity. I am wondering if people who consider themselves socially conscious in this respect are less likely to show implicit bias as measured by the implicit association test (IAT). For example, do people who frequently and openly discuss and defend LGBT rights show less implicit bias (or reverse bias) towards LBGT individuals?

# Answer
The relationship between implicit bias and individual behaviour is not direct and does not satisfactorily explain biased behaviour on an individual basis.

There are two studies that looked at cardiovascular disease, which does propose some interesting hypotheses. These studies add to the growing evidence that bias whether implicit or explicit is significant at a group or community level instead of at an individual basis. This 2014 a study of 503 cardiologists by Daugherty et al. performed implicit gender bias test and asked the cardiologists to go through a clinical vignette. The differences the recommendations in the clinical vignette according to gender was not wholly explained by the differences in the implicit bias test. We know there is a bias against aggressive management of heart disease in women by cardiologists in general by previous studies.

> * The utility of secondary stress testing after an abnormal exercise treadmill test was rated as “high” more often for female than male patients (32.8% versus 24.3%, P=0.04); this difference did not vary with implicit bias. Angiography was more consistently rated as having “high” utility for male versus female patients (part 1: 19.7% versus 9.8%; part 2: 73.7% versus 64.3%; P\<0.05 for both); this difference was larger for cardiologists with higher implicit gender bias on risk taking (P=0.01)

At a community level however, there is a strong correlation between communities that have a high level of black racial bias and higher rates of black deaths from circulatory diseases. This 2016 study by Leitner et al mapped over 1.4 million responses of white participants to US counties through a national survey and found that counties with high rates of implicit and explicit bias against blacks had far higher rates of "circulatory disease and in circulatory-disease-related death rates" than counties with lower racial bias. Although this study does not solely focus on implicit racial bias, (it included explicit racial bias), it does provide food for thought.

> * (I)n counties with high (1 SD above the mean) explicit racial bias, the difference between Blacks’ and Whites’ death rates was 62 deaths per 100,000. In contrast, in counties with low (1 SD below the mean) explicit bias, the difference was 35 deaths per 100,000... We made this estimate at the average Black population level in counties for which we had death-rate data for Blacks (average Black population = 28,598); 11 more Blacks per county were predicted to die annually in high-explicit-bias counties (95 deaths) than in low-explicit-bias counties (84 deaths).

**References:**

Daugherty Stacie L., Blair Irene V., Havranek Edward P., Furniss Anna, Dickinson L. Miriam, Karimkhani Elhum, … Masoudi Frederick A. (n.d.). Implicit Gender Bias and the Use of Cardiovascular Tests Among Cardiologists. Journal of the American Heart Association, 6(12), e006872. https://doi.org/10.1161/JAHA.117.006872

Leitner, J. B., Hehman, E., Ayduk, O., & Mendoza-Denton, R. (2016). Blacks’ Death Rate Due to Circulatory Diseases Is Positively Related to Whites’ Explicit Racial Bias: A Nationwide Investigation Using Project Implicit. Psychological Science. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797616658450
> 2 votes

---
Tags: social-psychology, bias
---


title: Schwartz Value Survey (SVS)

text:
# Question
Title: Schwartz Value Survey (SVS)
I am looking for the Schwartz Value Survey (SVS; Schwartz, 1992). I seem to have found a copy here in the appendix of this paper but I'm not quite sure if it is okay to use it the way it is presented, or if I need permission to use this scale in my research. I would appreciate any help; thanks in advance.

# Answer
> 0 votes
The first Schwartz Value Survey (SVS) was published in 1992 which consisted of 56 items. Since then, it has gone through a couple changes. A current version employs 57 items. The SVS56 and SVS57 are different, with one item changed and one item added in the SVS57. Schwartz & Sagiv (1995) is the first article using the SVS57.

A 'face' item was added in 2004, the final survey consisting of 58 items.

The SVS57 is available here with a short scoring key included as well. However, I recommend going through the full manual with additional resources, available here.

