My college psychology textbook says...

[scifinerd]

...a lot of stuff that I find to be rather questionable.

Hello everyone, I'm currently taking a psychology class at my university and I'm not not really happy with the information presented in my textbook. So I decided to highlight some of the stuff I find to be either inaccurate, misleading, and/or offensive. Below are some screen shots that I took of the pages. So please read them and share your opinions. I'm really curious about what everyone's thought's are because this is what is being taught to hundreds of college students. If this needs to change then I'm ready to do something about it. After all ignorance is a byproduct of misinformation, so if we want to wipe out ignorance I think a good start would be to stop teaching it.

(Please note there may be some spots that I forgot to highlight.)

...Well there you have it.

Since I'm asking for all your opinions I figure I'd share mine too. Firstly I don't like that it essentially portrays everyone on the spectrum as being the same. By that I mean that it seems to contain too many all inclusive statements (i.e. Children with autism...) rather than "Some" autistic children. Personally I feel that the way it portrays ASDs is not only wrong but also damaging to those of us on the spectrum. My other issue is the fact that it treats the autism spectrum as a disease, which I feel is really offensive. My last thing is I find it very misleading to call a meltdown a tantrum when they are in fact two very different things. I guess to summarize I feel that a lot of the information is untrue, inaccurate, and misleading.

What do all of you think about it?

Also please vote in my poll

Thanks for reading my post! (sorry it's so long)

(PS:I value everyone's thoughts/opinions so it's perfectly okay if yours differ from mine.)

 

[Katleya]

I believe this is your first post, so I'll start with welcome!

As for your textbook, how lovely... said no one ever.
There's hardly any nuance. Whoever wrote this missed the memo on the "S" part of ASD. But what's very concerning to me is that it's not 100% crap, a few of the things written do have grounds in reality, although they are gross generalizations that seem presented as a monolithic truth. I find it concerning because someone who doesn't have a deeper knowledge will trust what's written, since it's partly true, and then they'll apply that "knowledge" elsewhere.
At any rate, that section needs to be revised, and it would be great if the textbook could be removed from whatever list it's on until it's amended.

 

[Streetwise]

...a lot of stuff that I find to be rather questionable.

Hello everyone, I'm currently taking a psychology class at my university and I'm not not really happy with the information presented in my textbook. So I decided to highlight some of the stuff I find to be either inaccurate, misleading, and/or offensive. Below are some screen shots that I took of the pages. So please read them and share your opinions. I'm really curious about what everyone's thought's are because this is what is being taught to hundreds of college students. If this needs to change then I'm ready to do something about it. After all ignorance is a byproduct of misinformation, so if we want to wipe out ignorance I think a good start would be to stop teaching it.

(Please note there may be some spots that I forgot to highlight.)
View attachment 38599 View attachment 38600
...Well there you have it.

Since I'm asking for all your opinions I figure I'd share mine too. Firstly I don't like that it essentially portrays everyone on the spectrum as being the same. By that I mean that it seems to contain too many all inclusive statements (i.e. Children with autism...) rather than "Some" autistic children. Personally I feel that the way it portrays ASDs is not only wrong but also damaging to those of us on the spectrum. My other issue is the fact that it treats the autism spectrum as a disease, which I feel is really offensive. My last thing is I find it very misleading to call a meltdown a tantrum when they are in fact two very different things. I guess to summarize I feel that a lot of the information is untrue, inaccurate, and misleading.

What do all of you think about it?

Also please vote in my poll

Thanks for reading my post! (sorry it's so long)

(PS:I value everyone's thoughts/opinions so it's perfectly okay if yours differ from mine.)

As Stephen Fry says " that is arse gravy"

 

[Streetwise]

it's like somebody just wrote down the word autism and then randomly picked out words from a hat???!!!!!

...a lot of stuff that I find to be rather questionable.

Hello everyone, I'm currently taking a psychology class at my university and I'm not not really happy with the information presented in my textbook. So I decided to highlight some of the stuff I find to be either inaccurate, misleading, and/or offensive. Below are some screen shots that I took of the pages. So please read them and share your opinions. I'm really curious about what everyone's thought's are because this is what is being taught to hundreds of college students. If this needs to change then I'm ready to do something about it. After all ignorance is a byproduct of misinformation, so if we want to wipe out ignorance I think a good start would be to stop teaching it.

(Please note there may be some spots that I forgot to highlight.)
View attachment 38599 View attachment 38600
...Well there you have it.

