Re: Axis 5 - any meaning to this?

[Guest guest]

This one was less clearly defined and somewhat contradictory.

Many things in the first group seem to indicate sensitivity, possibly with a

bit of OCD.

The second group creativity/ADD.

Inger

Axis 5 - any meaning to this?

Negative loading:

79. Do you have a need for comfort items like blankets, stuffed animals

etc? (-0.172)

146. Are you the one relied on to remember what needs to be done during a

project? (-0.167)

89. Do you crave order in your home and work environments? (-0.162)

185. Do you have food intolerances? (-0.144)

17. Do you see yourself as sensitive? (-0.141)

186. Do you have allergies? (-0.138)

73. Do you prefer being told the bottom line rather than having to find

your own way there? (-0.137)

143. Are you the one everyone relies on to remember birthdays? (-0.136)

67. Do you love to collect and organize things, make lists & diagrams etc?

(-0.134)

106. Do you see yourself as putting people first, before ideals and

objects? (-0.124)

171. Do you always carry a notepad? (-0.118)

37. Are you good at small talk? (-0.116)

129. Are your views typical of your peer group? (-0.109)

197. Do you enjoy working as a partner or team member, with supervision?

(-0.105)

5. Are you over-or under-sensitive to heat, cold, wind, humidity etc?

(-0.104)

4. Do you have a very acute sense of smell and/or taste? (-0.103)

178. Do you have difficulties judging distances, height, depth or speed?

(-0.103)

Positive loadings:

139. Do you prefer troubleshooting to using a manual when technical problems

arise? (0.189)

190. Do you often question authority? (0.170)

137. Do you find predictability and constancy mind-numbing? (0.146)

98. Do you find social chitchat difficult, tiresome and/or a waste of time?

(0.144)

76. Do you find a little danger in your life energising? (0.135)

65. Is you imagination unusual, with unique ideas that others don't have?

(0.128)

144. Do you sometimes show up without the notes you need? (0.124)

59. Do you have unconventional, often unique ways of solving problems?

(0.123)

68. Are you very gifted in one or more areas? (0.112)

142. Do you miss appointments often? (0.111)

100. Do you mostly prefer to play/work/do things on your own -

unsupervised? (0.111)

80. Do you have the need for something new and exciting get motivated?

(0.110)

60. Do you focus on one interest at a time and become an expert on that

subject? (0.109)

Leif

FAM Secret Society is a community based on respect, friendship, support and

acceptance. Everyone is valued.

Check the Links section for more FAM forums.

[Guest guest]

This one was less clearly defined and somewhat contradictory.

Many things in the first group seem to indicate sensitivity, possibly with a

bit of OCD.

The second group creativity/ADD.

Inger

Axis 5 - any meaning to this?

Negative loading:

79. Do you have a need for comfort items like blankets, stuffed animals

etc? (-0.172)

146. Are you the one relied on to remember what needs to be done during a

project? (-0.167)

89. Do you crave order in your home and work environments? (-0.162)

185. Do you have food intolerances? (-0.144)

17. Do you see yourself as sensitive? (-0.141)

186. Do you have allergies? (-0.138)

73. Do you prefer being told the bottom line rather than having to find

your own way there? (-0.137)

143. Are you the one everyone relies on to remember birthdays? (-0.136)

67. Do you love to collect and organize things, make lists & diagrams etc?

(-0.134)

106. Do you see yourself as putting people first, before ideals and

objects? (-0.124)

171. Do you always carry a notepad? (-0.118)

37. Are you good at small talk? (-0.116)

129. Are your views typical of your peer group? (-0.109)

197. Do you enjoy working as a partner or team member, with supervision?

(-0.105)

5. Are you over-or under-sensitive to heat, cold, wind, humidity etc?

(-0.104)

4. Do you have a very acute sense of smell and/or taste? (-0.103)

178. Do you have difficulties judging distances, height, depth or speed?

(-0.103)

Positive loadings:

139. Do you prefer troubleshooting to using a manual when technical problems

arise? (0.189)

190. Do you often question authority? (0.170)

137. Do you find predictability and constancy mind-numbing? (0.146)

98. Do you find social chitchat difficult, tiresome and/or a waste of time?

(0.144)

76. Do you find a little danger in your life energising? (0.135)

65. Is you imagination unusual, with unique ideas that others don't have?

(0.128)

144. Do you sometimes show up without the notes you need? (0.124)

59. Do you have unconventional, often unique ways of solving problems?

(0.123)

68. Are you very gifted in one or more areas? (0.112)

142. Do you miss appointments often? (0.111)

100. Do you mostly prefer to play/work/do things on your own -

unsupervised? (0.111)

80. Do you have the need for something new and exciting get motivated?

(0.110)

60. Do you focus on one interest at a time and become an expert on that

subject? (0.109)

Leif

FAM Secret Society is a community based on respect, friendship, support and

acceptance. Everyone is valued.

