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

31–40 of 386 posts

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

#31

Post by mrweasel »

RecycledEle wrote: post #8

[flagged]

For adults at least there's also the calculation of "What will this cost me?" You will see people with Downs syndrome force themselves between people fighting without considering that they might themselves be hurt, while the rest of us "normies" makes the calculation that there are twenty guys beating up a single person and they could just as easily take you out as well.

In professional settings we see people not speak out against obvious violations of proper conduct, ethical behavior and wrong doing out of fear. E.g. I know a nurse who should speak up about any number of violations in her workplace. They aren't serious enough to get someone killed and if she does she'll never work in this part of the country again. So yes, should should do something, but the personal cost is immense.

Actually, it does sound a bit sociopathic. Maybe it's just the average person succumbing to a sociopath society.

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

#32

Post by greggsy »

nyanmatt wrote: post #20

“With autism” A large portion of the autistic community is very against this phrasing. Autism is not a disease you carry, or something you “have”. It should be used as an adjective to describe a person: “Autistic people less likely to succumb to bystander effect” Edit: If you follow through to the actual paper referenced you can see they use the correct phrasing.

While I can see where you’re coming from, I don’t believe those around me or the community I live in see it as such a dire designation and of a disease. It’s a common term of phrase that doesn’t really need to be picked apart.

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

#33

Post by mrweasel »

nyanmatt wrote: post #28
ralusek wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm a brown haired person. I'm also a person with brown hair. Neither phrasing makes my brown hair a disease I carry.

That’s a totally false comparison. Brown hair is something you physically have.

Technically so is autism if you want to go that route. It's something that is physically different in your brain, at least different enough that you can spot it with a scan.

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

#34

Post by drewcoo »

orwin wrote: post #14
RecycledEle wrote: post #8

[flagged]

It's not sociopathy, it's more like 'wtf should I do'. I passed a weird certification in highschool to learn how to deal with injuries and dangerous situations (car crash, someone passing out in public) and so far it helped twice. Each time the other helpers had the same (or similar) training I did. However when I met two people fighting each other in public, violently (blood and teeth), I was under a severe bystande…

> It's not sociopathy, it's more like 'wtf should I do'.

You're saying the difference is not in action but in intent.

I claim you can't truly know someone else's intent. Further, I don't think I'd trust a sociopath (ASPD) to tell me honestly what their intent is/was. So I don't understand the difference from an objective point of view.

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

#35

Post by 1letterunixname »

Wow, that's interesting. It's curious how the 2 main demographics of individualists: the eusocial leadership group and people with autistic tendencies. There is obviously some spectrum overlap. It's probably unhelpful to automatically reduce people to stereotypes, but it helps to model and understand tendencies and behaviors.

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

#36

Post by [deleted] »

082349872349872 wrote: post #2

My wife recently discovered "Young Sheldon", and one of the most egregious goofs so far is the idea that Sheldon would suffer from stage fright. We both agree that stage fright is something probably only suffered by people who care about the opinions of strangers.

[deleted]

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

#37

Post by tgv »

ralusek wrote: post #26
nyanmatt wrote: post #20

“With autism” A large portion of the autistic community is very against this phrasing. Autism is not a disease you carry, or something you “have”. It should be used as an adjective to describe a person: “Autistic people less likely to succumb to bystander effect” Edit: If you follow through to the actual paper referenced you can see they use the correct phrasing.

I'm a brown haired person. I'm also a person with brown hair. Neither phrasing makes my brown hair a disease I carry.

There's no point in arguing about these interpretations. Some people get convinced that "X with Y" means that X has Y, and since this is used in sentences like "X has cancer," autism is portrayed as a disease. There are other people who oppose the adjectival phrase for similar reasons.

IMO, the point in these cases is more that a certain phrase has obtained a negative connotation, and should be avoided, but it is framed in some Sapir-Whorf-like style.

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

#38

Post by mjburgess »

themk wrote: post #27
mjburgess wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It might be important to realise that signs and rules are made up by sign-makers and rule-makers; often to their benefit. Reality doesnt come with a rule about leashing dogs on grass. It feels like something is going wrong here in your connecting a dog being off a leash with somehow empathy for the dog. I read your impulse to act here as your mind being hijacked by the sign-maker to conscript you into their preferred…

No, these rules exist so that everyone can have a safe space. Go find an off-leash area for your dog.

I'd imagine the person walking his dog was making the area no less safe for anyone else. Maybe people might feel safer.

The rule, in the abstract, can be given some plausible 'social good' defense -- many rules can, even the most insidious. No doubt, on extreme averages, dogs being on leashes marginally improves the on-average saftey.

But this 'on-average' is a radical abstraction. What it says is that the dog's freedom, enjoyment, and that of their owner must be Brought Into Order to fit with a system of values which discounts that entirely.

The sign is a symptom of this system of disciplining people; it conscripts them into a value system which may routinely be against their benefit and that of many others.

The sign doesnt tell you this; the sign gives you no critical autonomy to engage with its system of values --- in the way a conversation would.

That is how I diagnose this commenter's issue: his critical faculties are not being triggered. Rather the sign is seen transparently as a command to be followed.

There are no Commands to be Followed. There are only people commanding, and following them is advised only if it is advised.

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

#39

Post by jollofricepeas »

Yoric wrote: post #7

Anecdotal evidence: around me, several kids are on the autistic spectrum. It's hard to prevent them from intervening when they notice what they feel is an injustice, towards them or others. At some point, this included one of them regularly attempting to rescue babies from baby trolleys, which they considered a prison. Fortunately, the would-be rescuer was only aged 3 at the time.

Hate to be another person with another anecdote.

But…

I manage several neurodivergent people and to be honest they are the best thing about our company.

They lead in areas that neurotypicals do not which often is being one of the few to speak out when something appears to be wrong or is wrong.

Specifically…

- issues that impact women, ethnic minorities & lgbtqia

- issues that impact healthcare coverage for pay

- issues that impact compensation for themselves and others

we about had a riot when they found out our org was not matching inflation.

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

#40

Post by nyanmatt »

greggsy wrote: post #32
nyanmatt wrote: post #20

“With autism” A large portion of the autistic community is very against this phrasing. Autism is not a disease you carry, or something you “have”. It should be used as an adjective to describe a person: “Autistic people less likely to succumb to bystander effect” Edit: If you follow through to the actual paper referenced you can see they use the correct phrasing.

While I can see where you’re coming from, I don’t believe those around me or the community I live in see it as such a dire designation and of a disease. It’s a common term of phrase that doesn’t really need to be picked apart.

Your community may not be the problem. There are other communities (such as Autism Speaks) which do view it as a disease. And the popularity of this viewpoint is evident by the number of jigsaw puzzle piece bumper stickers around.
Post reply on HN