"Results show that, compared with the non-autistic population, as represented by standardized norms ... and typically developing (TD) control groups ..., individuals with ASD exhibit significantly lower math scores ... and greater variability."

https://medicalxpress.com/news/2026-02-closer-mathematical-abilities-autistic-people.html

4 minutes ago, Genady said:

"Results show that, compared with the non-autistic population, as represented by standardized norms ... and typically developing (TD) control groups ..., individuals with ASD exhibit significantly lower math scores ... and greater variability."

https://medicalxpress.com/news/2026-02-closer-mathematical-abilities-autistic-people.html

I think many people tend to over-focus on the savants, who are very much a minority. Autism is a disability and can have global negative affects on a person's social functioning and cognition. The same thing happens with certain sections of the deaf community: they consider themselves 'different', rather than socially disabled. I'm deaf and consider myself socially disabled in face to face interactions. My opinion is they are kidding themselves. There is two young men living in my street that I know, and they are considered high-functioning. I can't see them being self-sufficient anytime in the future

47 minutes ago, StringJunky said:

There is two young men living in my street that I know, and they are considered high-functioning. I can't see them being self-sufficient anytime in the future

That doesn't mean they're not mathematical geniuses, although I have no opinion concerning the topic of this thread.

Depends on what you mean by busting the myth: showing it to be untrue, or widespread acknowledgement that it’s not true.

I think the myth was busted a while ago, in the first meaning of busted, but like many myths, it persists owing to ignorance, and that that’s probably not going to change very soon.

6 minutes ago, swansont said:

the myth was busted a while ago, in the first meaning of busted

I didn't know that,

23 minutes ago, swansont said:

owing to ignorance

Edited Tuesday at 05:22 PM5 days by Genady

7 hours ago, KJW said:

That doesn't mean they're not mathematical geniuses, although I have no opinion concerning the topic of this thread.

I don't disagree, but they are outliers. The clue is in 'spectrum'.

43 minutes ago, StringJunky said:

I don't disagree, but they are outliers. The clue is in 'spectrum'.

Right. We hear about outliers because they are outliers, but they are not typical even if it’s hinted that they are; the hasty generalization fallacy in action (specifically, as I just reminded myself via search, it’s pars pro toto - a part taken to represent the whole)

I think it comes about in part because we see examples of math savants who look like they are on the spectrum and improperly extrapolate from there, so it’s a sampling bias error.

13 minutes ago, swansont said:

Right. We hear about outliers because they are outliers, but they are not typical even if it’s hinted that they are; the hasty generalization fallacy in action (specifically, as I just reminded myself via search, it’s pars pro toto - a part taken to represent the whole)

I think it comes about in part because we see examples of math savants who look like they are on the spectrum and improperly extrapolate from there, so it’s a sampling bias error.

Yes. 'Pars pro toto' seems to be very apt here, and a consequence of this view is that it does a long term disservice to the great majority for whom it is pathological in some way.

Edited Tuesday at 11:17 PM5 days by StringJunky

Entertainment media don't help with such myths. I've met people who think of autism as Christian Bale in The Big Short, who plays someone with mathematical skill in analyzing financial markets and has minimal people skills. Such characters in movies and television have become the cliche. They're all brilliant coders or mathies or pianists... or they're Temple Grandin. They tend not to show the folks who only eat white food, can't manage a phone conversation or make their own purchases, and engage in handflapping (stimming) when there are more than two people in the room. As @swansont notes, it is outliers who are singled out for attention.

When I was a young fellow, the public figure most commonly mentioned in this context was the pianist Glenn Gould, who was on the spectrum (and also had synaesthesia, which helped him as a musician - he saw musical tones as colors).

I think they should have provided the tests they used on the study. Show me how you evaluated then show me the stats.

I have read about a boy that didn’t speak, so his mom tried to communicate with him in his “language.”

Not every autistic person is a genius, but they may not appear smart because they can’t communicate.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=OR36jrx_L44&pp=ygURa2lkIGdlbml1cyBhdXRpc20%3D

It is very common for autistic people (at least the high functioning ones) to have areas of special interest, called a hyperfocus, which they get deeply fascinated by and perhaps over time come to know a lot about. Sometimes this can be the stereotypical maths, but it can just as well be LEGO, Marvel superheroes, or SpongeBob SquarePants.

So no, not all autistics are maths geniuses - I know a lot of people in the autistics community, and not one of them fits that bill. But many of them are very knowledgeable at something.

4 hours ago, Markus Hanke said:

It is very common for autistic people (at least the high functioning ones) to have areas of special interest, called a hyperfocus, which they get deeply fascinated by and perhaps over time come to know a lot about. Sometimes this can be the stereotypical maths, but it can just as well be LEGO, Marvel superheroes, or SpongeBob SquarePants.

So no, not all autistics are maths geniuses - I know a lot of people in the autistics community, and not one of them fits that bill. But many of them are very knowledgeable at something.

Isn't it true for all people? How is it different for autistic people?

I believe that one complicating factor is that most if not all autistic people experience difficulty in communicating with others, both autistic and non autistic.

This difficulty affects both directions of communication.

2 hours ago, Genady said:

Isn't it true for all people? How is it different for autistic people?

