Savantism, IQ, and the Nature of Intelligence

A new study at Kings College London lead by Patricia Howlin (author of Autism and Asperger Syndrome: Preparing for Adulthood which I thought was pretty good) claims Savant skills may be widespread in people with autism--"widespread" meaning 1 in 3 as opposed to the previous 1 in 10 statistic. The new study was based on parent report, researcher criteria, and peak abilities on standardized IQ tests.

There are pluses to focusing on what autistic people can do instead of what we can't--after all, with people who aren't autistic that is typically what is done to build self esteem, skills, and facilitate learning. And as Happe, a member of the research team, is paraphrased in the New Scientist article,

She says that the study opens a window into the mind of a child with autism and recommends using these isolated, exceptional abilities as a way to motivate people with autism to learn other skills--such as social or communication ones--that might not come as easily.

On the other hand, focusing too much on savant skills or "autistic super powers" can be dangerous or dehumanizing if taken too far. Autistic people shouldn't be valued only if they can perform some freakish mental feat to awed spectators.

The Kings College study is criticized by Darold Treffert who studies savant syndrome and stands by the 1 in 10 number.

He says this is partly because he is mistrustful of parental reports, and partly because he does not think that the peak ability in the intelligence subtests qualifies someone as a savant. "Some autistic savants do well on IQ subtests, but not all autistic persons who do well on IQ subtests are savant."

But he says the study is interesting, because it underscores the failings of IQ tests to measure overall intelligence.

"We are all made up of a series of intelligences, especially the savant, and IQ measures one component," he says. "Savants starkly challenge our definition of 'intelligence' and require us to look for ways to measure other 'intelligences'."

As an autistic person with a peak ability on an intelligence subtest (picture completion if you're curious) but no savant skills, I would agree that caution needs to be taken in placing meaning on IQ scores. Much more broadly, Michelle Dawson's paper The Level and Nature of Autistic Intelligence shows the failings of giving IQ tests which rely on verbal and social abilities to people who do not have typical ability in those areas.

In the New Scientist article, concluding remarks from Treffert,

"We need a more reliable definition of savant syndrome, and a more reliable definition of intelligence," he adds.

There's a saying in the artificial intelligence field: What is intelligence? Whatever it is machines can't do yet.

What is intelligence?

Truthfully, science hasn't answered that question yet.