Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

People with autism less likely to succumb to bystander effect, research finds

sciencedaily.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

321–330 of 386 posts

Re: People with autism less likely to succumb to bystander effect, research finds

#321

Post by PH95VuimJjqBqy »

mjburgess wrote: post #314
PH95VuimJjqBqy wrote: post #302

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The term for this is whataboutism. Despite your protestations to the contrary, this is about unleashed animals in the park. It's not about trees, it's not about weapons (although most parks also have prohibitions against weapons), or teenagers. It's about dogs and why people want them to be leashed. Joel Spoelsky coined a term years ago, architecture astronaut. https://www.joelonsoftware.com/2001/04/21/dont-let-archi…

I have elsewhere defended 'whataboutism' as just another way of asking a person to answer for moral hypocrisy. Some people clearly want to walk their dogs without leashes. Some people want all dogs leashed. Now, what's the moral standard at work? How do you determine the level of danger? If you want to constrain people, limit their ability to lives their lives as they wish, you need to have an answer you can defend w…

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_fatal_dog_attacks_in_t...

> Was babysitting a family members Pit Bull mix. Her family believes the fatal attack occurred while attempting to stop a fight between the Pit Bull and her 2 Chihuahuas.

...

> Bitten by the family dog while playing outside with adult supervision, later died in hospital.

...

> Was at home to check on his daughters dogs when they attacked him.

...

> A 6-year-old boy was killed by the family dog, a pit bull mix; the boy was severely injured and died in hospital the next day.

---

this isn't abstract or theoretical, this is reality. These are dogs that killed _family members_ in 2023, the list of dogs that injured _people_ is much larger.

The signs aren't abstract and the people who put them up aren't doing them for abstract reasons, but for some reason you want this to be an abstract debate while at the same time complaining that the signs were put up.

That's not how it works.

Re: People with autism less likely to succumb to bystander effect, research finds

#322

Post by InSteady »

deadbeeves wrote: post #136
Buttons840 wrote: post #130

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If they feel threatened by dogs off leashes, that's them, let them live. It seems perfectly reasonable for such a person to go someplace where dogs must be on leashes.

I'm not saying they shouldn't live, I'm saying that if off-leash dogs scare you and you don't want to be scared, you shouldn't be outside. Even if every last dog owner kept their dog on a leash at all times, there would still be some dogs without a leash, and all of them would be outside your house. I assume any person would understand that by the time they reach adulthood and either learn to deal with the fact that…

Telling people who have different life experiences and tolerances for risk than you to "stop going outside" is childish, my dude. You seem to struggle with accepting the reality of this person's differing worldview. Maybe take a step back and realize that it's perfectly ok when people disagree with you about stuff on the internet.

Re: People with autism less likely to succumb to bystander effect, research finds

#323

Post by PH95VuimJjqBqy »

eightysixfour wrote: post #178
omginternets wrote: post #163

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Literally nobody in this conversation is arguing that they should be able to do what they want.

That is what arguments like this are: > In a word: discernment. If it's a miniature poodle, you can probably chill. If it's a big dog, it's probably worthwhile to enforce the law. Your whole argument is “judgement is an important component of the law” but what that leads to is differing judgements on what we can do. What individual is so far above reproach that they should have the right to discern whether the situat…

watch and be amazed as I successfully do what you're implying can't be done.

raping a 5 year old should be illegal and there is no grey there.

Go on, explain to me why I'm wrong.

Re: People with autism less likely to succumb to bystander effect, research finds

#324

Post by tysam_and »

at_a_remove wrote: post #174

I've considered getting a serious adult test for something spectrumy. On the casual tests I score high on Systematizing but I fail to score low on the Empathaizing, but again, those are the casual tests. This is another point for me getting some kind of assessment, because I have a very strong anti-bystander effect that seems almost not in my control.

Start with https://embrace-autism.com/raads-r/ as exploration, and see the other formal tests on the page.

Good re-testability, and they're part of what they use for a formal diagnosis.

Re: People with autism less likely to succumb to bystander effect, research finds

#325

Post by permo-w »

lmm wrote: post #237
permo-w wrote: post #154

Earlier quoted context omitted.

this effect seems to be especially true in airports. they seem to particularly inspire dumb herd behaviour. perhaps there's an increase in perceived danger leading to a stronger desire for safety in numbers? another example: queueing to board the plane. other than to fit in, why on earth would I stand there and compete to spend more time in a sweaty uncomfortable seat packed with 400 other people? plus, if you get on…

> this effect seems to be especially true in airports. they seem to particularly inspire dumb herd behaviour. perhaps there's an increase in perceived danger leading to a stronger desire for safety in numbers? There's an increase in potential negative consequences. More people with guns, more chance for "security" to pick on someone they don't like. If you go off on your own and you're right, you don't gain much - if…

I've personally avoided missing flights by breaking from the crowd in airports

Re: People with autism less likely to succumb to bystander effect, research finds

#326

Post by penguin_booze »

wkat4242 wrote: post #140
nathan_compton wrote: post #116

I have mild autism (not entirely politically correct to describe it that way) without intellectual impairments and I frankly see normal people as disabled.

