New Test For Neurological Variation

**Posts:** 1123 · by **davidbanner99@** » Mon Sep 21, 2020 7:27 pm

Posted this on my website today. It's not yet finished as the key requires notes and quotes.
This test is geared less towards some magic score. My emphasis always is on how people vary in information processing. I'm not overy worried over the defects in personality but abstract, associative thought processes deserve more emphasis.

TEST FOR PATHOLOGY OF HANS ASPERGER

This test differs from other Asperger tests because it has been designed to make people aware of what might, or might not, apply to them. Later, some comments on the questions will be added to clarify them. Socially integrated people, who deviate somewhat from the typical, neurological norm, may see areas where they have autism characteristics. However, the full picture of clinical pathology may relate to very few individuals.

(1) I experienced significant difficulty at school and struggled to concentrate on explanations made by teachers. (Agree) (Disagree) *
(2)I was considered by many to be quite bright but my actual performance in class was below standard. (Agree) (Disagree)*
(3 During my school years I daydreamed and would often lose track of what was being explained by teachers. (Agree) (Disagree)*
(4) My time at school was full of conflict, tension and apprehension. (Agree) (Disagree)*
(5) I found reading far easier than maths as I was growing up. I suffered mental blocks with arithmetic. (Agree) (Disagree) –
(6) In some subjects, I did quite well at school but feel this was the result of my own efforts and not a direct result of what was communicated in class.(Agree) (Disagree) *
(7) I consider myself more capable of learning new skills or subjects without the need to find a class, study group or teacher. (Agree) (Disagree) *
(8) I find I need to learn information in my own way and at my own pace. (Agree) (Disagree) *
(9) I tend to notice small details that most people would not pay importance to. (Agree) (Disagree) *
(10) I often find I can solve more complicated problems by using my own methods as opposed to trying to understand accepted explanations. (Agree) (Disagree) *
(11) I have noticed that my overall perception of standard subjects and way of thinking in general seems not to relate to the norm or resonate with others. (Agree) (Disagree) *
(12) I prefer to direct my efforts towards some physical result I can show to others, such as something I made or designed. I see myself as productive and purposeful. (Agree) (Disagree)
(13) I tend to be governed more by my intellect and understanding than my emotions. I don’t react spontaneously but carefully consider facts as they appear before me. (Agree) (Disagree)*
(14) I am very methodical and prefer a systematic, organized approach to any new subject I approach. (Agree) (Disagree)
(15) I am very organized and motivated to see each task completed to the finish. I am purposeful and animated in my work. I always prefer to be physically occupied (Agree) (Disagree)
(16) I get bored when I have to follow a rigid system of beginning and end, using an”A” to “Z” approach. I dislike organised, mechanised systems of tuition. (Agree) (Disagree)*
(17) I am very much guided by my emotions and tend to express my feelings quite openly. (Agree) (Disagree)
(18) I smile a lot and appear bubbly as well as interested in what’s going on around me. ((Agree) (Disagree)
(19) I would consider myself to be facially expressive in such a way as people can usually guess my mood through my expression. (Agree) (Disagree)
(20) I rarely smile or show my emotions during everyday interaction. (Agree) (Disagree) *
(21) I may sometimes offend others by a general insensitivity towards their feelings or misinterpretation of boundaries. None of this is intentional. (Agree) (Disagree) *
(22) I have never had a boyfriend or girlfriend. (Agree) (Disagree) –
(23) I have significant difficulty forming close friendships or bonding with other people. (Agree) (Disagree) *
(24) I am not very good at being sympathetic or understanding and prefer to offer structured, rational advice to solve problems more pragmatically. (Agree) (Disagree)*
(25) I always feel unable to meet the basic expectations demanded of me in everyday life. (Agree) (Disagree)*
(26) I appear to have no status where groups, organizations or teams are concerned. I often feel ignored and passed by. (Agree) (Disagree)*
(27) I consider myself to be popular and tend to follow the latest trends and areas of interest as others. (Agree) (Disagree)
(28) I would describe myself as introverted and reluctant to socialise. (Agree) (Disagree)-
(29) I consider myself socially communicative and not shy. At the same time my social skills are not very good because …….
(A) I dominate the conversation and steer it towards my own point of interest. (Agree) (Disagree)*
(B) I tend to make inappropriate remarks that distract from the current point of debate. (Agree) (Disagree)*
(30) I have always been in conflict within family circles or at work. (Agree) (Disagree)*
(31) I would describe myself as obsessive over my interests and very goal orientated in these areas. (Agree) (Disagree)*
32) I am not suited to work that requires physical dexterity or co-ordination. I find mechanical work to be difficult. (Agree) (Disagree)*
(33) In the opinion of others, my handwriting is poor and scrawly. (Agree) (Disagree) *
(34) I tend to struggle with personal appearance and hygiene. (Agree) (Disagree)-
(35) I am very sensitive to noise and may be annoyed by dripping taps or rustling caused by wind. (Agree) (Disagree) *
(36) I prefer to wear my familiar, worn clothes and may feel uncomfortable in stiff shirts or wooly fabrics on my skin. (Agree) (Disagree)*
(37) My overall motor movements are slow and awkward. I struggle to catch a ball and was very poor at team sports. (Agree) (Disagree)*
(38) People notice me as “different” very quickly and pick up on my awkwardness. I have suffered discrimination from childhood onwards to adulthood. (Agree) (Disagree)*
(39) I often feel angry, resentful and very negative towards other people. (Agree) (Disagree)*
(40) I have suffered from (or still suffer from) obsessive, compulsive disorder or obsessive, repetitive behaviour. (Agree) (Disagree)*
(41) I am sometimes unable to recognise people I know in unfamiliar surroundings. I may mistake a total stranger for someone I actually know. (Agree) (Disagree)*
(42) I feel no mental connection with other people and feel disconnected from them. It is similar to watching chatacters on TV but not being a part of the show. (Agree) (Disagree)*
(43) I often don’t make eye-contact or engage with those who initiate conversation. (Agree) (Disagree)*
(44) I sometimes feel as if no specific gender is dominant in my personality. (Agree) (Disagree)*
(45) I cannot normally share in the experiences of other people and tend to view life from my own perspective. (Agree) (Disagree)*
KEY:
Asterisk + Agree pushes score more towards pathology.
No Asterisk + Agree tends to push against Asperger pathology.

