Welcome, everyone, to Meteorology Matters. We
often talk about the weather out there. But today,
we're looking inward. We're exploring something
quite extraordinary. Absolutely. It's this idea
that understanding ourselves, our own minds,
can fundamentally change how we see our work,
our passions, even the sky itself. Exactly. And
we're diving into this fascinating link between,
well, Human cognition and the atmospheric sciences,
how our brains are wired might just shape our
connection to weather. It's a really compelling
area. We're seeing how specific psychological
profiles, even conditions like autism, can really
influence career choices and frankly lead to
outstanding skill in certain fields. Especially
fields like ours, like meteorology. Precisely.
And today's research really sheds light on that.
And we're anchoring this discussion around a
really powerful story. It's about Rob Jones,
a 44 -year -old meteorologist. He's had a long,
successful career but recently received an autism
diagnosis. And for Rob, this diagnosis has sort
of illuminated his entire life, his whole career
path. It's like a key unlocking why certain things
felt the way they did. Yeah, making sense of
the past through a new lens. Right. So our mission
today is to look at the science, the research,
that helps explain Rob's experience. To explore
why someone like him might have always been,
well, almost destined for a life studying the
weather, even before he had that label, that
understanding. It's a journey that reveals a
lot about how different minds engage with complex
systems. Okay, so let's start there. Rob's career
is... Seriously impressive. On -air work, high
pressure forecasting. I mean, he's navigated
some incredibly demanding situations. Definitely.
Predicting severe weather. That's immense pressure.
And he achieved all this without knowing about
his autism. So you have to ask, right, what was
going on underneath? What inherent traits might
have been guiding him, almost unconsciously,
toward meteorology? Like an invisible hand pushing
him towards patterns and systems. Yeah, exactly.
Towards the atmosphere, which is, you know, chaotic,
but also follows rules. What was drawing him
in? Well, this is where a really key idea from
psychology comes in the empathizing systemizing
theory, or EES theory. pretty foundational for
understanding cognitive diversity, especially
with autism. OK, EES theory. Break that down
for us. Sure. So systemizing is basically this
fundamental drive we have. It's the urge to analyze
things, to figure out how they work, and then
to build mental models or systems to explain
them. So like wanting to know the rules. Exactly.
Identifying patterns, lawful regularities. The
goal is prediction. You know, if this happens,
then that will happen. It's about understanding
cause and effect. Makes sense. And the research
suggests there are about six main types of systems.
People try to figure out technical things like
computers, abstract ones like math, but crucially
also natural systems. Ah, natural systems. Like
the weather. Precisely. Weather, geology, biology,
these fall right into that category. It's about
observing, finding the underlying logic in the
natural world. OK, so that's systemizing. What's
the E part? Empathizing. Right. Empathizing is
kind of the flip side. It involves two things,
mainly. First, the cognitive bit, understanding
what someone else is thinking or feeling, their
intentions, their perspective. Putting yourself
in their shoes intellectually. Yes. And second,
the effective bit, actually responding with an
appropriate emotion, feeling concern or joy alongside
them. Got it. So how does this relate to autism
and, well, Rob? The core idea of ES theory, especially
regarding autism, is that autistic individuals
often show a stronger natural inclination towards
systemizing. Their brains are sort of wired to
excel at analyzing systems. OK. Now this strength
in systemizing can sometimes, not always, but
sometimes mean that cognitive empathy, figuring
out other thoughts and intentions intuitively,
might be more challenging. So a different balance
of strength. Exactly. It's not about lacking
care or feeling. Often it's about how information,
especially social information, is processed.
For someone potentially like Rob, the logical,
rule -based world of weather might feel much
more intuitive, more comfortable than the often
subtle and shifting rules of social interaction.
