New test purportedly spots psychopathy in babies


#1

[Read the post]


#2

In my family we have the “pork chop” test, it’s to complicated to go into, but it works!


#3

Pretty much they’ve identified high end autism with the ability to mirror emotions, while not taking them in.

Not a hard test to do. However, determining if someone is just going to be a socially adapt aspie that will go mostly unnoticed because they are sufficiently advanced to try to fit in vs. those that decide they don’t need to fit societies bounds and feel that using others is acceptable. Much harder to detect because the social programming isn’t there yet.


#4

Manservant! My eugenics rifle!


#5

IANAP, but I thought psychopathy wasn’t considered a thing any more, and schizophrenia didn’t manifest until puberty anyway? What are they going to find a test for next, hysteria? Melancholia?


#6

From the first link:

A study by my former PhD student, Alice Jones, now at Goldsmiths, University of London, highlighted that children with callous-unemotional traits have a very different profile of empathy problems to those seen in children with autism spectrum conditions. They have atypically blunted affective response to other people’s distress, but are perfectly capable of judging other people’s point of view (i.e., they can mentalize). Children with autism spectrum conditions appear to have the opposite pattern of difficulties. By contrast, children who display antisocial behavior, but who have low levels of callous-unemotional
traits, look similar to typically developing children on these domains.


#7

My grad work was in clinical psych trying to teach computers to recognize personality via textual analysis.

Folks WANT to sort psychopathy out of the autism scale because it is serves a politically correct agenda. In fact, most people that talk about it will not talk in print because of the implications and that fact that they will be scrutinized. Me? I was a machine intelligence guy that somehow fell into the wetware side of things…I’m just reporting what I’ve heard from experts in the field that I spoke with.

Given that it is a spectrum, there will be different characteristics as you go across it. There are folk within the spectrums that have different abilities. There are folks that learn to recognize emotion while not connecting to it. They may not understand what it means, or how it works, but they can mirror it and interact as if they do. Is it different than someone in a different part of the spectrum? Absolutely.

Either way, I studied this stuff to a small extent, friends have studied it (and focused on this aspect) to a FAR greater. I’m only repeating what I’ve been told. And given the uproar of folks getting angry over even little things like merging the autism / aspergers diagnoses where even clinicians are convinced they are completely different things…tells me they might be right about the political land mines that would happen if they were to say this (or even not going out of their way to disuade other that they were implying this in the first place). Sadly, I know of few other sciences that the folks that are afflicted think they should be able to define the science. I mean, I’ve broken bones but I don’t think I’d claim to be an expert on ostiocytes.


#8

How’d they do on the test with regard to the question about the tortoise in the desert?


#9

You’re right, schizophrenia and personality disorders, etc usually don’t show up until the late teens/early twenties.

Even if this “test” was accurate (and I have severe doubts about that), I don’t see how it would help anyone learn to cope with a lack of emotional response. Usually that’s something you learn as you go along, out of necessity.


#10

Aren’t all babies psychopaths?


#11

Silly human. Testing isn’t for problem solving. Testing is for sorting trash from resources.


#12

Testing for personality traits before a personality has been established. Ugh. All infants, children, and adolescents are different degrees of antisocial because their frontal lobes aren’t fully developed. This is basic neurology. It’s when these antisocial traits become so pronounced as to defy developmental explanations that diagnosing personality disorders are worth considering. It’s also why some people seem to “outgrow” childhood/adolescent diagnoses. They should never have been diagnosed in the first place. Personality assessment and diagnosis takes an individual’s motivation and subjective experience into account.

Autism, otoh, is a diagnosis based on observed behaviors with unknown etiology. There is no single test for autism. Any number of observed traits can lead to an autism disorder diagnosis in children. That’s why autism is now classified as a spectrum disorder in the DSM5. It’s not something one “outgrows” either. Autism is not personality, it is not motivation for behavior. Autism is what observers notice about an individual’s behavior that differs from the norm. It is a diagnosis that does not take the individual’s subjective experience into account.

This study confuses the two in the grand tradition of the behaviorists, genetic psychology, and behavioral neuroscience: You are not your thoughts and feelings, but your actions and behaviors, programmed from before birth, a meat robot.


#13

Additional public resources and assistance with schooling/socialization?


#14

So you perceive pseudoscience, and combat with a different form of pseudoscience?


#15

I pass as human? That’s encouraging.


#16

Is there an actual question here, hidden in your aspersions?


#17

Eugenics rifle… Or promotion to management track.


#18

Okay, so it sounds like we’ve got a pretty reliable test for humans now.

But I’m still waiting for the day someone develops a method to determine which eggs will grow up to be psycho chickens.


#19

That is foolish talk. If Tests-for-X exist, then X must exist. I will send you some phlogiston via the luminiferous aether and then it will all make sense.


#20

Wow…I’m watching that movie right now!!!