Autism Test

[Carl-Richard]

13 minutes ago, integral said:

only 2 wrong is out of this world, i dont think normal people can do that, unless i really am autistic, i am guessing in the majority of does

I need to see there whole face, i cant do it with just the eyes.

Might be because i struggled to make eye contact for most of my life and eye contact is torture.

Eye contact is like sex, its extremely intimate

Eye contact became substantially breezier for me after awakening. But eye contact is a skill like anything and arguably most people prefer eye contact to fluctuate quite substantially which is natural, even very extroverted people. You can actually notice when you're talking to (most) people that they will break eye contact regularly when you're the one talking. When you're talking it's much more natural to engage in eye contact because you're talking "to" them. It's when you're listening that you're more likely to fluctuate.

The mistake if you think you struggle with eye contact is to pull through and become like a space laser when you're with people. You should rather find a natural rhythm of look, think, actually listen to what they're saying. If you just stare at someone who is talking to you to the point where you don't even hear what they're saying, well, what's the point of that? You want to "be with" someone, hear them, feel them.

Eye contact is usually like a game of call and receive that happens naturally. For example: somebody looks at you when talking, you look at them, then they look away, then you keep looking at them a bit more and then you look away, then they look at you again, then you notice that they're looking and you look at them again, then you might look away and think about what they're saying, then they look away, then you look at them again, etc. Because eye contact can be experienced as quite intense like you're saying, it's natural for it to go through cycles where the intensity breaks/decreases and then increases again.

 

Here are more "performance" type tests that don't rely on self-report:

Quote

 

| Test | What you actually do | What it assesses |

|---|---|---|

| **Movie for the Assessment of Social Cognition (MASC)** | Watch a film about four people meeting for dinner and answer questions about their feelings, thoughts and intentions. | Understanding mental states within a social context. ([Clinical Psychology of Social Interaction][1]) |

| **Reading the Mind in Films Test** | Watch short scenes and identify characters’ emotions or mental states. | Complex emotion recognition using moving faces, voices and context. ([Autism Research Centre][2]) |

| **Cambridge Mindreading Face–Voice Battery (CAM)** | Identify complex emotions from facial video clips and voice recordings. | Recognition of emotions through facial expressions and voices. ([pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov][3]) |

| **Reading the Mind in the Voice Test** | Listen to speech recordings and select the appropriate mental-state description. | Understanding emotional tone and other vocal cues. ([Autism Research Centre][4]) |

| **Faux Pas Test** | Read or hear stories and identify whether someone unintentionally said something inappropriate or hurtful, and explain why. | Understanding social mistakes, intentions and another person’s perspective. ([Autism Research Centre][5]) |

 

[1]: https://dziobek-lab.org/resources/?utm_source=chatgpt.com "Our tasks & tools"

[2]: https://www.autismresearchcentre.com/tests/reading-the-mind-in-films-test/?utm_source=chatgpt.com "Reading the Mind in Films Test"

[3]: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/16477515/?utm_source=chatgpt.com "The Cambridge Mindreading (CAM) Face-Voice Battery: Testing complex emotion recognition in adults with and without Asperger syndrome."

[4]: https://www.autismresearchcentre.com/tests/reading-the-mind-in-the-voice-test/?utm_source=chatgpt.com "Reading the Mind in the Voice Test"

[5]: https://www.autismresearchcentre.com/tests/faux-pas-test-adult/?utm_source=chatgpt.com "Faux Pas Test (Adult)"

 

https://chatgpt.com/share/6ae730f5-5140-83ed-84dd-2369be8aa6d2

[Leo Gura]

1 hour ago, Carl-Richard said:

Makes no sense for me to take the test when I know what every question does to the score.

There's a thing called self-honesty.

You can still answer the questions honestly without gaming the test.

[Leo Gura]

I got 32 on the eye test.

Those eyes are pretty ambiguous. Like reading tea leaves.

Edited 1 hour ago by Leo Gura

[Psychonaut]

The test is biased. The questions don't answer anything. It is a diagnostic tool for pre-screening. The calculator for the scores is simplistic and the score (the number) is practically meaningless without a proper analysis. For evaluation you need to read the 3 cited papers and understand how a psychologist thinks. I scored 24/50 and I know for a fact that I am neuro-divergent. 

[Psychonaut]

I have started writing a complete analysis of this particular test. It starts with the biased 4P scale which is from 2001. With this trash 4P scale that test can only give a meaningless result. It needs to be at least a 5P scale and I personally would just use a 7P scale for every questionaire, because why bother with a 4P or a 5P scale....