---
Tags: measurement
---


# Question
Title: What is the relationship between mathematical ability and autism?
There have been studies \[1\],\[2\] investigating the relationship between autism spectrum conditions (ASCs) and mathematical or scientific ability. In the first study, Baron-Cohen et al (2007) examined 378 undergraduate mathematics students with 414 students from other disciplines (medicine, law, social science). There was a ninefold increase in the rates of autism in the mathematics group compared to the control group (seven cases of autism 1.85% in the math group vs one case of autism 0.24% in the control group).

There is some evidence that seem to indicate that individuals with higher mathematical ability *might* have more autistic traits. Baron-Cohen has suggested that there is an empathizing–systemizing difference where empathy is mutually exclusive to systematizing or conceptualization but this is hotly contested \[3\].

So what is the relationship between mathematical ability and autism?

*(The distinction between postgrad and undergrad maths is discussed in another question - Is there any evidence for the distinction between undergrad and postgrad mathematics?*)

---

**References**

> \[1\] Baron-Cohen, Simon, Sally Wheelwright, Amy Burtenshaw, and Esther Hobson. "Mathematical talent is linked to autism." Human nature 18, no. 2 (2007): 125-131.
>
> \[2\] Baron-Cohen, Simon, Sally Wheelwright, Richard Skinner, Joanne Martin, and Emma Clubley. "The autism-spectrum quotient (AQ): Evidence from Asperger syndrome/high-functioning autism, males and females, scientists and mathematicians." Journal of autism and developmental disorders 31, no. 1 (2001): 5-17.
>
> \[3\] Baron-Cohen, S. (2009). The empathising-systemising theory of autism: Implications for education. Tizard Learning Disability Review, 14, 4–13. https://doi.org/10.1108/13595474200900022

# Answer
> 2 votes
It can range from savant-like skills to extreme dyscalculia, some are very mean or average.

The savant stereotype is caused mostly by many Western films which is applicable only for a small fraction of ASD population; for the others in ASD spectrum it is misleading and unhelpful.

---
Tags: autism, mathematical-ability, aspergers
---


# Question
Title: Does everyone have some degree of Aspergers?
I have taken some tests for Asperger's which gives a rating point, and the higher you score its more likely that you have asperger. I was just wondering if this means that there are degrees of asperger, that everyone is asperger to some degree, or is this rating just a property of the test, and people either have asperger syndrome or not?

# Answer
> 11 votes
Whatever test you took, it does not test Asperger. It tests for symptoms that are typical in someone with Asperger.

For example one Asperger test asks you to rate the following statement (translated from German) on a skale from *1 = "totally disagree"* to *4 = totally agree"*:

1. I prefer to spend my leisure time with other people rather than alone.

Now of course people with Asperger often tend to stay by themselves and undertake things alone rather than with friends, but many non-Asperger people might feel that they sometimes enjoy time alone also, for example if they are naturally shy and find being with others enjoyable but exhausting, or if they have a job dealing with people and they like to have some free time by themselves to relax from the constant interaction.

Just this weekend I read an interview with one of the most influential German movie directors, Doris Dörrie, who said how she likes to go on holidays by herself, especially to foreign countries where she cannot interact with anyone because she does not speak the language, and she goes on to tell how she went to Japan and enjoyed her aloneness tremendously and spent whole days basking in being outside society and looking on. Totally Asperger, if you think about it. But her job is to intensely interact with people, and she simply needs time off from that.

It's totally unremarkable that many people show some of the behaviors or emotions that people with Asperger (or other psychological disorders) show. It does not mean that they have Asperger to some degree. Rather, if someone rates very high in that test, that is merely an indication that they very likely have Asperger. No psychological diagnosis relies purely on a single self-report measure, but on a complex series of observation, interviews, and a battery of tests.

---

Also see the answer by Eoin for a different perspective on the question.

# Answer
> 6 votes
Two additional points to the previous answer from `what`.

* With the release of the 5th edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-5), Asperger's is no longer classified as a condition in its own right, but as Autism coupled with high intelligence and intact language skills.
* Almost all accounts of Autism hold that it exists as a **spectrum**, or a **continuum**: some people are very typical of the condition, some people are very strongly the opposite, and most people are somewhere in between.

