Talk:Weak central coherence theory

message: Hi,
I have some problem with how the first paragraph of the "support and criticism" section is built up. Firstly, maybe it makes more sense to separate the two things to clarify things. Secondly there is a summations which is not preceded by a semicolon, and that makes the structure of the text a bit bizarre. Especially since this number 1:
   1. Results in which these skills are measured with visuospatial tasks confirm the theory to a large extent. Autistic individuals performed tasks where a design or a figure had to be divided into their constituent parts faster than control individuals. For example, autistic individuals perceived the constituent blocks in an unsegmented condition of a Block Design Task more easily (Happé, 1999; Ehlers et al., 1997; Shah & Frith, 1993). In addition, they performed Embedded Figures Tasks in which hidden shapes in drawings have to be found as quickly as possible, better than control individuals (Happé, 1994b; Jolliffe & Baron-Cohen, 1997; Shah & Frith, 1983).
sums up studies which are not relevant to weak central coherence theory. These studies confirm that autistics have stronger local coherence. The two skills are not related in the sense that being good at one means to be bad at the other. It is like saying "we have found people with good eyesight are better at driving cars, so they must be bad at walking..." 
It is not because Frith and Happé write their papers in this sense that it is objective. If people want to keep this section, please motivate or suggest some changes to put it into context...
thx
dennis
: As I understand it WCC proposes that stronger local coherence IS a trade-off for weak central coherence. It's faulty logic but the article is about the theory - flaws and all. 81.174.157.213 (talk) 17:20, 26 June 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: It would be nice if someone cleaned up this rather confused criticism section. It's simply internet level lay talk, and confuses the studies cited for legitimate criticism.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.57.57.220 (talk) 10:43, 19 August 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Thursday October 25th, 2007

message: Because she is British, this statement might be misunderstood by Americans.  We with autism can't "see the forest for the trees," but it is very British to call a small forest "a wood," which in American would be called "the woods," plural.  Ironically, my explanation of this potential misunderstanding is itself an example of the kind of nitpicking we with Asperger Syndrome are hard-pressed not to engage in, on any subject, at all times.  I would add that we often can't even see the trees because there's just so much wood (the stuff trees are made of) in the way. --BlueNight (talk) 16:39, 13 May 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Hi BlueNight! Thank you for making this point. It's a bit hard to change though because it is a direct quote. Also, you still seem to understand this quote perfectly well, so maybe other Americans also will? With friendly regards, Lova Falk talk 07:36, 29 May 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  "The wood for the trees" 

message: The article seems a little light on information about the subject. Perhaps a "Request for improvement" header or something along those lines should be put above the article?
As example, the dutch version of the article seems to provide more background about the subject (even though it's also rather small), and also refers to things like the "schizoid spectrum" (no english version available) and how it relates to Autism. 
The current version of the article only makes it seem like WCC/CC is small a disputed theory, with little arguments for and against it, while in practice it is one of the most widely used psychological theories to explain AD(H)D and autism-related thought and input processing problems (just do a quick google for 'central coherence theory').
I'm not an expert on the subject, so I don't feel fit for providing the needed additions, but I know enough about it to know the article is a little lightweight, and think a header such as 'This article requires additional information' would be desirable. 
-  83.163.238.91 (talk) 13:15, 21 August 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article is a little light on information, and makes it seem like it's a small and disputed theory