Check the Links section for more FAM forums.

[Guest guest]

To me it seems to describe sensitivity / emotion versus

rational / logic issues.

Leif

> This one was less clearly defined and somewhat contradictory.

>

> Many things in the first group seem to indicate sensitivity, possibly with

a

> bit of OCD.

>

> The second group creativity/ADD.

[Guest guest]

To me it seems to describe sensitivity / emotion versus

rational / logic issues.

Leif

> This one was less clearly defined and somewhat contradictory.

>

> Many things in the first group seem to indicate sensitivity, possibly with

a

> bit of OCD.

>

> The second group creativity/ADD.

[Guest guest]

Leif and Inger:

This thread, and related ones are very interesting reading, but I

feel like I am comming in in the middle of a conversations. Could

you give a some background. It seems like this is related to Leif's

aspie quizz or Leif's and Inger's aspie quizz, but I still am

feeling a bit lost.

Ilah

>

> This one was less clearly defined and somewhat contradictory.

>

> Many things in the first group seem to indicate sensitivity,

possibly with a

> bit of OCD.

>

> The second group creativity/ADD.

>

> Inger

>

>

>

> Axis 5 - any meaning to this?

>

>

> Negative loading:

>

> 79. Do you have a need for comfort items like blankets, stuffed

animals

> etc? (-0.172)

> 146. Are you the one relied on to remember what needs to be done

during a

> project? (-0.167)

> 89. Do you crave order in your home and work environments? (-

0.162)

> 185. Do you have food intolerances? (-0.144)

> 17. Do you see yourself as sensitive? (-0.141)

> 186. Do you have allergies? (-0.138)

> 73. Do you prefer being told the bottom line rather than having

to find

> your own way there? (-0.137)

> 143. Are you the one everyone relies on to remember birthdays? (-

0.136)

> 67. Do you love to collect and organize things, make lists &

diagrams etc?

> (-0.134)

> 106. Do you see yourself as putting people first, before ideals

and

> objects? (-0.124)

> 171. Do you always carry a notepad? (-0.118)

> 37. Are you good at small talk? (-0.116)

> 129. Are your views typical of your peer group? (-0.109)

> 197. Do you enjoy working as a partner or team member, with

supervision?

> (-0.105)

> 5. Are you over-or under-sensitive to heat, cold, wind, humidity

etc?

> (-0.104)

> 4. Do you have a very acute sense of smell and/or taste? (-0.103)

> 178. Do you have difficulties judging distances, height, depth or

speed?

> (-0.103)

>

> Positive loadings:

>

> 139. Do you prefer troubleshooting to using a manual when

technical problems

> arise? (0.189)

> 190. Do you often question authority? (0.170)

> 137. Do you find predictability and constancy mind-numbing?

(0.146)

> 98. Do you find social chitchat difficult, tiresome and/or a

waste of time?

> (0.144)

> 76. Do you find a little danger in your life energising? (0.135)

> 65. Is you imagination unusual, with unique ideas that others

don't have?

> (0.128)

> 144. Do you sometimes show up without the notes you need? (0.124)

> 59. Do you have unconventional, often unique ways of solving

problems?

> (0.123)

> 68. Are you very gifted in one or more areas? (0.112)

> 142. Do you miss appointments often? (0.111)

> 100. Do you mostly prefer to play/work/do things on your own -

> unsupervised? (0.111)

> 80. Do you have the need for something new and exciting get

motivated?

> (0.110)

> 60. Do you focus on one interest at a time and become an expert

on that

> subject? (0.109)

>

> Leif

>

>

>

>

>

>

> FAM Secret Society is a community based on respect, friendship,

support and

> acceptance. Everyone is valued.

>

> Check the Links section for more FAM forums.

>

[Guest guest]

Ilah,

This is the background: about 3 years or so ago, I was unhappy with the

clickable tests available online at the time (practically only Simon

Baron-Cohen's AQ-test, which I found too stereotypical and not including any

sensory issues that are so common among Aspies, and a Swedish test that was

so-so). So I started designing my own and Leif made it work technically.

I still wasn't quite happy with the result and wanted to update it, but have

been too overwhelmed to ever get down to it. Eventually, Leif tired of

waiting and made version II & III himself (which included many questions I

did not at all approve of, but I was too busy with other things to protest

in time).