sign indicates grey areas.
The key is not much use till the notes are added later on.

**Posts:** 105 · by **bawdyheated** » Tue Sep 22, 2020 3:19 am

Wow this is absolutely very helpful!

**Posts:** 12131 · by **Richard@DecisionSkills** » Tue Sep 22, 2020 12:02 pm

Two things....

ONE: The test uses many double barreled questions.

Take question 15. I am organized AND motivated. I am purposeful AND animated. To answer (Agree) the person cannot disagree with any of the 4. What if they are organized, purposeful, and animated, but not motivated? They have 3 out of 4...they still select disagree?

Double barrel questions end up causing confusion and tend to reduce test validity.

TWO: why only a two point scale? Why limit responses to only agree/disagree?

**Posts:** 1123 · by **davidbanner99@** » Tue Sep 22, 2020 7:07 pm

Richard@DecisionSkills wrote:Two things....

ONE: The test uses many double barreled questions.

Take question 15. I am organized AND motivated. I am purposeful AND animated. To answer (Agree) the person cannot disagree with any of the 4. What if they are organized, purposeful, and animated, but not motivated? They have 3 out of 4...they still select disagree?

Double barrel questions end up causing confusion and tend to reduce test validity.

TWO: why only a two point scale? Why limit responses to only agree/disagree?

This test is different to the norm as it doesn't claim to diagnose anyone. Plus, I haven't yet added the notes which explain the questions. The notes are necessary once the test is complete. The idea is to answer the questions honestly. Question 15 is looking for the lack of direct purpose noted in autistic children. They have what German specialists call "low tension" which reduces physical output and systematic approach. Lots of patients struggle to finish tasks or work to a schedule. Put simply, a person with autism wouldn't be typically dashing around an office to a set schedule. Not normally. Soviet psychiatrists even suggested the low stimulus in the hippocampus part of the brain can stifle retina development and cause myopia.