Autism (and Asperger's) is characterized by a 'triad of impairments' to social interaction,communication (less so for Asperger's), and flexible imaginative functions (i.e. repeated/stereotyped behaviours and interests). Obviously, these are traits that vary across the general population as well (I, like many scientists, can be very focused and one-track in my interests).

I recently also came across a paper by Happé and Ronald (2008) (link) arguing that, genetically speaking, these traits vary independently of each other in the general population. It's only when someone has high levels of all three that they are diagnosed as having Autism.

Finally, for an even more broad theory of Autistic traits in the general population, take a look at Simon Baron-Cohen's extreme male brain theory of autism, which states that people differ in the fundamental trait of being either 'empathizing' or 'systematizing', with men tending to be more 'systematizing'. Autism, then, is just a case of being more like a male brain then usual, or super-systematizing.

I hope this is some help!

# Answer
> 1 votes
No. Everyone is not a little bit autistic. Everyone may not be "typically developing" in some or some aspect; but autism is not universal.

**Apparently Same symptoms or same behaviour may have complete different reasons.**

Aspergers is predominately a communication problem and problem with social guesswork. Usually a vast number of other complaints co-occur which are invisible from outside. It not necessarily includes introversion, rather the introversion is sometimes a byproduct of failed communication with peer group.

Some typically developing people may be shy or introverted. Who do not like to make friends. But they have good social skills.

Some people may develop narcissistic personality disorder. Which is a problem about ego. They may have manipulative nature. They tend to have good understanding of social cues.

In some cases these condition may be co-occuring. However everyone is not autistic, and there isn't a thing like being a "little bit" autistic. *Being in even very mild end of ASD spectrum is usually a very stressful condition, however the invisibility of the disability often blends it so much indistinguishably* with typically developing population.

Another situation of similar superficial appearance, Also Say for a restless uncontrollable behaviour may look common with ADHD and some ASD as well as typically developing. But the inherent reason may be very different. Such as for ADHD it may be a shifting attention and energetic impulse, whereas in ASD it may be the anxiety developed from lack of predictability of a real life process going on. A typically developing person can do the same due to joy or anger or boredom but they have better response inhibition. Even bipolar patients may have indistinguishable symptom, but that is due to an unusual state of mood and feeling, even without triggered by another reason.

Psychology is very tricky. Not only behaviours but the reasons behind behaviour to be considered.

---
Tags: aspergers
---


# Question
Title: Is stacking cans really a sign of Asperger's?
Wikipedia says:

> People with Asperger syndrome often display restricted or specialized interests, such as this boy's interest in stacking cans.

How predictive is this of Asperger's: What percentage of normal boys and boys with Asperger's display this type of behavior, respectively?

# Answer
> 3 votes
Symptoms of Asperger’s Syndrome

* difficulty recognizing social cues
* awkward body language
* social isolation
* aloofness
* fixation on certain objects

The picture (and idea) that “stacking cans” is in itself a sign of Asperger’s is misleading at best. One could just as easily say this child is making “a tower”, a common activity amongst children.

Asperger at Psychotherapy Collective

Stacking objects can be a child development tool.

Childhood development tools

# Answer
> 1 votes
Autism is usually a range or spectrum of co-morbid symptoms that greatly vary from one autistic individual to another. As an only common characteristic we may say that autism is a disability in social cognition.

Even no two aspergers are same (and now the term Asperger has been merged with ASD since there is not a clear distinction of Asperger and other ASD. Initially Aspergers was distinguished from most other types of autism that do not have any speech or language delay (WHO, ICD-10 , DSM-4) though internally it is very same to other forms of autisms.

We may say that arranging objects (such as laundry clips, pen caps, pebbles, blocks, sticks etc) may help recognise autism, but it is not a conclusive by any means. Almost any kids do some amounts of constructive play. If a kid likes to line up toys, no need to panic, it is probably not autism, its probably a very common kid, playing with stuffs. However if there are combination of social difficulties then maybe it is autism and the kid needs support and understanding.

