For context I have audhd. I’ve always been confused about the association between stacking toys and autism. I don’t particularly remember stacking toys as a kid other than of course I did because I was a kid. Don’t lots of kids try to stack stuff as high as possible occasionally? Why is this seen as an autistic trait? Is it a stereotype due to the historical bias towards autistic boys with a particular presentation or something else? If it really is associated with autism and not a bias, why do autistic kids do it more?
You must log in or register to comment.
It’s no so much stacking that’s a notable symptom, it’s collecting, arranging, sorting and displaying, often without playing with the toys as intended. Instead the focus is more on neatly sorting by color / shape / size etc. and sometimes preferring to keep them in that configuration over playing with them.
This is similar to the tendency for some autistics to focus on the part of a toy, like spinning the wheels on a toy truck, instead of playing with the truck doing truck things.
While these are commonly associated with autism, these two examples are neither necessary or sufficient symptoms to diagnose autism. Meaning that you can see this symptom in an allistic (not autistic) person and it does not mean they have autism and you can have autism and not have these symptoms.
One thing common to many autistic people is ground up processing. Their minds do incredibly well with details (the spinning truck wheel, the defining characteristics of the toys they sort) but sometimes don’t see “the big picture” as easily. It can be an incredible strength in many ways, especially when embraced and harnessed instead of shamed and “corrected.”
Autistic person here:
Yep, you got it.
Its complex consistent pattern creation, its fixation on details/components.
And you’re right to point out how its much more complicated than ‘oh they do this thing so they must be autistic’.
But I will push back slightly against the ‘ground up’ thinking framework.
Its not so much that it needs to be details -> small concepts -> big concepts… its that the framework needs to be consistent and well defined, without exceptions or vaugeries.
Autistic people can totally understand something, starting from a big picture perspective, if you actually explain all the mechanistic concepts, from the top down to the bottom.
What neurotypicals often do is just forget to explain edges cases, ignore contradictions that they don’t even realize are present, because they don’t evaluate the concepts for potential contradictions that thoroughly.
That’s the strength of the neurotypical thinking mode: its faster, less mentally taxing, less stressful. Less rigorous and accurate, but its faster, and works in most common cases. A ‘good enough’ heuristic.
Thats why autistic people often struggle with socializing: They’re getting a whole bunch of different feedback from different people with different personalities who have different uses and meanings for the same words, who have different opinions about what is or is not appropriate in what kind of situation/context, who have different kinds of facial expressions, body language, tone shifts, etc.
This is very hard to consolidate into a consistent, stable, detailed, non-contradicting framework for how to socialize, because everyone is actually ‘playing’ by slightly different rules… but neurotypicals do not realize the extent to which that is true.
What is much easier to do, for an autist, is to model a single person’s ‘social rules’, or a small group of similar people’s ‘social rules’.
We call that ‘masking’.
Then you just switch masks, switch social etiquette rules, when you are around a different group.
Its easier to have a few, smaller, consistent models of socializing, than it is to try and … consolidate them into a sort of grand, unified, totally consistent socializing framework.
… Because when you try to do that, you realize more and more contradictions.
Wow I might have to save your comment because I’ve been trying to explain why I think the way I do and why things annoy me my entire life without having the vocabulary for it and you just summed it up so well. Thank you!
Happy to help!
I’m… getting to be closer to 40, than 30.
I’ve just been doing this ‘being alive autistic’ thing for a fair amount of time now.
Thanks for the additional detail here! I knew I was making a broad generalization with “ground up” and don’t mean to imply that if you start with details (ground) you never make it to the big picture. As you said, more data and examples are necessary and while the overarching structure can eventually be seen, autistics are less like to wave away outliers as quickly as neurotypicals.
Still, I think it’s been well documented that in general autistics much more likely to utilize inductive reasoning whereas neurotypicals rely more on deductive reasoning. Both have strengths and downsides and work best in combination.
It’s almost as if we need each other and should cherish the differences that make us better together! In my experience, that means NTs need to adjust more to autistics because autistic people are constantly adjusting to a society that overvalues NTs.
Thanks for the additional detail here!
No prob!
As with the other reply, yeah I don’t mean to be hostile or accusatory, and I’m aware that … well, not everyone wants or has time to write a small essay, lol.
And yes, I would agree that generally, autists do tend more toward inductive than deductive reasoning.
