Relationships in the Spectrum

The Problem

People on "the Spectrum" have difficulty in understanding the nuances of daily negotiated transactions. This is particularly a problem with trivial negotiations which we encounter in daily life.

The problem is that, without a rulebook or HOWTO, it's difficult to learn how to do it right, and difficult to avoid confrontation.

(more explanation)

Major negotiations are less of a problem because the rules are often well-defined. Taking this to the extreme of a tri-cultural negotiation it seems that Aspies are particularly adept. It's the day-to-day encounters that take more innate understanding instead of logic.

Some of these trivial negotiations include nonconsequential things such as synthetic chat by checkout clerks. That sort of thing is easy enough to handle by a brief mumble or nod. It's the more meaningful interactions that require skill.

These negotiated interactions in the commercial environment are particularly irritating to people on the Spectrum because:

1. Many of these ploys are artificial;
2. They're keyed into NT behaviour which are not easily understood by autistics;
3. The suggested response creates a trivial burden;
4. The ploys are often intrusive; and
5. It's sometimes difficult to know how to respond.

In the worst of circumstances, these negotiated interactions cause conflict or deny the autistic access to goods and services.

This Webpage

This page focuses on using commercial ploys as training exercises.

The purpose of the exercises are to train in the mechanics of negotiated interactions with NTs. This is based on the idea that the ploys are designed by marketing developers to take advantage of the unwritten rules of NT interaction.

There are several references to the "Telemarketing Scum Page" website at www.scn.org/~bk269/telemarketing.html.

That website has a different focus in that it is not intended to train in negotiated interactions or autism. The site does have a number of details which are beyond the scope of this page.

I fully endorse that website for good reason -- I wrote it!

What's the Point?

The purpose of this document is to offer some ways to build skills needed for negotiated interactions.

A Homework Assignment

relationships.html describes the educational value of cinematic depiction of emotions found in "adult theme" entertainment.   The difficulty of these shows is that their content is often uninteresting, particularly for younger people with AS. (Adults with AS tend to find these "human studies" as interesting as NTs do.)

Try to find a show which has some degree of entertainment appeal to it. Some of the HBO shows are particularly good, but any movie which depicts adult themes and adult emotions is a trivial but real educational experience.

The Reason

Outbound telemarketing involves solicitation by organizations, usually using predictive dialing equipment. Generally they do not use "opt-in" lists and almost universally, they don't care.

Or maybe they do care. On Planet Aspie telemarketers exist for the purpose of training people how to interact. Perhaps it's the same way here.

Much as it's possible to learn how to drive a car in snow by intentionally skidding the car in a safe place, telemarketers offer a "safe place" to learn how to interact badly.  So even if you learn by getting your number "blacklisted" by telemarketing companies, you learn nevertheless! (Interacting badly is useful in learning how to interact favorably and how to recognize when one interacts badly)

(Interacting badly is useful in learning how not to interact badly.)

Excellence in Training and Excellent Service

Outbound telemarketing operations use carefully studied behaviour patterns to manipulate their "marks" (potential sales targets). In other words, they pay people to train autistics in negotiated interactions! Is that convenient or what?

THANK YOU Telemarketers!

The Strategy

Increase their cost of making that call to the point where it's uneconomical. Usually it's just a matter of seeing how long you can keep them on the line.

Take the philosophy of SuSE Linux -- "Have a lot of fun." Try to find out what keeps them on the line and consume time. But most of all, make a game of it and have fun!

In doing so, you will learn how to negotiate interactions, as well as what things are agreeable or disagreeable to people.

This is actually counterproductive.

The more successful you are, the more telemarketing operations will blacklist your phone number. But in the meantime, you're practicing your negotiated interaction skills, helping the public and benefitting the economy.

What About the Employees?

Telemarketers get paid whatever the telemarketing operation deems they need to in order to keep people working there. There's more about this in www.scn.org/~bk269/telemarketing_economics.html.

The Official Point System

On the theme of "have fun", here's a link to The Official Point System.