Conversly, someone is autistic does not mean they will obsessively arrange toys in arrays. Some will watch TVs, some will sit still, some will jump or pace up or some will try to socialise but eventually fail. Or some will sit beside the window, or some will not look anything such readily recognisable. ASD is a spectrum of conditions, not one single condition.

Lining up toys that is only one observation on behaviour but there are many more other aspects such as some common characteristics are difficulties comprehending social norms and cues, failing to guesswork on social expectations, lack or inappropriateness in using body language, lack of eye contact, lacking sense of personal boundary, irritability with change of address or routine or living methods or arrangement of things, hypersensitivity or hyposensitivity (or combination of these 2) towards sound noise, light, smell, tastes, texture, in some cases difficulty with fine motor skills, learning difficulties such as dyscalculia or dyslexia, problems with facial recognition etc. However these symptoms usually occur in a combination and vary greatly within ASD individual.

Yes, punding, patterning and constructive play (and some cases disinterest or difficulty or inability in pretend play or role play game) is one of the common feature of ASD, and not necessarily tin cans but these infants may find some other materials, and not only lining up but they may engage in making more type of arrays and patterns, however *only 1 characteristic is not even close to conclusive.*

---
Tags: autism, aspergers
---


# Question
Title: Why seemingly all the neuronal membrane-bound receptor are exclusively GPCR or highly homologous to GPCR family?
Nicotinic AchR is known for long to be an ion channel receptor however it has been argued whether it is a GPCR, as well Muscarinic AchR is known to be GPCR. Seemingly many other nerve cell bound receptors like Serotonin receptor, Melatonin receptors, Dopamine receptors, Adrenaline and Nor-adrenaline receptors, known to be G-protein coupled receptor (GPCRs). Although GABA receptors are not directly GPCR by functionality, wikipedia tells a subtype of GABA receptor. is probably GPCR.

So I have basically 2 part in this question:

1. Why GPCR or receptors homologous to GPCR are so common in nerve cells?
2. Are there neuronal receptors which do not have homology with GPCRs?

# Answer
> 1 votes
I think you're confused about proteins that *are* GPCRs versus having homology. GABA-B is another that *is* a GPCR (it is not particularly related to GABA-A). These are also called metabotropic receptors.

Ionotropic receptors are from separate families, many from the Cys-loop family (see Sine & Engel, 2006) with a characteristic 5-subunit composition, or the heterotetrameric structure shared among related glutamate receptors (see Dingledine et al 1999).

Your link for nAChR doesn't seem to argue that it is homologous to GPCRs, instead it describes a possible interaction with that channel with g-proteins.

Additionally, none of this is special for neurons: because all modern proteins evolved from previous ones, there is substantial homology within protein families that can often be traced even between vertebrates and bacteria. Within the GPCR family, many different proteins have evolved different sensitivities and different specific g-protein interactions, but the general concept is conserved: something binds outside the cell, causing an internal conformational change that affects a g-protein. The ionotropic receptors are much different.

---

Dingledine, R., Borges, K., Bowie, D., & Traynelis, S. F. (1999). The glutamate receptor ion channels. Pharmacological reviews, 51(1), 7-62.

Sine, S. M., & Engel, A. G. (2006). Recent advances in Cys-loop receptor structure and function. Nature, 440(7083), 448.

---
Tags: neuro-transmitters, cell-signaling
---


# Question
Title: Cingulate cortex vs Limbic lobe are they same or slightly different?
I've read the wikipedia article on Cingulate cortex and the article about limbic lobe. Also did web search but it is not clear to me whether they are synonymous or there are slight differences in the parts they include.

**UPDATE:**

it seems search terms for "limbic system" and "limbic lobe" giving me a different google search result. There also are wikipedia pages on

1. Cingulate cortex,
2. Limbic Lobe ,
3. Limbic System .

where cingulate cortex (1) is confusingly similar to Limbic lobe (2) but Limbic system (3) seem to be different (but inclusive) terminology from limbic lobe (2).

So I want to know if limbic "lobe" and cingulate cortex are synonymous or they differ in the areas they include.