Since I'm asking for all your opinions I figure I'd share mine too. Firstly I don't like that it essentially portrays everyone on the spectrum as being the same. By that I mean that it seems to contain too many all inclusive statements (i.e. Children with autism...) rather than "Some" autistic children. Personally I feel that the way it portrays ASDs is not only wrong but also damaging to those of us on the spectrum. My other issue is the fact that it treats the autism spectrum as a disease, which I feel is really offensive. My last thing is I find it very misleading to call a meltdown a tantrum when they are in fact two very different things. I guess to summarize I feel that a lot of the information is untrue, inaccurate, and misleading.

What do all of you think about it?

Also please vote in my poll

Thanks for reading my post! (sorry it's so long)

(PS:I value everyone's thoughts/opinions so it's perfectly okay if yours differ from mine.)

 

[Streetwise]

As Stephen Fry says " that is arse gravy"

amendment:arse is ass (U.S.A) derriére(Quebec)(Fra)
Gesäß(Ger/Austria/Switz)
nalga(spanish speaking)
he means diarrhoea- but if its indescribably fantastic then arse gravy! in english public schools (public means private)that is disdain and probably trying to be polite .

 

[Jennacide]

ASD is not diagnosed exclusively during childhood... Alot of ppl fake being like NTs for a very long time to fit in... I did and didnt get diagnosed until i was 30.

Its not a disease, i dont even think of it as a disorder or impairment.

I dont understand what it means by a small minority experience a full recovery. Recovery from what? The only thing that is going to help us and eleviate our attached mental illnesses (depression, anxiety etc) is if the NT community stops laying down judgements and expecting us to think and act like them. They make things worse for us. Ive said it before and ill say it again, They are the disorder!

 

[Datura]

At first I was wondering what specifically you disliked about the textbook, but the "exclusively diagnosed in childhood" and "recovery" part certainly caught my eye. You also make a good point about them misrepresenting autism as a monolithic condition, rather than a continuum thereof.

The notion of recovery is also rather odd. Even if one were to somehow become alistic and you held the contention that autism was a pathology it still doesn't make sense. To recover is to return to a previous state, so one cannot recover from the way they were born, except to die, I suppose.

 

[Streetwise]

its a mix 80% laziness 5% prejudice (they are strange because they dont look at you)15% greed (we want a guarantee that this book will sell!!!! truth is not sensationalist!!!)

...a lot of stuff that I find to be rather questionable.

Hello everyone, I'm currently taking a psychology class at my university and I'm not not really happy with the information presented in my textbook. So I decided to highlight some of the stuff I find to be either inaccurate, misleading, and/or offensive. Below are some screen shots that I took of the pages. So please read them and share your opinions. I'm really curious about what everyone's thought's are because this is what is being taught to hundreds of college students. If this needs to change then I'm ready to do something about it. After all ignorance is a byproduct of misinformation, so if we want to wipe out ignorance I think a good start would be to stop teaching it.

(Please note there may be some spots that I forgot to highlight.)
View attachment 38599 View attachment 38600
...Well there you have it.

Since I'm asking for all your opinions I figure I'd share mine too. Firstly I don't like that it essentially portrays everyone on the spectrum as being the same. By that I mean that it seems to contain too many all inclusive statements (i.e. Children with autism...) rather than "Some" autistic children. Personally I feel that the way it portrays ASDs is not only wrong but also damaging to those of us on the spectrum. My other issue is the fact that it treats the autism spectrum as a disease, which I feel is really offensive. My last thing is I find it very misleading to call a meltdown a tantrum when they are in fact two very different things. I guess to summarize I feel that a lot of the information is untrue, inaccurate, and misleading.

What do all of you think about it?

Also please vote in my poll

Thanks for reading m
y post!
(sorry it's so long)

(PS:I value everyone's to thoughts/opinions so it's perfectly okay if yours differ from mine.)

its list of what autism speaks likes

 

[Judge]

Yeah, I have to agree with Katleya. Me too, being surprised that they even bothered to mention that autism is on a spectrum of traits and behaviors. That you cannot just itemize such things as if they applied to each and every one of us with the same amplitude. They don't. Very misleading for a college textbook, IMO.

If such authors bothered to actually observe a community of people on the spectrum, they'd likely see without a lot of difficulty that we're really quite a diverse lot on various levels.

 

[Lady Penelope]

They missed the part where it's exclusively a male 'disease' ...

This is incredibly outdated.
I'm not going to take offense unless you print the publication date and it's post 1980.

 

[wight]

Typical text book, 3 paragraphs of over generalization on one aspect of something and then 3 sentences intimating that what you just read isn't the full story. It is roughly accurate if they are writing exclusively about the actual diagnosis of autism (not Aspergers, not atypical autism, not HFA, etc.) only the narrow section of the spectrum labeled "austism" in the DSM 4.

You are correct, it is terribly over generalized and out of date. (and I might add, poorly written).

@Lady Penelope , get ready to be offended, the text references a study from 2009 and the DSM-V... therefore it must have been written after they were published.