Cautions

The telemarketing.html webpage mentions several things to avoid, including confidential information, and making purchases. Also mentioned are long distance telephone anti-slam blocks established with your local dialtone provider (US). This permits you to go through all of the motions of accepting a long distance service plan and not get the plan. But make sure you select a "no-fee  no-minimum" plan.

This is the difficult part, because it's the real thing. You've got to get it right. Unlike dealing with telemarketers, you don't want to learn by offending the other party. If "not offending" is part of the exercise, you will probably get it right.

Techniques

"Person" of Speech (first person vs. second )

In personal conflict resolution, this is sometimes referred to as "'I' statements and 'you' statements". (In a particular structured technique of personal conflict resolution, an "issue" is addressed by a person stating an "issue" in terms of "'I' statements"; i.e., in first person. The theory is that the statement is less accusatory when stated in first person. While the facts are essentially the same as stated in first person or second person, the focus is on the experience of the person raising the issue.)

Consider whether to phrase the conflict in first or second person. In general, first person is less confrontational.

There are instances when second person is less confrontational because it is more direct. e.g., "You're repeating my name." is more direct than "I object to hearing my name repeated several times in a single conversation." One test is whether the "first person" statement is too obsequious.

Here's an Example of First Person Language Used in Negotiated Interaction

Some General Techniques in Negotiated Transactions

"Are you able to ..."

This accomplishes two things:
1. Verifies that you have the correct person; and
2. Creates an incentive for the person to attempt to meet the request. People who would be less inclined to be helpful will often provide the service if it demonstrates their authority to do so.
This is most effective when dealing with large corporate entities and bureaucrats. People working with small entities generally don't need to prove their authority.

Insist that the person focus on the question first.

Diversions range from answering related but irrelevant questions, to repeatedly mispronouncing the caller's name. Some responses:

"Yes, but that wasn't really my question."

This one's a fairly non-confrontational response, and has the advantage of focusing the conversation. It also gives a reason for repeating the question, which is often necessary.

Recognize answers which "contradict" the question, or which are "non-responsive" in general.

If an answer doesn't have a direct correspondence to the question, be ready to say so. Examples:

• "Yes, but that wasn't my question."
• "Yes, but [repeat question]. That is what I really want to know."
• "Oh, I'm afraid you misunderstood my question. (More likely the person pretended to misunderstand.) Do you understand what I asked?
• "I understand, but that's my question."
• "Yes, but that has nothing to do with my question."
• "Yes, but that doesn't really address my question."

All-in-all, it's a fairly easy thing in some cases to make this kind of "Is it responsive?" analysis.

This type of "Is it responsive?" analysis can also be used to confirm dishonest business dealings with sales people, agents, etc. If you receive a non-responsive answer,

1) confirm that the non-responsiveness was intentional, and
2) determine whether to terminate dealing with that person.

Request that the issue be addressed first, before irrelevancies.

Repeat addressing, repeat naming or signifying

The other person repeatedly addresses you. This is significant for people on The Spectrum because of a tendency to take the "signifying" tactics literally -- "HEY, [name], you're not paying attention!"

(If calling by name is done immediately after an introduction, it's a mnemonic device and should not be considered hostile.)

In many cases it's best to ignore it as a sales or intimidation technique, or simple state, "You're repeating my name." 

More on responses to "repeat naming" or signifying tactics here ( www.scn.org/~bk269/repeat_naming.html )
The part about giving them your dog's name is particularly useful if you're in an irritable mood trying to solve a particular problem on the phone.)

If the person is talking too fast for you, avoid the tendency to speed up.

(Usually, this is the person's natural manner of speech, but you will be at a disadvantage if you try to match it.) It is to your advantage to slow down to a more comfortable pace, and it is more likely the person will listen to what you have to say.

Conversation interrupted by repeated "hold".

Start from the beginning each time. The person will stop using the "hold" interruptions, usually after the second time, or will "flush" the call (hang up). Either way, the "hold" interruption tactic won't work.