**Posts:** 1123 · by **davidbanner99@** » Tue Sep 22, 2020 7:14 pm

Take 31. That may sound contradictory. Even so, if you were fanatically collecting lists of washing machine parts, you may be doing all of this sat alone in a room with no real purpose in mind or goal anyone could relate to. So, later I will add notes and explanations. Even the key really needs more detail.

**Posts:** 1123 · by **davidbanner99@** » Tue Sep 22, 2020 7:26 pm

bawdyheated wrote:Wow this is absolutely very helpful!

I didn't want to do a test where people wanted to somehow "pass". What's expected is most people will relate to a few questions and possibly nobody will relate to all of them.

**Posts:** 12131 · by **Richard@DecisionSkills** » Tue Sep 22, 2020 7:43 pm

davidbanner99@ wrote:This test is different to the norm as it doesn't claim to diagnose anyone.

If the test is not mean to diagnose, why is the title “Test for...”?

If I write “Test for heart disease” it implies the test will diagnose heart disease.

If you write “Test for Pathology...” it implies diagnosis.

And if it is not for diagnosis, what is the value of taking the time to take the test?

**Posts:** 12131 · by **Richard@DecisionSkills** » Tue Sep 22, 2020 9:38 pm

davidbanner99@ wrote:Take 31. That may sound contradictory.

....(31) I would describe myself as obsessive over my interests and very goal orientated in these areas. (Agree) (Disagree)

It is two questions, i.e. a double-barrel question.

Question 1: I would describe myself as obsessive over my interests.
Question 2: I would describe myself as goal-oriented in areas in which I have an interest.

A person might agree they are obsessive but disagree that they are goal-oriented.

I'm not sure what purpose the test serves. If it is just for fun with no real value then having double or triple or quadruple barrel questions is not an issue. Or maybe to "agree" you have research that shows the person must be both obsessive and goal-oriented. Maybe the research shows if they describe themself as neither or one, but not the other, then disagree is the correct response.

**Posts:** 1123 · by **davidbanner99@** » Tue Sep 22, 2020 10:48 pm

Richard@DecisionSkills wrote:
davidbanner99@ wrote:Take 31. That may sound contradictory.

....(31) I would describe myself as obsessive over my interests and very goal orientated in these areas. (Agree) (Disagree)

It is two questions, i.e. a double-barrel question.

Question 1: I would describe myself as obsessive over my interests.
Question 2: I would describe myself as goal-oriented in areas in which I have an interest.

A person might agree they are obsessive but disagree that they are goal-oriented.

I'm not sure what purpose the test serves. If it is just for fun with no real value then having double or triple or quadruple barrel questions is not an issue. Or maybe to "agree" you have research that shows the person must be both obsessive and goal-oriented. Maybe the research shows if they describe themself as neither or one, but not the other, then disagree is the correct response.

I don't think there are any tests that can do away with interpretation. One mistake I spotted was the mathematics one. It is true that most of the anamneses I looked at do show reduced maths with higher linguistic intelligence. However, not always. So I will modify that.
Your other point obviously deserves consideration if the question seemed unclear. Please be aware I typed the test in one day with the added information it will have notes at the end. So, it is really going to be streamlined. The agree or disagree so far is a simple option but later that will be more detailed.
First part is designed to raise questions. Second part explains how the questions were intended. Third part allows the person to build a picture.
In time, it should be a pretty useful test I hope.

**Posts:** 12131 · by **Richard@DecisionSkills** » Tue Sep 22, 2020 11:36 pm

davidbanner99@ wrote:In time, it should be a pretty useful test I hope.

Are there no current tests for pathology of Hans Asperger?

Best of luck.

**Posts:** 1123 · by **davidbanner99@** » Tue Sep 22, 2020 11:38 pm

I noticed people respond more to tests than posts. Tests are a good way to engage interest. The problem with established Asperger tests is they are a bit stereotypical. Most people believe Asperger people are geeky, computer wizards with all "A" grades. I am putting together more historical tests based on the 1940s papers. This introduces a more controversial picture although it's also true to say Lorna Wing's patients were all pretty clinical. I'm currently exchanging mails with some very highly qualified neurology professors, I.Q. think-tanks and writers. Pretty much we all share imput. My main contribution is I dig up really old texts of German origen so read the sources Asperger used.