I had also gotten a vision - a real vision, when I was driving to town

(luckily, my body on " autopilot " is actually a better diver than I am!) - of

a more comprehensive test that would also include other diagnosis on the

neurodiversity spectrum, plus preferrably also separate between temperament,

learning style etc.

However, this made the project even more overwhelming for me, so after I

mentioned it to Leif he decided to do it himself with the help of someone

from another list. My participation has been minimal since I was

exceptionally busy offline at that particular time. I think they did a

pretty good job of it, even if it would still need some adjustment to get it

exactly as I envisioned it.

It is the evaluation of the initial replies to this last 200-question

neurodiversity version that Leif & I are discussing now. If anyone else has

opinions about it, feel free to butt in. :-)

Inger

Axis 5 - any meaning to this?

>

>

> Negative loading:

>

> 79. Do you have a need for comfort items like blankets, stuffed

animals

> etc? (-0.172)

> 146. Are you the one relied on to remember what needs to be done

during a

> project? (-0.167)

> 89. Do you crave order in your home and work environments? (-

0.162)

> 185. Do you have food intolerances? (-0.144)

> 17. Do you see yourself as sensitive? (-0.141)

> 186. Do you have allergies? (-0.138)

> 73. Do you prefer being told the bottom line rather than having

to find

> your own way there? (-0.137)

> 143. Are you the one everyone relies on to remember birthdays? (-

0.136)

> 67. Do you love to collect and organize things, make lists &

diagrams etc?

> (-0.134)

> 106. Do you see yourself as putting people first, before ideals

and

> objects? (-0.124)

> 171. Do you always carry a notepad? (-0.118)

> 37. Are you good at small talk? (-0.116)

> 129. Are your views typical of your peer group? (-0.109)

> 197. Do you enjoy working as a partner or team member, with

supervision?

> (-0.105)

> 5. Are you over-or under-sensitive to heat, cold, wind, humidity

etc?

> (-0.104)

> 4. Do you have a very acute sense of smell and/or taste? (-0.103)

> 178. Do you have difficulties judging distances, height, depth or

speed?

> (-0.103)

>

> Positive loadings:

>

> 139. Do you prefer troubleshooting to using a manual when

technical problems

> arise? (0.189)

> 190. Do you often question authority? (0.170)

> 137. Do you find predictability and constancy mind-numbing?

(0.146)

> 98. Do you find social chitchat difficult, tiresome and/or a

waste of time?

> (0.144)

> 76. Do you find a little danger in your life energising? (0.135)

> 65. Is you imagination unusual, with unique ideas that others

don't have?

> (0.128)

> 144. Do you sometimes show up without the notes you need? (0.124)

> 59. Do you have unconventional, often unique ways of solving

problems?

> (0.123)

> 68. Are you very gifted in one or more areas? (0.112)

> 142. Do you miss appointments often? (0.111)

> 100. Do you mostly prefer to play/work/do things on your own -

> unsupervised? (0.111)

> 80. Do you have the need for something new and exciting get

motivated?

> (0.110)

> 60. Do you focus on one interest at a time and become an expert

on that

> subject? (0.109)

>

> Leif

>

>

>

>

>

>

> FAM Secret Society is a community based on respect, friendship,

support and

> acceptance. Everyone is valued.

>

> Check the Links section for more FAM forums.

>

[Guest guest]

Inger:

> This is the background: about 3 years or so ago, I was unhappy with the

> clickable tests available online at the time (practically only Simon

> Baron-Cohen's AQ-test, which I found too stereotypical and not including

any

> sensory issues that are so common among Aspies, and a Swedish test that

was

> so-so). So I started designing my own and Leif made it work technically.

Actually, I embarked on the project since I thought the DSM was

such a horrible thing with only negative traits. I simply wanted to

prove that positive or neutral traits also was part of AS. Initially

I only wanted to disprove that AS was some kind of disease

or brain damage.

> I still wasn't quite happy with the result and wanted to update it, but

have

> been too overwhelmed to ever get down to it. Eventually, Leif tired of

> waiting and made version II & III himself (which included many questions I

> did not at all approve of, but I was too busy with other things to protest

> in time).

Actually, in version II, I added many of my own ideas of questions

I had a hunch would work. I made almost no input to the initial

quiz questions. I also added some controversial stuff, like

sexual deviations. After 1500 answers, I decided I didn't need

to experiment any more, so I made a new version with the

best questions from I and II, and filled it up with some more

controversial stuff, like more physical traits.

> I had also gotten a vision - a real vision, when I was driving to town

> (luckily, my body on " autopilot " is actually a better diver than I am!) -

of

> a more comprehensive test that would also include other diagnosis on the

> neurodiversity spectrum, plus preferrably also separate between

temperament,

> learning style etc.