I know what you mean. I remember one time I got off the plane in Italy and I was walking with my girlfriend to customs. At one point we branched off from all the other passengers and she was like "hey we're going the wrong way, everyone is heading there". And I said nope this is the EU passengers exit, look at the sign. She couldn't believe it was right because the plane was full of others from our EU country. All th…

> Even when I'm in a group I'm navigating as if I were alone

This ring true to me about my whole life, both in a good and bad senses.

Re: People with autism less likely to succumb to bystander effect, research finds

#327

Post by hezralig »

GoblinSlayer wrote: post #310
raffraffraff wrote: post #292

I'm not even sure what passes for "autism" these days. Back in the late 90s I helped out at a tiny charity that helped out family's of severely disabled kids. They would be utterly dependent on their parents for everything and needed constant supervision. Almost all were non-verbal. Due to the fact that many of them had genetic conditions, they had a bunch of health problems and also looked different to other kids th…

The article uses it as a synonym for neurodiverse people.

It does not.

Re: People with autism less likely to succumb to bystander effect, research finds

#328

Post by permo-w »

penjelly wrote: post #234
permo-w wrote: post #154

Earlier quoted context omitted.

this effect seems to be especially true in airports. they seem to particularly inspire dumb herd behaviour. perhaps there's an increase in perceived danger leading to a stronger desire for safety in numbers? another example: queueing to board the plane. other than to fit in, why on earth would I stand there and compete to spend more time in a sweaty uncomfortable seat packed with 400 other people? plus, if you get on…

or maybe people are in a new place and processing a totally foreign environment? Maybe theyre stressed/tired from flying? Not thinking because theyre in a rush? Its not that hard to find reasons for why people might make mistakes in an airport. > another example: queueing to board the plane. other than to fit in, why on earth would I stand there and compete to spend more time in a sweaty uncomfortable seat packed wit…

>what? people are following direction, and the way the plane boards is actually important to how fast it loads, so youre messing with that because its a mild convenience to you and you consider that intelligent behaviour?

if this had been the case even once on the tens of flights I've taken in recent years, then I would have participated in that. in reality however, boarding is almost exclusively two naturally-formed queues, priority and not

the tone of your comment sounds to me like suppressed embarrassment. it's okay, you're not an idiot for queueing for boarding, it's just not a behaviour I'm going to participate in for no real reason

Re: People with autism less likely to succumb to bystander effect, research finds

#329

Post by graphe »

RoyalHenOil wrote: post #231
graphe wrote: post #144

>The study was published this week in the October issue of Autism Research and created with collaborators from the University of Toronto. The research participants -- employed individuals, 33 with autism and 34 neurotypical -- were asked to weigh in on hypothetical scenarios involving everything from inefficiencies to inequalities to quality concerns. It's a survey of 67 people. Could have been online even. Nothing I…

Sample size is a red herring. If the difference is big and stark enough, you can detect it even in a MUCH smaller sample than this. You only need a big sample if the difference you are looking for is subtle. Mind you, this is assuming that the sample has been taken in an unbiased manner (nigh impossible in a voluntary survey like this) and that any conclusions you draw are applied only to the population you took the…

It was the fact that it was a survey that made me throw the article in my mental trash.

Re: People with autism less likely to succumb to bystander effect, research finds

#330

Post by sokka_h2otribe »

Obscurity4340 wrote: post #206
sokka_h2otribe wrote: post #203

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hi, I didn't totally understand your writing. One reason why a lot of things are comorbid: generally, few mental things have "a single gene" but are manifestations of many gene differences and nature. One reason why a lot of things are comorbid is just that more people are a little something than a lot something, and people who get diagnosed for one thing are more likely to have resources and reasons to be diagnosed…

No like I know I'm word salad here. I just mean that I wonder to what extent certain tendencies are related to stimulant meds vs a natural desire to like be on my own, playing and entertaining myself, and not relying on anyone else to enrich or make sure I'm ok

Hmm, I suspect for example "rambly long post" is more common ADHD trait on stimulants than off. Maybe that's what you're talking about?

Besides that, I think, generally, traits will be "a combination of reasons."

For example, even before stimulants folks w/ADHD had bursts of energy and attitude that can be similar to stimulant-driven quirks. Those quirks are probably just more common w/meds

Post reply on HN