More data, more understanding of the concepts at play, how they interact, basically equals you can build a better model, which then means you can make better deductions.
And yes, I agree that NTs and NDs should work together… this is I guess my own oversimplification, but I see it as like an rpg game with different player classes: A differentiated but well working team can leverage each other’s strengths, compensate for each other’s weaknesses.
There are certainly many, many situations where I find myself having to… basically override what my brain is trying to do, and make a snap decision based on my ‘gut’, which I fundamentally do not like doing, but sometimes, timing is more important than precision.
The major downside to the autistic… brainmode or whatever, as I see it, is decision paralysis, overanalysis or fixation that can be unproductive or detrimental.
So… it is kinda like different fundamental ‘brainmodes’ just are specced differently, optimized for different things, so to speak.
Anyway… yes it would be nice if NTs more broadly were… basically just a bit more patient, open-minded… and actually just listened.
Probably the most harmful general stereotype about autists is that they can:t control their emotions, or, they just don’t have them at all.
No, that’s not it at all.
Its that we routinely have emotions that result from chains of thoughts that… basically just don’t often occur in NTs, unless they’re really focusing.
That, and so much ‘normal’ NT emotional expression… is basically what we tend to view as a performance. So, when we are tired, or just really don’t care that much, honestly, or are focused on something other than doing the dance that accompanies a particular social mask… we’re flat.
I am convinced that to get a phd and do science, you are better off being autistic.
… well you can’t really choose to be or not be autistic, whereas you can choose to pursue a PhD or not.
(Cough, assuming money is not an issue, cough)
And tons of people who are not autistic, do have PhDs.
And and! You can do science, learn the scientific method, apply it more broadly to how you interact with the world… without a PhD, without being autistic.
Well, in most reputable universities you can take a phd program for free, indeed, they pay you. (yes, also is US). It is understood in academics that “you should not buy your way to a phd, but earn it”.
I said the thing about the autism, because I’ve seen a loooooot of people that I strongly suspect are in the spectrum. And “the good ones”, the ones that are truly remarkable researchers, have spent their lives obsessing with every single detail of a certain area.
Again, not a law, but in that context it seems to be, to some degree, an advantage.
I said the thing about the autism, because I’ve seen a loooooot of people that I strongly suspect are in the spectrum. And “the good ones”, the ones that are truly remarkable researchers, have spent their lives obsessing with every single detail of a certain area.
Again, not a law, but in that context it seems to be, to some degree, an advantage.
Oh I agree with you in that, being detail and consistency focused are autistic traits that are very helpful to complex research, and yeah, you’re probably not wrong, a lot of PhDs probably are on the spectrum.
I guess I’m just trying to be more broadly encouraging of anyone who wants to pursue research, education, learning the scientific method.
Autism is not a hard requirement, is what I’m trying to say.
The flip side of autism being a benefit for PhDs is that, well, autists tend to hyperfocus, burnout, snd not be so great with social skills…
… and social skills are often quite a necesssry component of becoming a PhD, overfocus and then burning out can be quite detrimental to the pursuit.
Well, in most reputable universities you can take a phd program for free, indeed, they pay you. (yes, also is US). It is understood in academics that “you should not buy your way to a phd, but earn it”.
… What I am aware of is a paradigm where, when you are pursuing your PhD, you teach undergrads, usually for not really enough money to comfortably pay your CoL + all the loans you likely had to take to get to the academic level where you would be considered for all that.
That’s the trick. Get your bachelor in a real country that cares about educating their inhabitants for little or no money.
Then the phd is paid by
selling your soul to the systemteaching kids anddoing all the work of a lecture for breadcrumbsassisting with assignments
They are more likely to be concerned about sorting them according to criteria that matter a lot to them but not for any practical reason, organizing them spatially like they’re a library of books that need to be kept straight, stuff like that. Making neat stacks can be very appealing to some people.
You’re not going to find answers to why autistic people do autistic things.
Neurotypical here. As a recent parent, when we got our kid their first blocks the first thing I did was see how high I could stack them.
Also, bottles. And coins. I dunno it’s just… fun?
I think I like things to be tidy because it takes less processing brain time. I was messy, but my grandma she had everything in the right place. Because she knew brain power is a precious thing that needs to be preserved.
We suspect our kid may be autistic but I’ve never seen her do this other than when she was younger and played with Lego type toys.