I guess the difference is in the level of intensity - for autistic people the fixation on their hyperfocus can be very powerful, to the point that it is at the forefront of their inner lived experience much of their waking hours, and can often almost look like an obsession of sorts. Eg someone with a hyperfocus on Spongebob Squarepants might own all the relevant media, have SBSP bedlinen und brush their teeth with SBSP-branded toothpaste, while simultaneously knowing everything there is ever to know about SBSP. This can then also "bleed over" to other areas, for example when in a conversation they might inadvertently start to blabber about their hyperfocus ("infodumping") even though the initial interaction was about something entirely unrelated.

This is not to say that neurotypical people don't have special interests or expertise in particular subjects, but the difference is in the degree / intensity of how this is experienced. Note also that this in isolation is not a defining indicator for someone being autistic, but it does form a part of a larger list of diagnostic criteria.

1 hour ago, studiot said:

I believe that one complicating factor is that most if not all autistic people experience difficulty in communicating with others, both autistic and non autistic.

This difficulty affects both directions of communication.

Indeed.

Edited Wednesday at 12:25 PM4 days by Markus Hanke

15 hours ago, studiot said:

This difficulty affects both directions of communication.

I agree. Their genus is lost if they can’t utilize it or explain their ideas.

The YouTube link I posted is a rare case where the child “snapped out of” autism. His mom found a way to communicate with him.

The book is called The Spark by Kristine Barnett.

1 hour ago, Trurl said:

“snapped out of” autism

I understand what you are trying to say here, but I’d like to highlight that it is only particular patterns / manifestations that one can improve on, given the right tools and strategies. Autism itself is a physiological difference in the human brain, you cannot snap out of it any more than you can snap out of being pregnant or having cancer. But you can find skilful ways to manage it.

If you’ve met one person with autism, you’ve met one person with autism.

18 hours ago, Markus Hanke said:

I understand what you are trying to say here, but I’d like to highlight that it is only particular patterns / manifestations that one can improve on, given the right tools and strategies. Autism itself is a physiological difference in the human brain, you cannot snap out of it any more than you can snap out of being pregnant or having cancer. But you can find skilful ways to manage it.

Well I haven’t seen any updates of Jake Barnett. You are right he still has autism but he is highly functional. And he is the stereotypical genius.

This video has been out several years. He must be grown by now. But I think for listening to the book his mother trying to communicate with him made the difference.

The stereotype of autism is those people are good at math. But he describes it as find math everywhere. He was doing calculations with Cheerios.

I am not a psychologist but maybe autism is a hyper concentration on something. So focused that they can’t communicate causing behaviors. It would explain why they excel in some areas and not others.

8 minutes ago, Trurl said:

Well I haven’t seen any updates of Jake Barnett. You are right he still has autism but he is highly functional. And he is the stereotypical genius.

This video has been out several years. He must be grown by now. But I think for listening to the book his mother trying to communicate with him made the difference.

The stereotype of autism is those people are good at math. But he describes it as find math everywhere. He was doing calculations with Cheerios.

I am not a psychologist but maybe autism is a hyper concentration on something. So focused that they can’t communicate causing behaviors. It would explain why they excel in some areas and not others.

You picked up my first point pretty well, that communications diffuculties impedes accurate assessment of abilities.

I would like to add to this that different folks, both non autistic and presumably autistic can think in different ways.

In particular some people can think in the abstract, others find this difficult to do. Some think in pictures, some in words and some in ideas or concepts.

51 minutes ago, studiot said:

In particular some people can think in the abstract, others find this difficult to do. Some think in pictures, some in words and some in ideas or concepts.

I like the way you’re thinking.

Have you ever read anything by Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi? He talks about creativity as an experience the user is not in control of. Anything could be creative. That includes religious experiences.

What if autism had similar traits to Mihaly’s Flow? The user is not in control and their brain is processing whatever is in their environment. The thought is profound; maybe even genius, but as you say it is not communicated or recorded. All we see is weird movements.

I believe all minds are capable of genus thought. It is realizing their value and sharing them.

And a little off topic but still worth mentioning, I believe our advantage over Ai is this realization of the value of our ideas.

3 hours ago, Trurl said:

The thought is profound; maybe even genius, but as you say it is not communicated or recorded. All we see is weird movements.

This is certainly true for some of us, but one has to remember that autism manifests along a spectrum - some autistics have very profound difficulties with communication, whereas some others might be at a near-neurotypical level in that particular area, but might be really struggling with other things. It’s difficult, if not impossible, to generalise what the “typical” autistic person might be like.

On 3/5/2026 at 11:50 PM, Markus Hanke said:

This is certainly true for some of us, but one has to remember that autism manifests along a spectrum - some autistics have very profound difficulties with communication, whereas some others might be at a near-neurotypical level in that particular area, but might be really struggling with other things. It’s difficult, if not impossible, to generalise what the “typical” autistic person might be like.

You are right. I was generalizing. I am unsure of the whole diagnosis of autism. I’m against labels and certain statistics. That is why I mentioned in an earlier post that I would like to take the same test as was used in the study. I have learned statistics are important and we have to classify such things, but like Kristin Barnett I think they are failing autistic children.

Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi wrote a few books on Flow and creativity. No stats in either book just descriptions of creative people. I imagine that he did have statics and data when interviewing Nobel Laterite's, scientists, and artists, and average people. The statics could be dangerous.

Well I will leave it to you guys to decide if you believe such stats are dangerous. But in just my own opinion a prodigy with autism would be studied for their gift while others would be left behind.

But I don’t think the study of this thread is necessarily bad. It makes you view autism objectively. (the stereotypes) I did think “prodigy” when hearing a person does have autism. But I caution labeling people.