# Answer
> 2 votes
Updated answer: The limbic lobe (aka limbic cortex) is made up of the cingulate gyrus and the parahippocampal gyrus (so the cingulate gyrus is only part of the limbic lobe). The limbic lobe is part of the limbic system. There is some disagreement over what the limbic system includes, but some of the other areas contained in the limbic system include the subcallosal gyrus, hippocampus, and amygdala.

---
Tags: terminology, brain, neuroanatomy, definition
---


# Question
Title: What's the memory capacity of the human brain?
This article,

Human brain can store..

claims the memory has a capacity of around 1 petabyte or quadrillion bytes.

This other one,

What's the memory capacity of the human brain

claims the memory storage capacity is around 2,5 petabytes.

What's the memory capacity of the human brain? Or at least the most widely accepted estimate?

# Answer
> 3 votes
I don't know the answer to your question but I'm not aware of anyone who does.

The paper referred to in the first article above is Bartol et al. (2015) in eLife (https://cdn.elifesciences.org/articles/10778/elife-10778-v2.pdf). This paper is a proposal of how one might estimate the storage capacity of a synapse. Their current estimate is 4.7 bits per synapse. The article states that more work is needed to get an accurate estimate. The paper does not provide a definitive answer to your question. There is not much research on this subject at the moment, probably because there are still many things we don't yet know about the nature of memory. In time we may find that a completely different method to Bartol's gives a better estimate.

The figure of 1 petabyte is not given in Bartol's paper. This value may have been given in the press release or it could have been calculated by the journalist (by multiplying the estimated synapse capacity by an estimated number of synapses). The estimate of the number of synapses in the brain is the subject of research itself. Bartol's paper says that there are 'many trillions of synapses', which doesn't give us enough information to calculate. The figure needed to get 1 petabyte is around 200 trillion synapses, if my maths is to be trusted. The figure of 1 petabyte is the product of two estimates that may or may not be right, so it's probably not reliable.

The second article is a Professor's response to this question. He says, in essence, that we don't yet know the answer and it would be difficult to calculate.

We still have so much to learn about memory. I suspect it will be some time before we know the answer to your question.

---
Tags: memory, brain
---


# Question
Title: Is it possible to develop dementia by eating bone marrow?
A psychiatrist once told me to avoid eating bone marrow because it could contain prions that could cause dementia. However, I haven't been able to find any studies that confirm this. Could this happen?

# Answer
> 4 votes
You might be referring to **Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease** (CJD). It is transmitted through exposure to brain tissue and spinal cord fluid from infected individuals.

> CJD is characterized by rapidly **progressive dementia**.

The leading scientific theory at this time maintains that CJD and the other transmissible spongiform encephalopathies (TSEs) are caused by a type of protein called a prion.

CJD is indeed caused by prions: proteins that occur in both a normal form, which is a harmless protein found in the body’s cells, and in an infectious form, which causes disease. The harmless and infectious forms of the prion protein have the same sequence of amino acids, but the infectious form of the protein takes a different folded shape than the normal protein. Sporadic CJD may develop because some of a person’s normal prions spontaneously change into the infectious form of the protein and then alter the prions in other cells in a chain reaction.

<sub>**Sources**
**-** NIH Fact Sheet
**-** WHO</sub>

# Answer
> 1 votes
Prions are sort of protein with such a distorted conformation that convert its benign/ essential form into prion forms. Thus they can multiply which is comparable to reproduction in virus and viroids.

if an animal is infected with prions then it is better to not eat any of the part of that animal. Not necessarily bone marrow but of any part. Prion disease also spreads through funerary cannibalism ritual. . Prion is a great concern about biosafety. Prion-infected cattles are not burried or left into nature but incinerated. There are disputes about whether burning is sufficient. Dementia is too mild term to describe prion infection, they are extreme debilitating, progressive, usually fatal, and usually affect the brain and nervous system. Most prion diseases are fatal within a few months, though some can last a few years.

**Some prion diseases are Scrapie, Kuru, Mad cow disease, Fatal insomnia etc.**

Prions can also spread through grafting, blood transfusion etc. and standard biosafety procedures to kill bacteria and virus does not work on prions. They require a more harsh sterilisation procedure.