Edited 1 hour ago by Psychonaut

[integral]

17 minutes ago, Carl-Richard said:

Eye contact is usually like a game of call and receive that happens naturally. For example: somebody looks at you when talking, you look at them, then they look away, then you keep looking at them a bit more and then you look away, then they look at you again, then you notice that they're looking and you look at them again, then you might look away and think about what they're saying, then they look away, then you look at them again, etc. Because eye contact can be experienced as quite intense like you're saying, it's natural for it to go through cycles where the intensity breaks/decreases and then increases again.

In my earlier years i couldnt understand what people were saying because i was focusing all my attention on this game. +social stress turning off the brain

All social behaviour was a Conscious process and not automatic.

But im sure most people are aware of all this to, its just it didnt distract them to much

Edited 1 hour ago by integral

[integral]

5 minutes ago, Psychonaut said:

The test is biased. The questions don't answer anything.

Ye would be good if we made a actualized.org test.

@Leo Gura a epistemology test would be awesome. How "Epistemically responsible are you" tests?

Edited 1 hour ago by integral

[LastThursday]

1 hour ago, Carl-Richard said:

I did the Reading The Mind In The Eyes test and scored 34/36.

I got 33/36, surely not? Apparently I can't read Incredulous, Shy or Dispirited. I must work on those in future.

[Psychonaut]

Can you give me a link to the "Reading The Mind in the Eyes" test? I would love to do it.

[LastThursday]

1 hour ago, Carl-Richard said:

Makes no sense for me to take the test when I know what every question does to the score.

I did the Reading The Mind In The Eyes test and scored 34/36. It bypasses the problem of self-report and subconsciously (or consciously) trying to fit a preconceived idea of yourself (or an idealized idea of yourself).

In other words, if someone has anything to gain on being called "not autistic" (or e.g. "not narcissistic"), unless they're completely oblivious to those terms and how they work, you shouldn't trust very much them giving a self-report sheet about it.

https://embrace-autism.com/reading-the-mind-in-the-eyes-test/

@Psychonaut 

[Leo Gura]

16 minutes ago, integral said:

Ye would be good if we made a actualized.org test.

@Leo Gura a epistemology test would be awesome. How "Epistemically responsible are you" tests?

The Epistemic Pervert Test™ 

[integral]

Just now, Leo Gura said:

The Epistemic Pervert Test™ 

😂 hahahah this has to be built, its to good

[Leo Gura]

22 minutes ago, Psychonaut said:

The test is biased.

Well, find us a better test then.

[Leo Gura]

7 minutes ago, integral said:

😂 hahahah this has to be built, its to good

Question #1: Are you a Christian, Mormon, or Scientologist?

If Yes, test over.

"You are a big epistemic pervert. Seek immediate professional help."

Question #2: Do you like to watch Tucker Carlson, Jimmy Dore, Tim Pool, Ben Shaprio, Steven Crowder, or Candice Owens?

Edited 1 hour ago by Leo Gura

[Psychonaut]

5 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

Question #1: Are you a Christian, Mormon, or Scientologist?

If Yes, test over.

"You are a big epistemic pervert. Seek immediate professional help."

I have started building an "impossible" test that basically answers questions like "Are you stupid". It is a test you cannot beat. I started it as a fun 10-point are you enlightened test "Like a shaktipat" test on one of my trash/throwaway domains. It is a pretty fun little test. But it can be beaten by memorizing the correct answers, because all answers are correct, and you can only select one "more-correct" answer than the other ones. It is essentially a collection of spiritual jokes. And I have already defined most of the failure criteria in a folder. I basically designed the test like an epistemic game that you cannot beat.

Here is the test: https://shaktipat.xyz/ 

Edited 1 hour ago by Psychonaut

[Leo Gura]

The 'Are You A Spiritual Rat?' test. 

[LastThursday]

ChatGPT has supplied the goods:

 

Epistemic Sadism Scale (ESS-20)

Instructions: Please indicate how much you agree or disagree with each statement. Answer according to your general tendencies, rather than a particular incident.

Response options:

5 — Highly agree

4 — Agree

3 — Neither agree nor disagree

2 — Disagree

1 — Highly disagree

 

Answer and then score according to the scale above. Questions marked R should be scored in reverse (i.e. 6-response number). 

 

Axis 1: Epistemic Dominance

The pleasure of possessing an informational or intellectual advantage over another person.

I enjoy knowing something important that another person does not.

Having information that gives me an advantage over someone else is satisfying.

I find it gratifying when someone realises that I understand something they do not.

I sometimes enjoy allowing someone to continue believing something when I know they are mistaken.