Okay, wow. Let's really connect this back to
Rob. His decades in meteorology, his skill in
forecasting, understanding atmospheric physics,
could this natural drive to systemize be that
invisible force we were talking about, the thing
that just pulled him towards weather? It seems
highly plausible, doesn't it? Think about it
from his perspective, maybe even as a kid. Yeah,
maybe he wasn't connecting as easily with, you
know, playground politics or unspoken social
rules. But the clouds, the wind, the rain, that
made sense. It followed patterns, even if complex
ones. There was an underlying logic he could
potentially grasp and find fascinating, maybe
even comforting. A system he could decode. Exactly.
And when we look at how this systemizing plays
out specifically with weather, it gets even clearer
why it's such a draw. OK, tell me more. Weather
is just. It's a perfect example of a natural
system, right? It demands constant observation
of tiny details, temperature, pressure, humidity,
all these variables. And then you monitor the
whole system, looking for those lawful changes,
those predictable shifts. It's finding order
in what looks like chaos. Which is exactly what
systemizing is about. Precisely. And the research
points out that autistic individuals often have
this deep drive to find truth in data. And by
truth, they mean precise, reliable, consistent
patterns. Facts you can count on. Not guesswork.
Right. It's about observation, logic, deduction.
The atmosphere provides this incredibly rich
data -filled environment for a systemizing mind
to explore. Can you give some examples of how
this actually looks? How autistic people might
engage with weather differently? Yeah, the research
highlights some really interesting behaviors.
For instance, some might repeatedly ask about
the forecast even if they just heard it. Why?
It might not just be curiosity. It could be fulfilling
a need for routine, for sameness, confirming
the world is predictable. Or maybe just finding
pleasure, actual comfort in knowing that information,
that system. OK, that makes sense. What else?
Well, think about memorizing cloud types in intricate
detail, not just the names, but how they form,
what they signal, or meticulously tracking daily
weather, maybe keeping logs or databases. Becoming
a personal archivist of the weather. Kind of,
yeah. Or compiling historical data, looking at
past storm tracks, comparing conditions. These
aren't just hobbies. They could be ways of imposing
control and predictability. Almost like managing
anxiety about the unpredictable. Exactly. It's
turning something potentially overwhelming into
a system you can understand, categorize, and
to some extent predict. It gives both intellectual
satisfaction and a sense of welcome. This is
fascinating. And it leads into another concept
you mentioned, hypersystemizing. What's that
about? So hypersystemizing is like taking that
systemizing drive up a notch. It's an even stronger
preference for systems with very low variance
things that are highly predictable, super consistent,
where the rules are crystal clear. OK, extremely
rule bound things. Right. And sometimes this
intense focus can manifest in behaviors that
might look repetitive from the outside, but they
serve an internal purpose providing that predictability
and comfort. And how does this connect to special
interests? I've heard that term used with autism.
It connects very strongly. Research suggests
that somewhere between 75 % and a massive 95
% of artistic individuals have what are called
special interests. Wow, that high. Yeah. And
these aren't just casual hobbies. They're intense,
absorbing passions. They often start really young
too, like between ages one and four. So very
early on. Very early. And here's the kicker.
These special interests... very often aligned
with these highly systemizable domains we've
been talking about. Things you can collect, categorize,
understand the rules of... And weather is one
of those. Weather is explicitly mentioned in
the research as a common example of a special
interest for autistic individuals. It fits the
bill perfectly complex, but rule -based. So let's
think about Rob again. Looking back now with
his diagnosis, his whole career path wasn't just
a job choice, was it? It sounds like it could
have been this natural flowering of... deep -seated
special interest. Very possibly. An unconscious
cultivation, starting way back in childhood,
that just naturally led him towards meteorology.
And think about the advantages. If your brain
is already wired to systemize, to see patterns,
that kind of focus can train your perception.
Exactly. The research talks about how it can
hone perceptual processing. So for someone like
Rob, maybe he features on a weather map, a cold
front, a subtle rotation in a storm, might literally
just pop out visually. Like a built -in pattern
detector supercharged by interest. Precisely.