(This is distinguished from "hold" while the operator is performing a work function. These "work function holds" functions can be irritating but are different.)

"Cut and paste" quoting.

This is mostly for text communications, where non-responsive answers can be particularly exasperating. If the question doesn't get answered a first time, cut and paste the same question.

Make it difficult to "ignore" the issues

This also usually applies to a second written communication. Write it with the idea that someone doing a very quick review would immediately notice if the issue is ignored a second time around. Perhaps a very brief, but polite preface, such as "(same question...)".

Refer to their notes.

If you have any sort of account that the person is looking up, there are likely to be notes. Since they are obviously looking at that, don't be reluctant to say something like, "Please look at your notes. You'll see that..."

Don't forget that the person on the other end of the line (the inbound telemarketer) is a human being doing a difficult job.

They are often used by their employers to make excuses for poor service or illegal or unethical policies. They are the ones that hear from irate customers.

Nevertheless, if they are supporting something that is unethical or otherwise unacceptable, don't be afraid to politely voice your objections. The business cannot act illegally without the assistance and consent of its employees.

Practice by Problem Solving

The idea is to get by with the least conflict. In most transactions, it's possible to try again so it's hard to lose by not getting what you want.

Most NTs will explain the need to be assertive. I believe that the difficult part is being assertive while understanding the interactions.

Practice by Controlled Responses

This involves limiting the interactions in a commercial setting. Develop specific ways to minimize responses to artificial familiarity, but do so in a manner which you deem to be non-offensive. Adjust your response according to experience which you gain.

One step further than simple "face-to-face" negotiation is doing so when the mere initiation of the negotiation requires discretion.

Public Manners

In engaging with in-personal exchanges, there are four priorities:

1. Being polite and displaying proper decorum;
2. Choosing issues that make sense without explanation to others;
3. Choosing issues which can be easily resolved;
4. Obtaining the result.

Often these priorities are such that it is best to ignore the situation.

An Example of Public Manners - "Priceless" Items

This involves the confluence of:

1. distinguishing the problem from very similar circumstances where the problem doesn't exist
2. determining whether circumstances are appropriate to raise the issue
3. determining how to raise the issue without offending friends
4. objecting in a polite manner, and in accordance with social norms

Also (in sharp contrast with the Telemarketing "exercises") it is important that, You should be careful to not be rude to the waiter or wait-person.

The analysis of the social situation is very complicated, but the required behaviour is fairly simple. In addition, it is possible to "back out" at any time.

Specific Example - "Priceless" Items at Restaurants

"Priceless" menu items at restaurants make good exercise material for negotiated transactions because this involves a confluence of the negotiation, social situations being exploited, and a need to match the negotiation to socially acceptable customs and norms.

So here it is:

In a typical example, a restaurant waiter or waitress presents what in the US are referred to as "specials". (These are items not listed on the printed menu. Historically, in the US, "specials" were particular items offered as a slight discount from comparable items on the menu, or in some cases discounted menu items. More recently, "specials" were increasingly used to describe items not on the menu. Some restaurants started charging prices in excess of comparable menu items for "specials" and there are those willing to recite the items and "forget" to mention price.)

The problem is a social one which is taken advantage of some unscrupulous restaurants and their staff. The patron would not wish to object because doing so can be perceived as rude.

The exercise is to:

1. determine whether to say anything; and
2. how to say it in a gracious manner.
3. how to avoid social stigmas, even if the price enquiry is done graciously.

So according to the two steps:

1. it may be best to not say anything; and
2. if anything is said, it must be done in a gracious manner.

If you decide to say something, you would still follow the four priorities above.

There are, of course, several alternatives. For example, you can either ask for the prices, accept the prices, or request time to discuss the order. Discussing the issue with someone with you has the advantage that you would not be in the socially awkward situation of simultaneously objecting to the "forgotten" prices and explaining your objection to your friends.

Your objection must be such that your friends are not offended or embarrassed

Do make sure that the items are indeed "priceless". (e.g., the item could be priced on a board near the entrance, or generically listed on the menu with a price as a "de jour" item.)

