The research was fundamentally flawed and should not be used as evidence that one group is better than the other. It does, however, highlight the problem of biased research that stigmatises everything about us.
Top-level
The research was fundamentally flawed and should not be used as evidence that one group is better than the other. It does, however, highlight the problem of biased research that stigmatises everything about us. 50 comments
thank you for the source. it’s even more disgusting than I thought. It’s so glaring that as researchers, they should have become AT LEAST as interested in the poor moral decisions of one group, instead of pathologising the other for their „inflexible“ consistency in Not! Taking! BRIBES! "gaining money" as in: taking bribes for putting kittens in boxes, so that must be okay 😂 Yes, sadly, true. @newtsoda So I do it now : thanks a lot. It made me realize that allistic people twisted my view of myself to the point of absurdity. @belgianzoe I'm happy I was able to help a little. I'm hopeful that we can continue to press for positive awareness and acceptance of autism 🙏 @newtsoda awe your art is so clean and nice and calming! do you have some more story-based calm-narrative ones? (p.s. it also reminds me of how https://www.webtoons.com/en/drama/fluidum/list?title_no=2283 looks) @newtsoda fabulous work, thank you for that! And thank you for image descriptions ✊🏽 Great to have you here! 🙂 @newtsoda This sort of reminds me of how, for a long long time we where discussed as though we didn't have empathy, where as if anything we, the issue we have an overabundance of empathy & are frequently overwhelmed by it. @newtsoda Love the idea of doing official NT research (I think I have done that for most of my life)! And yes, autistic folks need to speak for themselves. @newtsoda i am autistic and i think that a high percentage of autistic people care about social justice, but let us remember Elon is supposedly autistic tio and hos a self serving a-hole. @newtsoda "INEXPLICABLE COMPULSION TO PROJECT NEGATIVE SUBTEXT INTO SIMPLE CONVERSATIONS" oh jeez this ruins me @newtsoda Besides of the evil framing they decided to give this about autistic people: think about what this tells about how we perceive, build and expect societies to be. @newtsoda@wandering.shop This isn't just biased, it's terrible science. The hallmark of autism is a lower engagement with social norms. Of course autistic people were less likely than allistics to have different views in public than private. (As for higher general morality, that wouldn't shock me either. And I say this as someone who's allistic.) Flawed study, but as an anecdote, it does resemble my real world observation that we behave with a more consistent conviction than NTs (which I contest that they are 'typical', rather they're favoured for being easier to exploit under capitalism) I remember reading a study showing we've a lower representation among hate groups, attributed to having trouble handling the cognitive dissonance that keeps someone entrenched in bigotry It is, isn’t it? I was very happy about it, too! I’m not blind but I find reading comic-style information really hard. I just don’t know where to look! So I was most grateful for being able to just read it. Thank you! twisting good things to be bad isn't just a clear example of bias, but also of cognitive dissonance, they went in believing autistic people were going to be "worse" so when their study failed to reach that conclusion, they had to come up with some other reason why it actually super totally did prove what they wanted. @newtsoda admittedly, "autistic people have morals and this is bad because" paints a pretty complete picture of the researcher I am perfectly OK with being "too concerned about my moral compass" because at least I don't have to have a bad memory to have a good conscience @newtsoda I love that last panel. “Inexplicable compulsion to project negative subtext into simple conversations” indeed! @newtsoda I teach a behavioural public policy class for cognitive science students, and I prepare a session about neurodiversity. I came to ask for the research paper's name as well, as I couldn't with good consience share the comic forward just because it fits my bias :) So in case you get an answer (and I realise this is an old thread and the author might well have it muted), please tag me as well, if you can be bothered. EDIT: Source https://wandering.shop/@newtsoda/109314849992881056 @newtsoda We get to use it as research on researchers. Luckily, you don't need an ethics committee approval to research the researchers while they're duped into thinking that it is them who are the researching. @newtsoda that study is absolutely wild. "For example, Moran et al. (2011) reported that ASD participants considered accidental negative outcomes less permissible than healthy control subjects, whereas both groups rated other types of events as having similar moral appropriateness" I'm sorry, I don't think the control was healthy 😆 WTF @newtsoda @sheromon I used to work in an autism research lab, and the way they explained the difference between my (non-autistic) interest in video games and an autistic "circumscribed interest" in video games was that the latter was "excessive". It took me a couple of years to think "excessive for whom?" |
@newtsoda Do you have an URL for the research itself?
I'm interested in the results even if the conclusion seems as flawed as you mention.