Skip to main content

Journeys with Autism » A Critique of the Empathy Quotient (EQ) Test: Introduction and Part 1

A Critique of the Empathy Quotient (EQ) Test: Introduction and Part 1

August 6, 2011 Rachel Ableism, Alternative Theories of Autism, Critiques of Autism Theories, Empathy, Marginalization, Mind-Blindness, Modes of Thought, Myths about Autism, Theory of Mind (ToM)
This post is the first in a series critiquing the Empathy Quotient (EQ) test. Please feel free to offer your thoughts, your suggestions, your constructive criticism, and your own personal responses to the test or to my analysis of it. Your comments will help me refine both my thinking on the issue and the quality of my critique.

Introduction
The Empathy Quotient (EQ) test was designed by Simon Baron-Cohen and Sally Wheelwright, and is included in their 2004 paper The Empathy Quotient: An Investigation of Adults with Asperger’s Syndrome or High-Functioning Autism, and Normal Sex Differences. It is frequently used as one of the primary measures of empathy in autistic people, and is often brought forward to support the twin contentions that a) autistic people have below-average levels of empathy and that b) autism is, by definition, a low-empathy condition.
A very interesting post and worth reading the whole thing here. The test that is being critiqued is actually the very one that led me to believe that I am Aspie. My self diagnoses is not dependent upon that test however. Instead I have by this time read enough (6 books about AS and a multitude of online posts and emails) and now just today have met up with several aspies in San Francisco and my confidence in this diagnoses has gone from 99% to 99.9% :-)

She points out that NT people never pick up on our (my) distress in certain situations, noisy rooms full of chatter, overwhelming perfumes etc. In those situations I can be near tears or ready to howl in agony and NT people are utterly oblivious. So just who has a problem with empathy?!? I hadn’t considered that aspect of the thing before. I look forward to her next post!

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

NBC anti-life?

I would boycott NBC, if I ever watched it that is. I actually never watch anything on the old line networks, NBC, CBS, ABC, FOX. Everything I watch is on the cable only stations... do they still broadcast over the air? Ah well, this story is about the fact that it seems NBC refused to air an ad put together by some Catholic outfit that features an embryo and all of the hardships it faced in early life ending up with the revelation that they were talking about Obama. Here is the ad , check it out and see how unoffensive it is. Like I said, if I watched them I'd quit now. :-/
Post a Comment
Read more

Viva California! USA out of California Now!

Gene Veith points to a Russian who predicts the breakup the American Empire. Gene is somehow unaware of the dozens of secessionist movements in various states. Granted they are almost all small but still, they exist and this could be a good time for us. Those who know me already understand that I'm a California Nationalist who I doesn't think California should have joined those united States in the first place. Being a part of that empire just costs us money, we get nothing in return. These days we get to be hated by foreigners for being Americans and mocked by Americans for being Californians. Getting us out of the US yesterday would be a day too late as far as I'm concerned.
5 comments
Read more

Government = Violence

What it comes down to is this, any law you propose states this, I will kill you if you do not agree to do "X." I say this because ALL laws say this. All . Jay walking is a "crime." So, what does that mean? It means if you jay walk you risk death at the hands of government enforcers. How so? You are accosted while jay walking by the local police. You say, "Buzz off bucko!" The cop says "you are under arrest!" You say "Not even." They attempt to restrain you and you resist, you are now "resisting arrest" and in the process of subduing you force will be used to make you to comply. The harder you resist the more likely "they" are to simply kill you. All laws imply deadly force. All laws = the death penalty. Of course they won't say you are being killed for the "crime" of jay walking, but for resisting arrest or attempting to escape or whatever, but really it's the original "crim
5 comments
Read more