• Feeling isolated? You're not alone.

    Join 20,000+ people who understand exactly how your day went. Whether you're newly diagnosed, self-identified, or supporting someone you love – this is a space where you don't have to explain yourself.

    Join the Conversation → It's free, anonymous, and supportive.

    As a member, you'll get:

    • A community that actually gets it – no judgment, no explanations needed
    • Private forums for sensitive topics (hidden from search engines)
    • Real-time chat with others who share your experiences
    • Your own blog to document your journey

    You've found your people. Create your free account

They obviously were testing NTs here...

I don't know if it's an "obvious" conclusion. Nor would I assume that every autistic person likes being lost in thought for too long. I know I don't.
 
I think Ereth kinda covers what I was going to say.

The title of this thread would imply that NT's can't deal with their thoughts for a.. well, extended, period of time at all and that we aspies are all better at this (and presumably might be introverts, since such traits are more commonly associated with introverts).

The test does not state that neurotypology has anything to do with said test. In fact it would be the same as stating "they were obviously testing Caucasian people here". There's no criteria stated in the test so far that neurotypology is relevant here. They took averages.

And what if there were aspies in there, and they, as Ereth said, can't deal with being lost in their own thoughts.

In the future, please don't name threads this way, since it doesn't cover the article linked (despite it being an interesting observation) and does invite to a lot of NT-bashing and/or Aspie-supremacy, something we would like to keep out on this forum.
 
Seems more like an extroverted characteristic than an NT characteristic.

Ominous and kind of pathetic that people would rather shock themselves than sit quietly and think.
 
I dunno...I'd be quite curious to see what it's like to shock myself. I don't think I'd be able to resist the temptation. :P
 
The article states that the participants had received the same shock before, and had stated that they would pay to avoid experiencing it again.
 
Study: People Would Rather Be Shocked Than Be Alone With Their Thoughts - Slashdot

The links within this lead to content with a unique outlook.
Being alone, thinking, is referred to as "down time."
And thinking, being alone to think, is equated with
"doing nothing."

("Doing something is better than doing nothing, for most people, study shows.")

Another link:
“When people are spending time inside their heads, they're markedly less happy.”
Who are these people? What is the problem with their heads? My head is an OK place
to be. I am there quite a lot of the time. lol

A peculiar point in the articles is the insistence that a person left on his own
will have nothing to focus upon. o_O
 
Manuheleku said:
As an electrician, I'd not recommend it. :) Seriously, even small shocks are disconcerting.
Click to expand...
Depends on what you mean by "small". I've purposely shocked myself with two different e-collars to test the lower settings, and at those low settings, it was really not disconcerting or bothersome.
 
67% of male study participants, and 25% of female participants chose to shock themselves rather than sit and think. This means that 33% of male participants and 75% of female participants were happy to sit quietly.

And...men, correct me if I'm wrong, but I'm wondering if the gender difference was partly due to a few young men doing some "If I can take a shock, it proves I'm tough" thing. Maybe not just the men. It's the kind of thing I might do. (Not to prove I'm tough, just as an experiment).

And one of the people commenting in the link said "So could I. But if I was sat in an empty room with a button that gave me a shock, I'd definitely press it - not because I couldn't handle the boredom, but just to see what it's like. I'm not sure this study really measures what it intends to."

Another said:
"As the experiment was conducted (correct me if I'm wrong!) they agreed to sit out the period alone and all of them did so. They were not asked to refrain from pressing the button..

So the only difference from the basic experiment was the presence of the button which offered entertainment and also enlightenment -- in the form of providing the subject an opportunity to test and prove they could endure the shock, a new and unfamiliar experience.

In this version the experimenters FAILED to provide an environment with NO stimulation. They merely reduced available entertainment options to one, the button.

What the experiment did prove is that given time alone to think and reflect -- people will reevaluate their own aversion to an "unpleasant" sensation and decide to take advantage of an opportunity to better themselves by proving (to themselves) they can endure it."

And: "I find it perfectly healthy that half of the people admitted they "hated" the experience of enforced idleness on some one else's terms. Asking people their feelings towards contemplation, especially in cases the subject could choose their own place, that's real research."
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

New Threads

Top Bottom