Yes, the expanding of the quiz to other psychiatric conditions was in

my mind as well. I already started this process in version III with

some ADHD traits.

> However, this made the project even more overwhelming for me, so after I

> mentioned it to Leif he decided to do it himself with the help of someone

> from another list. My participation has been minimal since I was

> exceptionally busy offline at that particular time. I think they did a

> pretty good job of it, even if it would still need some adjustment to get

it

> exactly as I envisioned it.

It does require a lot of patient and memory to handle the huge amount

of information that has been collected. In the current merged evaluation,

there is a table with 500 (!) questions ranked in a lot of different groups.

There is also an extensive software package for evaluation that I've

written. It includes functions like cross-linking between different

quiz-versions, checking consistency and generating a set of

reports in HTML-format. I've also purchased MVSP, a multivariate

statistics package to be able to do PCA / factoranalysis with.

> It is the evaluation of the initial replies to this last 200-question

> neurodiversity version that Leif & I are discussing now. If anyone else

has

> opinions about it, feel free to butt in. :-)

I don't know if I posted the link to the evaluation here. If not, it's here:

www.rdos.net/aspeval

IMHO, including new diagnostic categories have largely failed, just

as the ADHD questions failed in version III. Instead of new groups

based on the new questions, we have some quite unexpected groupings.

These are the axis 3 - axis 5 I posted here. Axis 1 is the autistic

axis and axis 2 the neurotypical. The axisis is the result of the

factoranalysis with the MVSP package.

My wishes for coming versions is firstly to parallel DSM dxes as

closely as possibly. I'm working on this, and the failure rate when

recalculating neurodiversity quiz is 6% on overall, but 14% in

the professionally diagnosed group. I'm currently rerunning

the same algorithm on version III, to see how well this much

larger database can be adapted to DSM. It contains 6500+

answers while neurodiversity-version only contains 1000.

Next, I will present new meassures related to axis 1 and 2.

These will resemble the Aspie / NT score quite well, but

not entirely. If PCA-loadings are used to calculate Aspie

score, failure rate is 22%. I'm not sure how to present these

results yet. I would have liked to present them as Neanderthal

vs. African heritage, but this is too politically incorrect, so

I will probably use " warm-adapted " and " cold-adapted "

instead.

I also will calculate new scores based on axis 3-5, but

these will probably rely on better questions and a version

II of the neurodiversity test.

In addition to adding temperament test questions, I think

a future need is to prove that g-factor in IQ tests is related

to primary axis in Aspie-quiz. I have some idea how to achieve

this, but haven't been able to get permission to use it yet.

Leif

[Guest guest]

Ack! I do not have the remotest clue what all this technical stuff means.

You wrote the software yourself?? Wow!

I *really* wish you'd leave any " politically incorrect " issues out of it,

though, as I don't want my vision to be used to prove something that I want

no part of. As for calling it " warm- or cold-adapted " - please see what Kate

wrote about the nutty professor and his " Sun-people " and " Ice-people " !! I

think you're on very thin ice (no pun intended) if you insist on pursuing

that line of investigation and that it could be used against us, rather than

to improve how we are viewed.

I'm totally with you on the DSM thing; it is probably due to the

exceptionally poor description of AS in DSM that so many girls are missed.

Inger

Re: Re: Axis 5 - any meaning to this?

Inger:

> This is the background: about 3 years or so ago, I was unhappy with the

> clickable tests available online at the time (practically only Simon

> Baron-Cohen's AQ-test, which I found too stereotypical and not including

any

> sensory issues that are so common among Aspies, and a Swedish test that

was

> so-so). So I started designing my own and Leif made it work technically.

Actually, I embarked on the project since I thought the DSM was

such a horrible thing with only negative traits. I simply wanted to

prove that positive or neutral traits also was part of AS. Initially

I only wanted to disprove that AS was some kind of disease

or brain damage.

> I still wasn't quite happy with the result and wanted to update it, but

have

> been too overwhelmed to ever get down to it. Eventually, Leif tired of

> waiting and made version II & III himself (which included many questions I

> did not at all approve of, but I was too busy with other things to protest

> in time).

Actually, in version II, I added many of my own ideas of questions

I had a hunch would work. I made almost no input to the initial

quiz questions. I also added some controversial stuff, like

sexual deviations. After 1500 answers, I decided I didn't need

to experiment any more, so I made a new version with the

best questions from I and II, and filled it up with some more

controversial stuff, like more physical traits.

> I had also gotten a vision - a real vision, when I was driving to town

> (luckily, my body on " autopilot " is actually a better diver than I am!) -

of

> a more comprehensive test that would also include other diagnosis on the

> neurodiversity spectrum, plus preferrably also separate between

temperament,

> learning style etc.