---
Tags: neuroscience, neurology
---


# Question
Title: Are brain sub-divisions based off embryonic development used when describing mature brains?
Are the terms for brain divisions based off of embryonic development (e.g. prosencephalon, diencephalon) used for mature brain divisions? (e.g. forebrain, interbrain). For example, would it be wrong to say that the cortex of an adult human a part of their "prosencephalon"/"telencephalon"? I've seen texts refer to the "telencephalon" of an adult brain, though it has mostly been in a developmental context--and from my experience I haven't seen it explicitly stated when to use either term so I'm not fully sure if they're synonymous.

# Answer
> 3 votes
From my point of view, the terminology regarding the early three vesicles *prosencephalon*, (forebrain), *mesencephalon* (midbrain), and *rhombencephalon* (hindbrain) as well as the later developmental structures arising from these structures, namely *telencephalon*, *diencephalon*, *mesencephalon*, *metencephalon*, and the *myelencephalon* are mainly of use when discussing **embryonic development**. Alternatively it can be sensible to group various brain structures according to embryonic origin when discussing, e.g., infants with **developmental brain disorders**, with the origin very early in development. In this case the congregate of brain structures arising from an early embryonic vesicle may be affected.

I have seen authors swinging around these anatomical terms outside the context of development and quite frankly, it often doesn't make sense and only complicates matters as one has to trace back the structures arising from it later in life. Not being an anatomist, my humble opinion would be, wherever possible, to avoid these terms.

# Answer
> 0 votes
For school or college level biology class these hierarchical classification schemes (based on devbio) are still sometimes used and it helps me greatly to conceptualise the brain structure and basic folding as well as to get a meaningful mental framework to put the so many other small parts of brain.

Learning about a smaller brain part (say for example the parietal lobe, or for say hippocampus or amygdala or superior colliculi etc) and not knowing whether they belong to prosencephalon or mesencephalon or telencephalon (or some other level of structural hierarchy) will make me feel afraid and bizarre, and i would also fail to conceptualise and visualise the zones. the names of zones will appear like a chaotic crowd of plastic balls.

---
Tags: neuroanatomy
---


# Question
Title: How to measure/predict the difficulty of a conflict?
**Question**

I want to conduct an experiment and I found that the difficulty of a conflict to resolve could play a factor in this experiment. I now need an easy way of measuring the potential difficulty of a conflict, so that I can control this factor.

**Own Proposal**

I'm coming from StackOverflow and am used to present own proposals (since psychology is not primarily my field of expertise I wanted to have your opinion for my approach: I thought of a questionnaire that is supposed to measure various factors that could influence the difficulty of a conflict. The factors I thought of are:

* **Personal Involvement** (PI): The potential change and stress that a given conflict can have on the life of a conflict party. e.g. a colleague is telling you to bring out the trash while you don't feel like doing it.
* **Influence of Emotions** (IoE): How strong Emotions influence conflicts.
* **Objective vs. Subjective** (OvS): Are Arguments in the conflict based on evidence or are more testimonial kind.
* **Risk** (R): What is the probability and damage of an undesired outcome for a conflict party?
* **Level of Society** (LoS): 1-to-1 vs. 1-to-many vs. many-to-many, also is it a conflict between countries of just a few people. personal-family-inner friend circle-outer friend circle-foreign groups-countries-cultures ... just to give some example to what that could include.
* **potential violence** (PV): Probability and potential dangerousness of on party using violent measures.
* **explicitness** of conflict result(s) (ECR): I think some conflicts have explicit results like "Do Aliens exist?" and some don't necessarily have a definite answer like "What is an appropiate outfit for a woman? (which is answered differently in different cultures)"
* **conflict** resolution skills of the conflict partys (CRS): This also might include negotiating and communication skills as well.
* **medium** (M): speech, written, social network, face-to-face, etc.

I then thought of measuring those metrics on a scale of 1-7, weight them and add them add for some kind of conflict difficulty score:

Say Risk has a 10% influence on the conflict difficulty the weight, therefore, would be 0,1\*(Scale of Risk). I also think this way the result might be 2 different scores depending on the partys point of view.

