As for the paper, I did not find it to be very well done. I was actually surprised that it was written by a teacher. It is a graduate student paper, so I can’t judge it by the same standards as I would a scientific paper, but I thought it jumped to many conclusions and made poor associations.

Anyway, I’ll leave you with a quasi-related (though not directly related) link to a fascinating review of some of the scientific literature on Aspergers and Video Games. It’s really quite interesting, especially if you’re interested in Autism and Aspergers and learning. http://www.usask.ca/education/coursework/802papers/loeppky/index.htm

I don’t know about you but I can consider a number of possibilities about someone. Just becuase I consider the idea that they might have Asperges doesn’t mean I can’t ALSO consider the (more likely) scenerio that they are just rude, or that they’re life feels out of control and they’re just trying to gain some control over some aspect of their lives, or that they’re drunk, or any number of other possibilities. I don’t think almost anyone would just consider one possibility to the exclusion of all others.

I just think you’re reading too much into the posts. No one is saying “just assume that anyone who seems rude at the gaming table has Aspergers or Autism.” No one is saying that. He was simply pointing out that you might want to consider it. Consider. Not assume. Not to the exclusion of every other possibility. Just consider it. Just as you would in any other social situation.

You yourself admit that it’s good advice to consider the possibility that someone you’re dealing with might be somewhere on the Autism spectrum. Why is it any different at the gaming table?

You can certainly argue that the population might not be any higher among gamers than it is among the general population (though I do think there are reasons to believe that people many with Aspergers/Autism are likely to be attracted to gaming, as they are often attracted to things (like computers, and music for example) with defined rules and systems, which many role playing, tactical war, and board games have in spades), but you seem to be intent on throwing out the baby with the bathwater. Rather than saying something like: “I don’t think the population of people with Aspergers or Autism in the gaming community is likely to be higher than in the general population, so just be careful when you think about the possibility” you seemed to attack the very idea that anyone should even have brought it up as a possibility to consider.

Using the logic presented of “Someone might have Asperger syndrome.” should be something to consider with problem players ignores the more likely scenario “Someone is rude.”

We’ve already established that there is a 1 in 166 chance (CDC 2006 study) that someone is autistic and possibly has Asperger syndrome. The gaming community is not unique enough to warrant an increase or decrease in this statistic.

Now telling people to be aware that others might have Asperger syndrome applies to life in general. Forget gaming, it might be an encounter at the bus stop or at work. It is good advice for any social situation.

But implying that there might be more gamers with Asperger syndrome than the rest of the population, and encouraging untrained individuals to make what ammounts to an amateur medical diagnosis is IMO bad advice.

Certainly many, or maybe even most, people with Autism/Asperges are not problem gamers at all, but when you come across someone who seems to be ignoring social cues, it’s worth it to consider that they might be “on the spectrum” at some level or another. It’s not always the case, in fact it’s usually not the case, but it’s a good thing to consider and a good thing to have in your “social toolbox” which is really the point I’m trying to make.

I don’t think Protohacker was trying to suggest that the situation presented by John WAS someone with Aspergers, in fact I know he didn’t because I’ve gone back and re-read what he said. What I think he was trying to say was that SOME, not necessarily all, of the issues mentioned by John could ALSO be explained in some cases by someone having some level of Autism/Aspergers. He never suggested that all, or even most “problem gamers” were a problem due to being on the Autism spectrum. He simply said that more people than many might think are on that spectrum, and that his own son was just such a person.

He was in no way suggesting that all people with Autism or Aspergers are jerks or “problem gamers” just that some of them may be, and if you look out for that it may help you deal with someone who’s behavior seems strange in a way that benefits everyone.

I think a careful reading of what he actually wrote would make it quite clear that he was not in ANY WAY suggesting that most problem gamers were a problem because of Autism, but was simply suggesting that people keep an eye out for it and then suggested a few things that might help. This is just good advice for life in general, not just in a gaming context. Chances are at some point in your life you will have to deal with someone (probably many people) who has Autism or Aspergers. Knowing that, and knowing a few things to look for, will help you figure out the best way to interact with them. I don’t understand why that was at all controversial.

But I do not agree with everything that Protohacker has said as it applies to the original post. I think we should not say “This person might be autistic.”, but instead should think in terms of “What is wrong here?”

IMO Protohacker presented the idea that a gamer being autistic is a very likely scenario, and I am saying that it is not that likely compared to meeting an autistic person in any type of environment. Yet I believe that the number of rude gamers, or just socially inept gamers, is much higher then what the number of autistic gamers is.

Now my point and Protohacker’s points have both strayed from the original topic. That is fine, because discussion is part of what Gnome Stew is all about. And the reason I make passionate arguments is because I believe that what Protohacker is suggesting will not be as useful as he believes it will be. We don’t have to agree with each other, and I appreciate how polite he has been in his argument and I hope that I have shown him the same level of respect and politeness with mine.

But probably the biggest reason that I am so adamant in making this point is that I don’t want my nephew with Asperger syndrome to be associated with people who are just plain rude. There is a clear distinction between the behavior that John pointed out in the article and the behavior that autistic people display IMO. I believe that Protohacker’s comments blur that distinction in a way that I don’t like, so I said what I felt and that’s that.