I’m guessing because it is using toys outside of an intended mode of play? We’re kind of characterized as just generally doing things wrong, whether or not that’s a value judgment, can come entirely without any stigmas attached. Just like, we might experiment with the tactility and stacking of toys instead of say inventing a family for them.
Just guessing, I’m basing this on work that was done with me as a kid where my doctor was really interested in how I played and interacted with other kids and games.
But… stacking blocks… you know, with just letters or numbers or simple shapes on them?
That’s been a very common thing kids do, with very common toys for like, 100 years.
Also, the entire point of toys, from a child development perspective, is to allow for the kid to develop their creative potential, to discover new conceptual and physical concepts.
The idea of ‘an intended mode of play’ is… kinda stupid, from an evaluation standpoint?
Unless you’re testing specifically for ‘ability to consistently follow instructions’?
That might have some use in diagnosing ADHD, but not Autism. They’re different things, different behavior sets/spectra, and do not always present themselves at the same time: You can be just Autistic or just ADHD.
In fact, following directions extremely literally, dutifully, and consistently would potentially be an indicator of Autism, while also being a contraindicator for ADHD.
But anyway, from a child development standpoint, the whole point of toys is to discover how to have fun with them, to develop new mental and physical skills while doing so.
It really doesn’t make any sense to associate simply stacking things with autism, unless maybe its taken to extreme levels of determination and effort to sort things into categories, sets of categories, or create genuienly complex, consistent patterns, or spend so much time at it that it shows signs of fixation, almost as if they’re addicted to it.
I’m going with “neurotypicals broadly continue to not actually understand neurodivergence at all, because they literally can’t think that way, so they continue to inaccurately attribute to neurodivergence overly simplified stereotypes”.
I guess I haven’t seen the imagery op mentioned portrayed with stacking blocks. I was picturing toy cars or action figures because that’s what I’ve thought I’ve seen. Or maybe that one toy with the shapes you are supposed to fit. I retract what I said if I’m way off.
But, one of the worst things about how autism has been studied is that it’s been from the viewpoint of there being proper intended ways of doing all kinds of things. It totally IS stupid, I never defend that. But that’s how science from normative society tends to work. They have traditionally diagnosed us based on things they arbitrarily see as dysfunctional instead of what actually impairs quality of life.
But it kind of sounds like you maybe disagree with the premise of this thread? If so then why are you asking me? I was just weighing in with the way I may have noticed what OP is talking about
Sorry, I didn’t mean to come across as hostile, that was not my intent.
I am perhaps … just a bit sassy.
I do fundamentally disagree with the premise, that simply stacking blocks is any kind of useful indicator of autism, but I don’t mean to… target, or attack you, personally.
I mean to critique the idea.
No harm, I just got intimidated 🤗 I read your other comment too and obviously you have complex thoughts about this too. PsychoNot explained the whole “playing wrong” idea better than I did.
Okay yeah then I actually agree with you. “Doing things wrong” is a terrible measuring stick for diagnosis. It’s just a stigma that’s been applied to people with autism.
Super curious now: What’s your take on ABA? No wrong answers, I just like to hear people’s opinions because it’s a really split topic
ABA?
First time I’ve ever even heard of it.
From a cursory review uh… my thoughts… are…
This basically sounds like torture/brainwashing/grooming to me.
Waaay too intensive, especially with some weird person who isn’t your mom or dad.
Also, all you apparently need to be a ‘certified’ ‘behavior technician’ in this is a high school diploma, and 40 hours of training.
That’s a fucking joke.
To even diagnose autism, properly, you need at least a Master’s degree, 6 years of higher education, more likely a PhD, 8.
You’re gonna shunt off, long term, intensive session, ‘behavioral training’ to… an average American high school graduate, who reads at a 5th grade level, and took a month of weekend classes?
This is quackery and abuse, which seems to be mainly pushed by Autism Speaks, an organization well known for not actually listening to autistic people, infantilizing them, and speaking for, over them.
This just reads to me as ‘My Personality is Mom of Autistic Child’ people got together and attempted to formalize ‘mother knows best’.
Fair enough, thanks for your reply 👍
Yeah it’s from a time back when our understanding of autism was way different but there’s still places that use it today. Unfortunately.
Oi. Yeah.
Well, happy to talk with you 😊
… I… I need breakfast now, too much thinking, not enough calories.