**Posts:** 12131 · by **Richard@DecisionSkills** » Wed Sep 23, 2020 1:14 am

davidbanner99@ wrote: The problem with established Asperger tests is they are a bit stereotypical. Most people believe Asperger people are geeky, computer wizards with all "A" grades.

So you think that the current tests cause what most people believe, i.e. the stereotypes?

I am putting together more historical tests based on the 1940s papers. This introduces a more controversial picture although it's also true to say Lorna Wing's patients were all pretty clinical.

And you think the solution is to develop a new test using old papers?

FIRST, I would guess that over 90% of the general public has never seen an Asperger's test, and if they have seen the test it is not what causes or forms the stereotype. If the test has any influence on the cause or formation of incorrect stereotypes it is driven by inaccurate media (television, movies, novels).

If your goal is to influence how people view or "stereotype" people with Aspergers you are better off spending your time writing the next movie or miniseries that portray characters with Aspergers in a different way. They can be stereotyped based on the way you portray the condition.

Think of it this way...you hold a stereotype of what it means to be an Italian mobster. What caused that stereotype? Did you come across a test that asked you to agree/disagree with mobster related questions? No. You have a stereotype because throughout life you have seen repeated images, movies, etc. that paint a picture of what it means to be an Italian mobster.

Am I incorrect on the purpose of the test? To inform people, to create a different view of Aspergers?

SECOND, it's always good to reference original work, but just because it is original doesn't make it more accurate, truthful, or better. From the 1940's there will be a progression of more research that builds a large body of work. As technology and new methods to conduct research were developed what was thought about Aspergers in the 1940's was certainly improved. In the 1940's for instance, there were no fMRI machines.

That said, reading the original works is always interesting. It is interesting to see how over time the ideas evolve.

**Posts:** 1123 · by **davidbanner99@** » Wed Sep 23, 2020 7:41 pm

It's worth reading the Judith Miller and Sally Ozonoff paper. I found it by chance after I had already reached the same conclusion. Miller and Ozonoff compared the DSM with historic Asperger's patient anamneses. Amazingly, Asperger's patients would not have been diagnosed with Asperger Syndrome at that time (Ozonoff's)and this was demonstrated by the paper. Miller added also that the DSM didn't at all represent Asperger's actual patients. The question that then arises is why call a "syndrome" after the name of a doctor when supposedly his patients didn't meet the criteria? These were Fritz, Harro, Helmut and Erist. My own research using patient details from USSR clinics matches these four Austrian children with many others. The Soviet research was organized and very useful. So, after the Ozonoff study it was decided to scrap the Asperger diagnosis, which is where I parted company. I have found the original studies by Asperger, Suhareva and S. Munhin to be far more accurate. I have an 18 page essay covering the subject that is open to read to anyone interested.

**Posts:** 12131 · by **Richard@DecisionSkills** » Wed Sep 23, 2020 7:51 pm

davidbanner99@ wrote: So, after the Ozonoff study it was decided to scrap the Asperger diagnosis, which is where I parted company. I have found the original studies by Asperger, Suhareva and S. Munhin to be far more accurate. I have an 18 page essay covering the subject that is open to read to anyone interested.

Great.

It still is not clear the purpose or goal. Who is the audience of your 18-page essay? What do you hope to accomplish with the test?

My best guess, based on what you have provided thus far, is that you have the goal of changing stereotypes. It is an admirable goal, yet I'm still trying to clarify if that is in fact the main goal.

You seem to have dedicated a significant amount of time to studying the subject. You have also spent significant time writing an essay and developing a test for others. That is no small task. What is not clear...at least to me...is your purpose.

**Posts:** 1123 · by **davidbanner99@** » Wed Sep 23, 2020 7:56 pm

Rather than post a link, you can locate the Miller Ozonoff paper the same way I did by chance. Simply type "Asperger Fritz" (minus the quotes, and the essay appears. It's very detailed and is now recognised as a turning-point.Name of paper: Did Asperger's cases have Asperger Disorder?
As to the test I published it on my website and will have it completed in three weeks or so.

New Test For Neurological Variation

#1

#2

#3

#4

#5

#6

#7

#8

#9

#10

#11

#12

#13

#14

Main Menu

Psychology Resources

Recent posts

Active topics

Contact Us