Yes, the expanding of the quiz to other psychiatric conditions was in

my mind as well. I already started this process in version III with

some ADHD traits.

> However, this made the project even more overwhelming for me, so after I

> mentioned it to Leif he decided to do it himself with the help of someone

> from another list. My participation has been minimal since I was

> exceptionally busy offline at that particular time. I think they did a

> pretty good job of it, even if it would still need some adjustment to get

it

> exactly as I envisioned it.

It does require a lot of patient and memory to handle the huge amount

of information that has been collected. In the current merged evaluation,

there is a table with 500 (!) questions ranked in a lot of different groups.

There is also an extensive software package for evaluation that I've

written. It includes functions like cross-linking between different

quiz-versions, checking consistency and generating a set of

reports in HTML-format. I've also purchased MVSP, a multivariate

statistics package to be able to do PCA / factoranalysis with.

> It is the evaluation of the initial replies to this last 200-question

> neurodiversity version that Leif & I are discussing now. If anyone else

has

> opinions about it, feel free to butt in. :-)

I don't know if I posted the link to the evaluation here. If not, it's here:

www.rdos.net/aspeval

IMHO, including new diagnostic categories have largely failed, just

as the ADHD questions failed in version III. Instead of new groups

based on the new questions, we have some quite unexpected groupings.

These are the axis 3 - axis 5 I posted here. Axis 1 is the autistic

axis and axis 2 the neurotypical. The axisis is the result of the

factoranalysis with the MVSP package.

My wishes for coming versions is firstly to parallel DSM dxes as

closely as possibly. I'm working on this, and the failure rate when

recalculating neurodiversity quiz is 6% on overall, but 14% in

the professionally diagnosed group. I'm currently rerunning

the same algorithm on version III, to see how well this much

larger database can be adapted to DSM. It contains 6500+

answers while neurodiversity-version only contains 1000.

Next, I will present new meassures related to axis 1 and 2.

These will resemble the Aspie / NT score quite well, but

not entirely. If PCA-loadings are used to calculate Aspie

score, failure rate is 22%. I'm not sure how to present these

results yet. I would have liked to present them as Neanderthal

vs. African heritage, but this is too politically incorrect, so

I will probably use " warm-adapted " and " cold-adapted "

instead.

I also will calculate new scores based on axis 3-5, but

these will probably rely on better questions and a version

II of the neurodiversity test.

In addition to adding temperament test questions, I think

a future need is to prove that g-factor in IQ tests is related

to primary axis in Aspie-quiz. I have some idea how to achieve

this, but haven't been able to get permission to use it yet.

Leif

FAM Secret Society is a community based on respect, friendship, support and

acceptance. Everyone is valued.

Check the Links section for more FAM forums.

[Guest guest]

Inger:

> Ack! I do not have the remotest clue what all this technical stuff means.

Nor did I two years ago ;-)

> You wrote the software yourself?? Wow!

Yes, I had to learn how to analyse these kind of things, and

understand what the statistics meant, so the best way to achieve

this was by writing the statistic software for standard deviations,

correlation and chi-2 myself. I would have written the factor

analysis myself as well, if I could have gotten my hands on

a working algorithm.

> I *really* wish you'd leave any " politically incorrect " issues out of it,

> though, as I don't want my vision to be used to prove something that I

want

> no part of. As for calling it " warm- or cold-adapted " - please see what

Kate

> wrote about the nutty professor and his " Sun-people " and " Ice-people " !!

That would not be exactly how it would work. The quiz would not

judge people either as " sun people " or " ice people " . Most people

will not get past 75% on any of these meassures. I know because

I've calculated them.

> I

> think you're on very thin ice (no pun intended) if you insist on pursuing

> that line of investigation and that it could be used against us, rather

than

> to improve how we are viewed.

Other suggestions are welcome. We cannot omit that the genetic

picture is slightly different from DSM.

> I'm totally with you on the DSM thing; it is probably due to the

> exceptionally poor description of AS in DSM that so many girls are missed.

Yeah, the 10-15 point difference between men and women in Aspie-quiz

have been quite useful in arguing that point.