 

[onlything]

Sweet.

So typical for narrowminded people and so common both in the past and the present.

 

[Lady Penelope]

Typical text book, 3 paragraphs of over generalization on one aspect of something and then 3 sentences intimating that what you just read isn't the full story. It is roughly accurate if they are writing exclusively about the actual diagnosis of autism (not Aspergers, not atypical autism, not HFA, etc.) only the narrow section of the spectrum labeled "austism" in the DSM 4.

You are correct, it is terribly over generalized and out of date. (and I might add, poorly written).

@Lady Penelope , get ready to be offended, the text references a study from 2009 and the DSM-V... therefore it must have been written after they were published.

Aaaaaahhhhhh!!!!!
That is so irresponsible. I. Can't. Even.

 

[Chance]

And the gross generalizations are what makes people "experts" on our "DISEASE"...

Does this ever get better? I don't think anyone of us call ASD a disease. Just lump us in with STD's, AID's, Lepersy, and full blown mental retardation... DSM has been doing a good job of making this more mucky, so I guess it just keeps the divisions alive and well.

I think that text book is nothing but emergency ass wiping material... sorry I'm being tacky but its my only public jab back at these ass hats who think they have this all figured out... When in fact most of us can most often think them into a corner, with them sucking their finger in a fetal position, we just have more honor than to ever do that.

 

[onlything]

And the gross generalizations are what makes people "experts" on our "DISEASE"...

Does this ever get better? I don't think anyone of us call ASD a disease. Just lump us in with STD's, AID's, Lepersy, and full blown mental retardation... DSM has been doing a good job of making this more mucky, so I guess it just keeps the divisions alive and well.

I think that text book is nothing but emergency ass wiping material... sorry I'm being tacky but its my only public jab back at these ass hats who think they have this all figured out... When in fact most of us can most often think them into a corner, with them sucking their finger in a fetal position, we just have more honor than to ever do that.

Disease, huh? Looks like disorder is not enough of a label anymore. I'd rather call us like Temple Grandin's mother called her: Different but no less.

 

[Streetwise]

also think of the poor Forests that have been cut down, to supply this to organisations like autism speaks -who will Delight in it ,i bet they asked autism speaks what should be written.

 

[xudo]

I wasn't diagnosed til 31

 

[Sabrina]

I didn't get passed the first paragraph. Most people (at least in my social environment) have those wrong conceptions. That is why I am a closeted Aspie.

 

[Ylva]

Okay, since when is it a three-year-old's job to connect with adults? Especially ones who take great pride in their supposed ability to connect with people?

And that photo from the ABA session was hideous. The kid makes more eye contact than the umbridge – but he makes it with the camera, and not the umbridge.

 

[OkRad]

...a lot of stuff that I find to be rather questionable.

Hello everyone, I'm currently taking a psychology class at my university and I'm not not really happy with the information presented in my textbook. So I decided to highlight some of the stuff I find to be either inaccurate, misleading, and/or offensive. Below are some screen shots that I took of the pages. So please read them and share your opinions. I'm really curious about what everyone's thought's are because this is what is being taught to hundreds of college students. If this needs to change then I'm ready to do something about it. After all ignorance is a byproduct of misinformation, so if we want to wipe out ignorance I think a good start would be to stop teaching it.

(Please note there may be some spots that I forgot to highlight.)
View attachment 38599 View attachment 38600
...Well there you have it.

Since I'm asking for all your opinions I figure I'd share mine too. Firstly I don't like that it essentially portrays everyone on the spectrum as being the same. By that I mean that it seems to contain too many all inclusive statements (i.e. Children with autism...) rather than "Some" autistic children. Personally I feel that the way it portrays ASDs is not only wrong but also damaging to those of us on the spectrum. My other issue is the fact that it treats the autism spectrum as a disease, which I feel is really offensive. My last thing is I find it very misleading to call a meltdown a tantrum when they are in fact two very different things. I guess to summarize I feel that a lot of the information is untrue, inaccurate, and misleading.

What do all of you think about it?

Also please vote in my poll

Thanks for reading my post! (sorry it's so long)

(PS:I value everyone's thoughts/opinions so it's perfectly okay if yours differ from mine.)

Most of psychology to me seems like total BS. It is based on modern interpretations of human variations that have existed since the beginning of time. Cicero's Disputations at Tusculum details human emotions and even offers ways to help deal with them. I find that much more helpful. Same with Homer and Aristotle and Plato . I feel in my own heart and mind that current psychologists would be run right over by the likes of those authors I just mentioned. Laughed into oblivion.

As to this article, I am opposed to the way it is written and it is very biased. This is why some parents have even resorted to murdering their autistic kids, though on a few, still it makes me cringe to think they are making it out like this