Ok, so Autism and Aspergers are reasonably rare… I think the only point that Protohacker was trying to make was that it’s a common enough condition that people should be aware of it and try to figure out if the person they’re dealing with is on the Autism spectrum. I don’t think he suggested anywhere that all, most, or even a lot of the problem players someone might deal with would have some form of this condition, just that more people than many people might think have some form of Autism/Aspergers and so you should be aware that you might be dealing with such a person. He then went on to give a lot of detail, much of which I thought was good advice on not only how to deal with such a person but also how you might spot it, so you know what you’re dealing with. So… what exactly is your point?

When I have a player with this tendency, I find a couple of things help:

A) Break the action down into rounds. Yes, Mr Spotlight, I know that you are single-handedly defeating the enemy army. Next player, what are you doing? Oh, picking the lock – right, gimme a roll. No, Mr Spotlight, you aren’t casting Knock, you’re fighting the enemy army on the other side of the board. Next Player? (and so on and so on) I find that the other players quickly figure out that they can do whatever they want if they find something interesting outside Mr Spotlight’s bubble. And I make sure there’s something else to find!

B) If one person knows the “best” way to handle every situation without the others input, they will usually get to handle every situation without the others input. Around the third time he finds himself in combat without any backup because he didn’t listen, Mr Spotlight will do one of two things: 1) bitch because he got caught out by himself or 2) figure out that he got left by himself. This will usually lead to a pointed discussion where the group will explain that they voted to go left while he went right. You’re free to go right if you want, but we all went left because that’s where the majority of us wanted to go. No, it doesn’t matter that your plan was “better”, we went the other way.

BTW, Option B works in real life too.

Now back to the numbers. CDC’s 2006 report puts autism occurring in 1 of every 166 births. The numbers were on the rise in the 90s, but that was because the numbers weren’t being kept very well before the federal governement recognized autism as a disability that is eligible for funds used for special needs care and education. So the cases beign reported suddenly shot up just because people were finally asking “Is this child autistic?” and now the numbers are going down. We don’t knwo why for sure, but most likely because physicians are better trained in diagnosing autism then they were at the beginning of the 90s (they were many incorrect diagnoses of autism once people were actually looking for it). This is why the numbers are now decreasing according to many sources (not dropping dramatically, but dropping still).

Now going by that 1 in 166 number let’s say that half are autistic and are capable of playing an RPG. Now let’s say that half of that group actually wants to play RPGs. These are generous assumptions. That puts the potential number of autistic RPG players at 1 in 664. Even if we assume that all of these autistic players are problem players (and I doubt that they all are in that category) we still are nowhere near the 1 in 10 personal experience that I have of a prick who happens to be a gamer.

The numbers really don’t justify the idea that autism is a highly prevalent condition amongst gamers. If that were true there would be a great deal of research on the matter from those studying autism (“Why are my patients who have high functionality all players of RPGs?”). These are professionals trained in the art of observation and the scientific process. They would have discovered the trend IMO.

Now using my nephew and a few of his freinds from a group that belongs to who all have autism and are capable of playing an RPG, or participating in activities that are similar, as an example I do not see how a gaming prick exhibits that same habits that an autistic person does. My nephew covers his ears whenever a loud noise occurs. He isn’t playing, he is probably in discomfort because his hearing is highly acute. I don’t see that kind of reflex, or insinctive behaviour amongst gaming pricks. My nephew and his firends might behave in a way that one could misinterpret as being rude, but their behaviour still has a sort of persistence that demonstrates extreme focus and ignoring of social cues, but not of actual disrespect or contempt. Gaming pricks show their disdain for others.

Plus their is one clear sign that the example that Joh is using is not of an autistic person from my experiences – John’s problem player stopped his rude behaviour after a single day of discussing his problem in a very social activity. Autistic people will not have that kind of an experience. They need professional treatment from a medical doctor, and a good friend cannot make te social issues that they face disappear after a single day of talking.

It is obvious that you are passionate about this, and I do not meant to take away from how important it is that we are aware of the unique conditions and needs that others might have. Autism for some, but it could be something else for others. I just don’t believe that the 1 in 33 number is accurate at all. I also don’t want a legitimate prick being pitied when my nephew is goign to be unfairly judged during his lifetime. One person might be an asshole who should learn to play nice with others, while the person with autism is genuinely dealing with a problem of trying to make sense of social situation that their brain does not function well with. I prefer the assholes get their acts together and not have the burdens of others as an excuse for their behaviors.

Again, just my opinion so taht you know why I feel the way that I do.

I am of the opinion that a lot can be done by the GM. As has been said, if you have a player hogging all the game time to the exclusion of others, the GM can ‘time manage’ this. We have a couple of players who have a tendency to want to do everything. In a room they will examine something at the same time as interrogating the prisoners, and looking for secret doors. I’ve solved this by using a (kind of) turn based system: simply going around every player asking them what their characters is going to do, and then, starting with first one, playing this out. If the demanding players interject during someone else’s action I simply point out that they are still busy doing their thing as all this is happening concurrently.

As @John Arcadian says, sometimes, as the GM, you have to be bossy. As a player you have to trust the GM and if they haven’t spotted it, point it out.

Keep in mind, this is also just recognized autism. It is difficult, at best, to define autism, since it doesn’t really have a defined set of symptoms–it’s a ranged scale. So, someone can be mildly to severely autistic. The mild cases are likely to go unrecognized. So, the numbers could possibly be higher than even these. Who knows?

But, back to the example. Assuming 3 in 100 intelligent people are autistic. That’s 1 in 33 people. This means, if you walk into your average game store where they’re running games, statistically, there is someone in that store with autism. And he’s at someone’s table.