Leif

[Guest guest]

I do not believe there is a "we" when referring to people with A.S.D's. It only becomes how it is "we" are viewed when diagnostics create the socio-pathological conditions to create the conditions by which others come together. "we" can be applied to a group or a following of similar ideological idealisms, however in totality there is no "we" feasible. There are so many differences, despite the few similarities when viewed realistically. Though it is highly dependent upon the situational context, I do not perceive the mentality to be entirely logical. Inger Lorelei <inglori@...> wrote: Ack! I do not have the remotest clue what all this technical stuff means. You wrote the software yourself?? Wow! I *really* wish you'd leave any "politically

incorrect" issues out of it, though, as I don't want my vision to be used to prove something that I want no part of. As for calling it "warm- or cold-adapted" - please see what Kate wrote about the nutty professor and his "Sun-people" and "Ice-people"!! I think you're on very thin ice (no pun intended) if you insist on pursuing that line of investigation and that it could be used against us, rather than to improve how we are viewed. I'm totally with you on the DSM thing; it is probably due to the exceptionally poor description of AS in DSM that so many girls are missed. Inger New Songhttp://www.aspergershosting.com/audio/Onwah.wma

Messenger with Voice. Make PC-to-Phone Calls to the US (and 30+ countries) for 2¢/min or less.

[Guest guest]

There is no such thing as N.T.

[Guest guest]

:

> There is no such thing as N.T.

The result of Aspie-quiz II, III and neurodiversity version

proves there is such a thing as NT ;-)

NT has around 6% factor loadings. This is 6 times more

than temperamental traits.

However, you can label the " NT social group " in Aspie-quiz

NT traits or Hss traits or warm-adapted traits or African traits

or whatever. The results from factor analysis unfortunately

does not come with any label, just an indication of clustering

of traits.

Feel free to invent your own name for axis 2, but

don't call it for non-autistic, because it isn't. The

autistic - non-autistic aspect is entirely covered

by axis 1.

Leif

[Guest guest]

:

> I do not believe there is a " we " when referring to

> people with A.S.D's. It only becomes how it is

> " we " are viewed when diagnostics create the

> socio-pathological conditions to create the

> conditions by which others come together.

In that case there is no g-factor, no temperamental

groups and no learning style differences either.

All these have been identified with the same methods

I've used to identify autistic and NT domains.

> " we " can be applied to a group or a following of

> similar ideological idealisms, however in totality

> there is no " we " feasible. There are so many

> differences, despite the few similarities when viewed realistically.

Of course there are many differences. The thing is that

a majority of human variation clusters to either Aspie domain

or NT domain. The remaining diversity is so small as to

describe it as almost non-existant. We would almost

be genetic clones if the Aspie domain didn't exist.

Leif

[Guest guest]

Leif, again, there is no such thing as N.T.Leif Ekblad <leif@...> wrote: : > There is no such thing as N.T. The result of Aspie-quiz II, III and neurodiversity version proves there is such a thing as NT ;-) NT has around 6% factor loadings. This is 6 times more than temperamental traits. However, you can label the "NT social group" in Aspie-quiz NT traits or Hss traits or warm-adapted traits or African traits or whatever. The results from factor analysis unfortunately does not come with any label, just an indication of clustering of traits. Feel free to invent your own name for axis 2, but don't call it for non-autistic, because it isn't. The autistic - non-autistic aspect is entirely covered by axis 1. Leif

New Songhttp://www.aspergershosting.com/audio/Onwah.wma

New Messenger with Voice. Call regular phones from your PC and save big.

[Guest guest]

Leif, there is you and other people, the subjective nature of this is as great as you and then all other people in the world.Leif Ekblad <leif@...> wrote: : > I do not believe there is a "we" when referring to > people with A.S.D's. It only becomes how it is > "we" are viewed when diagnostics create the > socio-pathological conditions to create the > conditions by which others come together. In that case there is no g-factor, no temperamental groups and no learning style differences either. All these have been identified with the same methods I've used to identify autistic and NT domains. > "we" can be applied to a group or a following of > similar ideological idealisms, however in totality > there is no "we" feasible. There are

so many > differences, despite the few similarities when viewed realistically. Of course there are many differences. The thing is that a majority of human variation clusters to either Aspie domain or NT domain. The remaining diversity is so small as to describe it as almost non-existant. We would almost be genetic clones if the Aspie domain didn't exist. Leif New Songhttp://www.aspergershosting.com/audio/Onwah.wma

How low will we go? Check out Messenger’s low PC-to-Phone call rates.

[Guest guest]

:

> Leif, there is you and other people, the subjective

> nature of this is as great as you and then all other

> people in the world.

I'm not talking about how we perceive others, but

the clustering of a wide array of traits along a autistic

and NT axis. In fact, the MVSP program doesn't have

a slightest clue that some of the cases are autistic

and some NTs. It only uses its mathematical algorithms

to cluster the questions into the most important groups

(called axis) and then calculates " loadings " for the

questions. It also gives you a number that indicates

how much of the variance in the answers that can

be explained by each axis. The results of this analysis

is also validated by the manual groupings I do in the

cross-referenced evaluation, where I give correlations

between questions and the groups. There is good

consistency in all this, both between quiz versions

and between MVSP and manual grouping.