I prefer intellectual exchanges in which both people have an equal understanding of the subject. (R)

Axis 2: Intellectual Humiliation

The pleasure of exposing another person's ignorance, inadequacy, or intellectual vulnerability.

I enjoy watching someone struggle to defend a belief that I know is false.

It can be satisfying to expose someone's ignorance in front of other people.

I sometimes find it amusing when someone confidently makes a claim that I know is wrong.

I enjoy seeing someone realise that they have been intellectually outmatched.

I feel uncomfortable when someone is made to look foolish because of something they do not know. (R)

Axis 3: Epistemic Manipulation

The pleasure of controlling another person's access to information, understanding, or truth.

I find it satisfying to lead someone towards a conclusion without revealing that I am doing so.

I enjoy knowing how someone will react when they eventually discover the truth.

I sometimes find it pleasurable to let someone draw an incorrect conclusion from information I have given them.

I enjoy having control over when another person discovers something important.

I prefer to give people all the relevant information rather than control what they know. (R)

Axis 4: Epistemic Cruelty

The pleasure of causing psychological discomfort through the use of knowledge, truth, or intellectual advantage.

I sometimes enjoy telling someone a truth that I know will upset them.

Seeing someone become confused or distressed by something I have revealed can be pleasurable.

I enjoy making someone question a belief that is important to their sense of identity.

I sometimes find another person's intellectual discomfort more satisfying than the practical outcome of correcting them.

I would rather someone discover an uncomfortable truth in a supportive environment than have it exposed publicly. (R)

Edited 1 hour ago by LastThursday

[Psychonaut]

2 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

The 'Are You A Spiritual Rat?' test. 

You could phrase it like that XDDDDDD

[Psychonaut]

3 minutes ago, LastThursday said:

ChatGPT has supplied the goods:

 

Epistemic Sadism Scale (ESS-20)

Instructions: Please indicate how much you agree or disagree with each statement. Answer according to your general tendencies, rather than a particular incident.

Response options:

5 — Highly agree

4 — Agree

3 — Neither agree nor disagree

2 — Disagree

1 — Highly disagree

 

Answer and then score according to the scale above. Questions marked R should be scored in reverse (i.e. 6-response number). 

 

Axis 1: Epistemic Dominance

The pleasure of possessing an informational or intellectual advantage over another person.

I enjoy knowing something important that another person does not.

Having information that gives me an advantage over someone else is satisfying.

I find it gratifying when someone realises that I understand something they do not.

I sometimes enjoy allowing someone to continue believing something when I know they are mistaken.

I prefer intellectual exchanges in which both people have an equal understanding of the subject. (R)

Axis 2: Intellectual Humiliation

The pleasure of exposing another person's ignorance, inadequacy, or intellectual vulnerability.

I enjoy watching someone struggle to defend a belief that I know is false.

It can be satisfying to expose someone's ignorance in front of other people.

I sometimes find it amusing when someone confidently makes a claim that I know is wrong.

I enjoy seeing someone realise that they have been intellectually outmatched.

I feel uncomfortable when someone is made to look foolish because of something they do not know. (R)

Axis 3: Epistemic Manipulation

The pleasure of controlling another person's access to information, understanding, or truth.

I find it satisfying to lead someone towards a conclusion without revealing that I am doing so.

I enjoy knowing how someone will react when they eventually discover the truth.

I sometimes find it pleasurable to let someone draw an incorrect conclusion from information I have given them.

I enjoy having control over when another person discovers something important.

I prefer to give people all the relevant information rather than control what they know. (R)

Axis 4: Epistemic Cruelty

The pleasure of causing psychological discomfort through the use of knowledge, truth, or intellectual advantage.

I sometimes enjoy telling someone a truth that I know will upset them.

Seeing someone become confused or distressed by something I have revealed can be pleasurable.

I enjoy making someone question a belief that is important to their sense of identity.

I sometimes find another person's intellectual discomfort more satisfying than the practical outcome of correcting them.

I would rather someone discover an uncomfortable truth in a supportive environment than have it exposed publicly. (R)

I already know all this

Here is the test / analysis tool that I started building earlier. (It is essentially a survey design AND survey analysis tool)

https://diemex.dev/tools/seven-point-survey.html

All you need to do is take the questions, copy and paste them from the original test and then you have transformed the biased 4P SHIT-TEST into a 7P test. 

Edited 1 hour ago by Psychonaut

[LastThursday]

@Psychonaut I like it it a lot.

Whilst ChatGPT got the gist of it, I think the questions are too blatantly biased, poor silly ChatGPT.