Also determine if the absence of the price is intentional. Some items are at a presumed price, such as beverages and even desserts in some cases. Decide if the missing prices would normally be understood in the culture. If something is made to appear to have a presumed price, it's often possible to say, "I don't know the customary price for these items."

The situation is complicated with a group party sharing a single bill. It's sometimes possible to tell a dining partner that you prefer to avoid the unpriced items, or that you suspect there is a reason the items are "priceless". You can also agree in advance to avoid "specials" if there's no price.

A better approach is by NT-style indirectness (useful when dealing with NT crap). Ask for "a minute to think about it (the selection)" and when discussing it privately, comment that the 'specials' sound good but they have no prices."

In the worst of circumstances, you can pay your share and discuss that "priceless items" are often that way for a reason, and that the amount charged for these were out of line with the prices for listed items.

Or just "blow it off" (ignore it). To paraphrase a comment often made by those who usually have others pay the bill, "If you have to ask, then you can't afford it." (If you can't discuss it with that person, you can't afford to invite the person out to a dinner. That's why they have Starbucks.)

Some Techniques for "Priceless" Items while in Social Situations

Pick your battles on this one. The approach should be polite and non- confrontational. If you're with people, a request for prices should also sound reasonable. For example "priceless" menu items may be double the price for comparable items with prices. In some cases it's easier to simply avoid the priceless items. Possible ways to ask for the prices:

"These sound interesting. May we have the prices for these?"

"May we have the prices?"

As you can see, it is particularly difficult to ask this one in some circumstances.

"These look very interesting. I don't know the customary prices."

Sometimes affected. May be mildly aggressive or assertive. This works best if the immediate circumstance suggests asking for help (at one extreme) or false presumptuousness on the part of the staff (at an opposite extreme).

This approach has the advantage in that if the prices are within a customary range, you are simply asking for help in understanding that range.

For items which have a presumed customary price (beverages and desserts, but you don't know the customary prices) - "I don't know the customary prices for these items."

That places the "blame" on the patron, but in a favourable manner. NTs (neurologically typical people) consider this to be good diplomacy.

"I don't know the customary prices."

This variation has the advantage that it directly states a part of the problem, with the speaker "owing up to" the statement.
(The "owning up to" the statement comes from the part where the problem is stated in terms of the person making the statement. The prices may be hidden, knowledge of a social custom presumed, and social pressure tricks being employed by the business, but the problem is stated in terms of the result.)

At this point, the server can claim not to know (but will somehow be able to write the bill), but at least the charade of nonchalance over price is terminated.

"You're not giving us the prices. Does that mean that the prices are the same for comparable menu items?"

- This is more accusatory ("You are"). That's confrontational and not always acceptable conversation. If you don't know if the conversation is unacceptably confrontational, don't do it.

The "You're not giving us the prices." part may be too aggressive or assertive.

"I take it these are in the same price range as printed on the menu?"

This avoids the "You're not giving the prices" statement. The employee can either give the prices or withhold them. Either way, you know where you stand.

"I presume all of these are priced the same?" (similar items such as desserts)

If the answer doesn't include the price, then it's probably polite to ask what the price is. A reply without the essential information is called a "negative pregnant", meaning that the absence of information in a statement (the answer) carries significant information (in this case that the price is not forthcoming). At that point, directly asking for the price is acceptable in some circumstances.

"You forgot the prices."

That is probably too abrupt, but it looks good on paper.

Ask an indirect question about prices.

If done politely, this can be a good option. This can be used to deflect social stigma and direct confrontation.

At this point, you may be with others and not know the correct response. The easiest way to handle this is to:

1. Determine if it will help to interrupt the order so as to discuss the issue with your company. If it's appropriate to interrupt to discuss the menu, then it may be okay to interrupt the order.
2. Ask the server if you may have a minute or two "to decide" (or to discuss with the group).
3. When alone, ask the other members if the issue "is okay" with them. If necessary, apologize for not being familiar with the custom.