As anybody answering the quiz since version II should

be aware of, I intend to publish the results in a scientific,

peer-reviewed journal. However, since this topic is so

controversial, I need to cover all the possibilities, and

currently I see a need to put g-factor and temperament

groups into the quiz before publishing. By having those

axis which are confirmed by others, it gets a lot less

controversial and harder to discard.

Leif

[Guest guest]

I really don't know how else to say this respectfully to the group and you aside from... It is subjectively incoherent and highly illogical. Have you ever thought about a new interest or study? Leif Ekblad <leif@...> wrote: : > Leif, there is you and other people, the subjective > nature of this is as great as you and then all other > people in the world. I'm not talking about how we perceive others, but the clustering of a wide array of traits along a autistic and NT axis. In fact, the MVSP program doesn't have a slightest clue that some of the cases are autistic and some NTs. It only uses its mathematical algorithms

to cluster the questions into the most important groups (called axis) and then calculates "loadings" for the questions. It also gives you a number that indicates how much of the variance in the answers that can be explained by each axis. The results of this analysis is also validated by the manual groupings I do in the cross-referenced evaluation, where I give correlations between questions and the groups. There is good consistency in all this, both between quiz versions and between MVSP and manual grouping. As anybody answering the quiz since version II should be aware of, I intend to publish the results in a scientific, peer-reviewed journal. However, since this topic is so controversial, I need to cover all the possibilities, and currently I see a need to put g-factor and temperament groups into the quiz before publishing. By having those axis which are confirmed by others, it gets a lot less

controversial and harder to discard. LeifNew Songhttp://www.aspergershosting.com/audio/Onwah.wma

New Messenger with Voice. Call regular phones from your PC for low, low rates.

[Guest guest]

:

> It is subjectively incoherent and highly illogical.

What is? The NT concept?

The concept of species is perhaps subjective, but

it is highly logical, and therefore, since NT is another

word for a (sub)species, and so is autistic, there is

nothing illogical about it.

> Have you ever thought about a new interest or study?

No, a true Aspie does not give up on an interest until

(s)he has finished it, or there is nothing more to be

explored ;-)

Leif

[Guest guest]

Autistic is just a trait of symptoms, they all think differently and

they are not a species and neither are people without a form of autism.

There is no true aspie, that's a label that was made up, and then

taken too seriously, serious enough to apply to an identity.

All blind people are blind, that's a fact. All people with a form of

autism are not as directly similar, nor even close to that by

comparison to a blind person not seeing.

There are humans, not N.T's and Aspies.

> :

> > It is subjectively incoherent and highly illogical.

>

> What is? The NT concept?

>

> The concept of species is perhaps subjective, but

> it is highly logical, and therefore, since NT is another

> word for a (sub)species, and so is autistic, there is

> nothing illogical about it.

>

> > Have you ever thought about a new interest or study?

>

> No, a true Aspie does not give up on an interest until

> (s)he has finished it, or there is nothing more to be

> explored ;-)

>

> Leif

>

[Guest guest]

,

Is it possible that you and Leif could just agree to disagree on this issue?

Leif is one of the most stubborn Aspies I've ever met so you are probably just wasting your time trying to make him change his mind about this. (Believe me; I have tried!)

Would it help if we changed the designations to "socially oriented" vs "non-socially oriented" humans?

Inger

Re: Re: Axis 5 - any meaning to this?

I really don't know how else to say this respectfully to the group and you aside from...It is subjectively incoherent and highly illogical.

Have you ever thought about a new interest or study?Leif Ekblad <leif@...> wrote:

:> Leif, there is you and other people, the subjective> nature of this is as great as you and then all other> people in the world.I'm not talking about how we perceive others, butthe clustering of a wide array of traits along a autisticand NT axis. In fact, the MVSP program doesn't havea slightest clue that some of the cases are autisticand some NTs. It only uses its mathematical algorithmsto cluster the questions into the most important groups(called axis) and then calculates "loadings" for thequestions. It also gives you a number that indicateshow much of the variance in the answers that canbe explained by each axis. The results of this analysisis also validated by the manual groupings I do in thecross-referenced evaluation, where I give correlationsbetween questions and the groups. There is goodconsistency in all this, both between quiz versionsand between MVSP and manual grouping.As anybody answering the quiz since version II shouldbe aware of, I intend to publish the results in a scientific,peer-reviewed journal. However, since this topic is socontroversial, I need to cover all the possibilities, andcurrently I see a need to put g-factor and temperamentgroups into the quiz before publishing. By having thoseaxis which are confirmed by others, it gets a lot lesscontroversial and harder to discard.LeifNew Songhttp://www.aspergershosting.com/audio/Onwah.wma

New Messenger with Voice. Call regular phones from your PC for low, low rates.