I also think that some of the metrics I proposed are not needed or cannot be measured using a questionnaire like the medium for example. But before I really go all the way to create a new questionnaire I wanted to know if I'm on the right track, if there is literature on this topic I missed, if I missed other important factors and so on.

**Background**

I have implemented a chat tool for my bachelors thesis, that displays emotions and handles profanity in messages differently. I know want to evaluate this software. The goal of this software is to improve communication in conflict situations and a new solution for hate speech in social networks. I also have a software engineer background and this is my first question in the psychology sector.

# Answer
> 0 votes
Questionnaires and measurement scales typically take a lot of revision and validation. Otherwise, it is very common that you measure things you don't intend to measure, are missing relevant options, or omit critical factors entirely.

I'd recommend some piloting and to use existing and validated measures whenever possible.

Some of your items sound incredibly broad to me. Are you going to rate "influence of emotions" on a 7-point scale by asking people "On a scale of 1-7, how emotional do you feel about this situation?" That might be fine, but there's also a ton of nuance to emotion that will be missed.

You also have a lot of factors, so it will take a *lot* of data to resolve their relative influence (potentially hundreds of cases; thousands if you care about interactions between factors) in order to determine proper weights, and you *still* need to come up with a ground truth "conflict difficulty" outcome measure. Otherwise you are just guessing at weights which isn't very useful.

Make sure you have IRB approval before continuing with human subjects research (I've been surprised how unaware some tech people are about regulatory requirements, especially at Academia.SE).

Given this is a bachelors' thesis, it may be sufficient to *start* some of these processes rather than *complete* them. It might be simpler to just do an experiment, test two versions of your software, and compare some satisfaction outcomes. You won't know which conflicts were more difficult, but you won't necessarily have to: you can rely on random assignment to assume that the comparison groups are equal.

---
Tags: social-psychology, measurement, experiment-design, social-networks, conflict
---


# Question
Title: Excluding psychometry and interview methods, is there any physical or molecular method that can confirm mild autism?
ASD is a set of very much heterogeneous symptoms with some common characteristics like lack of eye contact, lack of social guesswork, difficulty in learning unwritten social norms or conventions, missing the sense of personal boundary of other people, lacking or inappropriate gesture, restricted repeatitive and intense interests, etc.

The interview and psychometry methods, sort of, work, still misdiagnosis ain both ways, are common and develop controversies and harasses. Delayed diagnosis is also a fact.

But my question is; do we yet have any "confirmed" and reliable test for ASD particularly those at the "mild" end of the spectrum? Such as a scan-based technique such as MRI/ fMRI/ DTI or say electrophysilology techniques such as EEG or qEEG or molecular tests like DNA blotting or DNA sequencing or Elisa etc does such physical or molecular techniques can characterise ASDs??

Notably, this article says no significant anatomical difference found in a large-scale analysis using ABIDE database.

# Answer
> 1 votes
No.

The key term that will help you look for research about this is the word "biomarker".

There are certainly correlations with autism and some of the measurement techniques, but they aren't specific enough to be used for diagnosis.

Plitt et al 2015 compared fMRI classification to a behavioral scale in high-functioning ASD vs IQ-matched typically developing. Their best imaging classification was about 77% accurate (and that's probably an overestimate due to selecting the 'best'), whereas behavioral classification was 95% accurate. This result is consistent with other studies.

It's possible to use these methods to find biomarkers at better than chance levels, but unless they become equivalent to other diagnostic methods, it is the diagnosis used to evaluate the biomarker rather than the biomarker used to evaluate the diagnosis.

---

Abraham, A., Milham, M. P., Di Martino, A., Craddock, R. C., Samaras, D., Thirion, B., & Varoquaux, G. (2017). Deriving reproducible biomarkers from multi-site resting-state data: an autism-based example. NeuroImage, 147, 736-745.

Ecker, C., Bookheimer, S. Y., & Murphy, D. G. (2015). Neuroimaging in autism spectrum disorder: brain structure and function across the lifespan. The Lancet Neurology, 14(11), 1121-1134.

