This information was taken from Autism Discussion Page
Autism Discussion Page was developed by Bill Nason, MS, LLP to discuss tools that help children on the spectrum feel safe, accepted and competent.
For a look at the discussion on this topic follow this LINK
I find this fb page so very helpful.
*****************************************************************************
Intellectual vs. Emotional Processing:
Explaining the social cognition differences between our two worlds!
In the message to follow, I describe how we (NT vs. ASD) relate on different planes. These different levels (intellectual vs. emotional) are based on different styles of processing, which make it difficult for us to relate on common ground. When we can acknowledge and respect the difference in processing, we can bridge the two worlds to better relating.
Most people on the spectrum are intellectual thinkers; processing things analytically based on facts and details. Most of us, especially women, are emotional thinkers; processing information emotionally (seeking the emotional meaning of the information). We look for the overall emotional meaning that the information has for us. The emotional context is the glue that gives information meaning to many NT people. This helps add meaning to the central coherence (overall meaning). NT people do not naturally perceive facts as detail, devoid of emotional meaning. They naturally look for the overall emotional meaning to interpret the facts. This is why we often do not see the facts/details, very well. They are filtered by or emotional interpretation.
People on the spectrum have stronger associative and procedural memory (factual memories) then NT people. They are very good at remembering factual detail, because it is how they process information. Now, that doesn’t mean they don’t remember strong emotions that are associated with an event, just not the emotional “meaning” the event has on them. For example, if an event had strong feelings attached to it (like pain) they may remember the strong feelings that were associated with the information (associative memory). However they would be weaker at remembering the emotional meaning (since they don’t tend to process information that way.).
Now, given that, NT people tend not to focus on concrete detailed facts about an event. We tend to remember the “episodic memories” of the event. Episodic memories are the emotional meaning that the event has for them. Whereas we tend to process information emotionally, rather than intellectually (factually), we tend to remember the emotional meaning (episodic memory) of the event. We tend to easily forget the factual details of the event, but hold onto the overall emotional meaning the event had for us. Without the emotional meaning, the event has little importance to us. For example, if you and I were to have gone to an amusement park many years ago, I would probably have forgotten most of the details of the event. However I would keenly remember the emotional meaning the event had for me. I would have only vague memory of the sequential details of what we did, but I would remember that we had a lot of fun doing it together. I would remember the fond memories of having lots of fun “experiencing” the event together. I would hold onto the emotional meaning of the event and forget most of the factual details. Most likely a person on the spectrum would hold onto many of the factual memories while the emotional, experiential memories might be weaker.
This differences in “emotional” verses “factual-intellectual” processing explains much of the differences in social relating. NT people tend to interact “emotionally” with one another, while most people on the spectrum tend to interact “intellectually.” Again, the differences in how we process information tends to pattern how we interact. When relating with others, NT people emotionally filter most of what is being said; reading between the lines looking for the emotional meaning. We immediately interpret what is said by how we read the person’s thoughts, feelings, perspectives and intentions. The “sharing of experiences” with others holds strong emotional meaning for us. The emotional meaning provides the backdrop for interpreting the facts.
This has strong impact around what motivates us to relate with one another. Most of us tend to relate with others because of the need for emotionally connecting with others. People on the spectrum tend to relate more around an intellectual interest. They enjoy relating with others when the interaction is centred around a common interest that they can intellectually relate around. They can get very excited to relate when it is around an intellectual endeavour that interests them. However, the conversation is usually very “facts” related. Now, with NT people you can see some of these differences between men and women. Women tend to be more relate for emotional reasons, whereas mean tend to relate around a common interest. Women can go out for dinner and spend hour simply “relating”, talking about whatever. Men, on the other hand, have to have and activity (golf, football, etc.) or intellectual topic (e.g. politics) to talk about. We feel uneasy with simply chatting (sharing) with no specific topic to centre us. This difference is what causes conflict between men and women! They often complain how us men do not (emotionally) read them right. They expect men to read between the line and get what is emotionally important for them. We often “don’t get it!”
Emotional reasoning also has it down falls. It tends to make NT people less reliable when remembering facts of an event. We tend to see what we want to see, and/or cloud the facts with what we “expect” to see. Factual memory is a much stronger asset for people on the spectrum. They are much more reliable in remembering the facts. There are pros and cons to both types of informational processing. Emotional processing, as much as it gives strong meaning for NT people, can also cloud our thinking. We often misjudge the actual facts because we tend to “read too much” into it. We immediately start interpreting our experiences in terms of our past “episodic/emotional memories” to give meaning to the experience. In doing so, we often misjudge the true intent of others, or the meaning behind what is truly happening. We often read intent into what people say or do that may not really be there, and we tend to look for underlying messages that are often not intended.
This explains why many NT people misjudge the actions of people on the spectrum. We tend to emotionally read “intent” behind their actions that are not really there. This causes NT people to get upset at some of comments and action of people on the spectrum, when there is actually no intent to “hurt their feelings” or effect them in any way. So, this results in two primary problems: (1) people on the spectrum cannot read the emotional meaning behind the intent of we say, and (2) we attach emotional meaning to what they say, when it is not really there (they mean literally what they are saying. As people on the spectrum say, if NT people would “say what they mean, and mean what they say” we would get along just fine!
These differences in “emotional reasoning” and “intellectual reasoning” provide two unique styles of processing. It is too bad that people cannot be strong at both of them. However, these two different modes of processing explain why we experience the world much more differently then each other. To help bridge our two “cultures” together, both parties need to get a better understanding how each other processes information, so we can better understand how we experience the world around us.