[Guest guest]

I am sure he has himself believing some things, which only he will

agree upon.

>

> ,

>

> Is it possible that you and Leif could just agree to disagree on

this issue?

>

> Leif is one of the most stubborn Aspies I've ever met so you are

probably just wasting your time trying to make him change his mind

about this. (Believe me; I have tried!)

>

> Would it help if we changed the designations to " socially oriented "

vs " non-socially oriented " humans?

>

> Inger

[Guest guest]

Well, at least he doesn't force anyone else to believe in his " other

species " -theory; anyone is free to disagree.

You have stated that you don't agree, so now we know what you think. :-)

Last time you did so, I took inspiration from it and amended my thinking a

little. I still believe Aspies and other neuro-diverse people are

genetically different, but not necessarily a separate race; that's taking it

a bit far, IMO.

(I have also tried to refrain from using the world NT, upon your

recommendation.)

Inger

Re: Axis 5 - any meaning to this?

I am sure he has himself believing some things, which only he will

agree upon.

>

> ,

>

> Is it possible that you and Leif could just agree to disagree on

this issue?

>

> Leif is one of the most stubborn Aspies I've ever met so you are

probably just wasting your time trying to make him change his mind

about this. (Believe me; I have tried!)

>

> Would it help if we changed the designations to " socially oriented "

vs " non-socially oriented " humans?

>

> Inger

FAM Secret Society is a community based on respect, friendship, support and

acceptance. Everyone is valued.

Check the Links section for more FAM forums.

[Guest guest]

Just people who are born experiencing various levels of differences.

People it is , not aliens, not labels just who we are individually.

It is just a label, afford others the ability to be more so

themselves, then reminding them of the label as self.

There is a psychological harm to labeling, it is most evident. Yet

also there are positives to labeling.

>

> Well, at least he doesn't force anyone else to believe in his " other

> species " -theory; anyone is free to disagree.

>

> You have stated that you don't agree, so now we know what you think. :-)

>

> Last time you did so, I took inspiration from it and amended my

thinking a

> little. I still believe Aspies and other neuro-diverse people are

> genetically different, but not necessarily a separate race; that's

taking it

> a bit far, IMO.

>

> (I have also tried to refrain from using the world NT, upon your

> recommendation.)

>

> Inger

>

>

[Guest guest]

:

> Autistic is just a trait of symptoms, they all think differently and

> they are not a species and neither are people without a form of autism.

How do you know? Can you prove that autistics are not

a species, and that the species of NT doesn't exist? I think

I can prove my point that autistics and NTs are indeed

separate species. I haven't got it published yet, so it

isn't considered as real yet, but I will.

> There is no true aspie, that's a label that was made up, and then

> taken too seriously, serious enough to apply to an identity.

There is a personality-type that matches Aspie to 80-90%,

and it is real alright. It also spans the entire spectrum of

human variation from sexual traits, social traits, behavior

preferences, disease predispositions and even physical

traits.

> All blind people are blind, that's a fact. All people with a form of

> autism are not as directly similar, nor even close to that by

> comparison to a blind person not seeing.

Bad comparision. If you can survey blind people and make

them cluster on various traits, apart from being blind, I'll accept

your analogy.

> There are humans, not N.T's and Aspies.

No, humans are comprised of Aspies and NTs.

I can accept Ingers suggestion that we agree to disagree.

However, I will not change my mind unless somebody

could present evidences that I'm wrong. That will take

quite a bit of work since I've worked on this for several

years by now.

Leif

[Guest guest]

Just a little bit of information, blind people have varying degrees of

blindness. My former neighbor was blind. His blindness was due to a

problem where his retina bled and his vision was impaired by floating

clots in the eyes. His condition was not the same as another person I

met who had retina pigmentosa where the sight was lost gradually till

she could not see unless something was about 1 to 2 inches from her

eye. Still other people are blind due to problems with the nerve

communication to the brain. Some blind people can tell that there are

blurs of color but not see details. Others can intermittently see

small pieces of their surroundings but not enough to safely drive a

car or consistently rely on to read.

I'm reserving comments on the rest of your topic because I don't feel

I know enough to take a stand at this point. Just wanted to let you

know that your assumption about blind people needs looking at again.

On 4/2/06, nathaninfortuna <nathaninfortuna@...> wrote:

> All blind people are blind, that's a fact. All people with a form of

> autism are not as directly similar, nor even close to that by

> comparison to a blind person not seeing.