Loth, E., Spooren, W., Ham, L. M., Isaac, M. B., Auriche-Benichou, C., Banaschewski, T., ... & Charman, T. (2016). Identification and validation of biomarkers for autism spectrum disorders. Nature Reviews Drug Discovery, 15(1), 70.

Plitt, M., Barnes, K. A., & Martin, A. (2015). Functional connectivity classification of autism identifies highly predictive brain features but falls short of biomarker standards. NeuroImage: Clinical, 7, 359-366.

Uddin, L. Q., Dajani, D. R., Voorhies, W., Bednarz, H., & Kana, R. K. (2017). Progress and roadblocks in the search for brain-based biomarkers of autism and attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder. Translational psychiatry, 7(8), e1218.

---
Tags: methodology, eeg, fmri, autism, genetics
---


# Question
Title: Adept noticing of microexpressions by autistic people
A recent conversation article argued that microexpressions may be picked up at a high rate by a subset of people with autism. Usually, autistic people are thought to be unable or inadept at social cues and social expressions.

Is there any evidence for this subset of adept microaggression assessors?

> Be aware that a subset of people with autism are highly adept at noticing micro expressions, the very quick expressions that flit across someone’s face before they “rearrange” into a socially acceptable reaction. The people able to perceive this, however, are often unaware that they are supposed to ignore those expressions and respond to the “public face” instead. This can lead to social awkwardness.

# Answer
> 2 votes
Clark et al, 2008 show *impairment* in ASD individuals for detection of the emotional content of microexpressions.

In general, ASD individuals have trouble discriminating the nuance of facial expressions (though some argue otherwise: see for example Ozonoff et al 1990), for example the differences between genuine smiles and posed smiles (for example, Boraston et al 2008); ASD individuals can *learn/train* to improve recognition of these cues, however (for example, Solomon et al 2004).

Tardif et al 2007 suggests that slowing down a discrimination task improves performance for ASD individuals, again suggesting that impairments may be worse for briefer displays like microexpressions. This result is also consistent with the idea that, for some ASD individuals, detecting emotions is more about learned rules rather than the more "automatic" emotional detection process for typically developing people.

Overall, I don't see evidence for the claim in the linked article. That said, ASD individuals are each unique humans, and there could certainly be specific individuals who are sensitive to or have learned to recognize microexpressions, but the article doesn't cite any reference. A general caution to be aware of and sympathetic to difficulties with social cues for ASD folks applying for jobs makes sense to me; connecting this to enhanced microexpression detection does not.

(I'd add, also, that the existence, nature, and ubiquity of microexpressions is a bit controversial: see Porter & ten Brinke 2008)

---

Boraston, Z. L., Corden, B., Miles, L. K., Skuse, D. H., & Blakemore, S. J. (2008). Brief report: Perception of genuine and posed smiles by individuals with autism. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 38(3), 574-580.

Clark, T. F., Winkielman, P., & McIntosh, D. N. (2008). Autism and the extraction of emotion from briefly presented facial expressions: stumbling at the first step of empathy. Emotion, 8(6), 803.

Porter, S., & ten Brinke, L. (2008). Reading between the lies: Identifying concealed and falsified emotions in universal facial expressions. Psychological science, 19(5), 508-514.

Ozonoff, S., Pennington, B. F., & Rogers, S. J. (1990). Are there emotion perception deficits in young autistic children?. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 31(3), 343-361.

Solomon, M., Goodlin-Jones, B. L., & Anders, T. F. (2004). A social adjustment enhancement intervention for high functioning autism, Asperger’s syndrome, and pervasive developmental disorder NOS. Journal of autism and developmental disorders, 34(6), 649-668.

Tardif, C., Lainé, F., Rodriguez, M., & Gepner, B. (2007). Slowing down presentation of facial movements and vocal sounds enhances facial expression recognition and induces facial–vocal imitation in children with autism. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 37(8), 1469-1484.

Winkielman, P., McIntosh, D. N., & Oberman, L. (2009). Embodied and disembodied emotion processing: Learning from and about typical and autistic individuals. Emotion Review, 1(2), 178-190.

---
Tags: autism, aggression
---