Your company or guests may be the major impediment. You need to be "gracious". This can include NT customs, but also includes social customs which are learned from experience.

If you feel "rolled over" to the extent that you are unable to say anything, it's always possible to say, "we need a minute to discuss it. Then you can say to your company that you don't know the restaurant's customary prices.

You may suggest an alternative, for example if the priceless item is dessert, simply say it's more fun to go elsewhere (or it's more fun to go elsewhere and you're uncomfortable with unstated prices). Aspies are good at pre-planning for anticipated events, so use that skill!

Prior Arrangements

Please excuse the details -- If you're experienced in dining out, treat this as a kind of sardonic commentary on life and enjoy!

While not directly a part of the "exercise" agenda, it helps to anticipate your position. You should build a favourable consensus ahead of time among your friends. It is definitely a part of social etiquette to have exchanges go smoothly.

It helps to make arrangements with dining partners ahead of time in cases in which the bill is being paid by you. This can be:

a general comment describing "priceless" items.

Simply mention to them that when prices aren't stated it's because they are out of sync with the prices on the menu.

Direct and sometimes the most expeditious. Make sure your comment doesn't sound too affected or petty. Don't apply your statement literally because others may not consider things like unpriced coffee in that category.

If it is appropriate to say that the person is dining as your guest, you can add, "except for 'special' items.

This presents a socially acceptable way to state generosity, but also state limits to the generosity.

Sometimes the "Local Rules" differ from the real rules.

In some cases, the "Local Rules" apply, but consider circumstances where they may not. Verify any verbally-stated requirements at a convenient time and place.

Sometimes the "Local Rule" relates to what someone wants to do or not do.

Derogatory Remarks

If you find that a derogatory remark is incorporated into notes about you or your transaction, use this to your advantage.

Example: I had special order eyeglasses ordered at a Walmart. After considerable delay, I complained that they could not have sent out the improperly mounted lenses without knowing about it, and the further delay was also intentional. On a call the next day, the person read notes that I thought there was a "conspiracy" against me. (I never mentioned "conspiracy" to them except in response to that note.)

I guessed that I would another several months' delay, and so called the main office of Walmart, and mentioned that the local office my objections by noting as "conspiracy theory". The same day, that office called to find out where to mail the glasses.

The point is that if you get an indication of derogatory comments, it may be to your advantage to comment on it. In the case of the "conspiracy" remark, the derogatory comment was an indication to the main Walmart office that the local department was grossly dismissing customer concerns.

(I've seen criticism of Walmart, but their policies have generally been very favourable to customers in my experience.)

There are cases where confrontation is deliberate. An example would be a store clerk initiating a sales pitch uninvited. In such cases it's best to keep one's mouth shut until one thinks through an appropriate response. These intrusions are usually a subtle twist of accepted social norms, so it is important to think though the response. These "twisted norms" may be particularly obvious only because you are on The Spectrum.

Depending on local culture, you can directly object ("I didn't ask to hear a sales pitch" or "This kind of 'in your face' sales pitch makes me uncomfortable."), or a more general "reactive" response such as a lengthy description of something equally irrelevant.

Understanding Friends A program to educate children about differences, and to foster empathy

This is from www.udel.edu/bkirby/asperger/ (O.A.S.I.S.) and describes in-class exercises. I'd explain more but it's a lot easier to just go to the link.

relationships.html - Autism, Dating and Socialization

index.html - the index page www.scn.org/people/autistics/index.html

singles.html - Autism and 'Singles' Dating Sites

abuse.html - Partner Abuse as Pertains to People on the Autism Spectrum

faqs.html - FAQs about editorial content of the relationships pages only

www.scn.org/help/monitor.html - Reducing Computer Display Monitor Flicker

Seattle Community Network
SCN People Pages

This site first posted August 8, 2002; rev August 5, 2007 ~~ written in WordPerfect 5.1 and works best with ~~ copyright 2002 by Stan P.