It's not just helpful for developing talent,
it's apparently a strong predictor for people
going into STEM fields, science, tech, engineering,
math. It's almost like his brain was pre -configured
for this kind of work. Makes his career seem
less like a choice and more like an inevitability,
in a way. A place where his unique mind could
really shine. It validates the journey, doesn't
it? And the research digs even deeper with another
concept called weather salience. Weather salience.
OK, what does that mean? It's defined pretty
specifically. It's the degree to which you assign
psychological value or importance to the weather,
how much you're naturally attuned to your atmospheric
surroundings. So not just noticing if it's raining,
but how much it matters to you psychologically.
Exactly. How much mental space or importance
it occupies for you. And what did the research
find about weather salience and autism? Well.
Across three different studies using questionnaires,
personality tests, open -ended questions, the
finding was consistent. Autistic individuals
tended to show a higher degree of weather salience
compared to neurotypical people. Higher. Okay.
Significantly higher. Or subtly. Sometimes subtle,
but consistently higher. It supports this idea
that there's a genuinely stronger, deeper connection
there. What else did they find? The qualitative
data, the written answers, was really revealing.
When autistic participants described why they
liked weather, they often talked about it as
a predictable and or categorical system. They
focused on the rules, the patterns. Back to systemizing.
Exactly. And here's something fascinating. They
often wrote about twice as much about why they
liked weather and in much greater detail than
the neurotypical participants. Wow. So a deeper
level of engagement, more reflection. It really
seems so. It wasn't just a surface level interest.
Were there specific numbers like survey results?
Yes, definitely. In two studies, the percentage
of autistic participants saying they had a general
interest in weather was significantly higher,
around 73 % in one, 70 % in the other. Compared
to? Compared to the neurotypical groups in those
studies. And even more striking, when asked directly,
are you interested in becoming a meteorologist?
Yeah. The vast majority of yes answers came from
the autistic participants. In one study, it was
something like 31 out of 36 yes responses. That's
huge. That really suggests a powerful pull towards
the profession itself. Not just liking weather,
but wanting to do meteorology. Paints a picture
of an internal gravitation, doesn't it? Almost
like an innate calling for some. But it's important,
as you said, to remember autism is a spectrum,
right? The research acknowledged nuances. Absolutely.
It's not uniform. The researchers themselves
highlighted heterogeneity. You might have someone
with high weather salience very attuned, but
maybe they wouldn't say they're explicitly interested
in a hobbyist way. Or vice versa. Interested,
but maybe less subconsciously focused on it.
Potentially, yes. The connection manifests differently.
It's not a single path. And they also mentioned
selection bias, right? What does that mean here?
It just means that the people who chose to participate
in a study about weather might already be more
interested in weather to begin with, especially
if they saw it advertised. Ah, okay, so the results
might be amplified a bit because the participants
were self -selecting. It's possible, yes. It
doesn't mean the findings are wrong, but it's
context. The real level of interest across the
broader autistic population might be slightly
different, but the core finding of a strong link
seems robust. So for Rob, looking back, his journey
makes sense within this pattern, but it's still
his unique journey. Exactly. His experience reflects
this broader trend of diverse minds finding their
niche, engaging with the world in ways that work
for them. It shows there isn't just one way to
be passionate about weather or good at understanding
it. It validates his path, his skills, his struggles,
all of it. Precisely. And the research also looked
beyond just the autism connection at meteorologists
more broadly. Oh, what did they find there? There
was a study comparing meteorologists to engineers
and physicists. Interestingly, meteorologists
scored higher as a group on both empathizing
and systemizing. Both? That's interesting. Why
might that be? Well, think about the job. You
need the systemizing for the hard science, the
forecasting. But many meteorologists also need
to communicate complex, sometimes scary, information
to the public. That requires some empathy, some
understanding of how people will receive the
message. Right, and teamwork, too, in forecast
offices. Exactly. They also scored a higher on
personality traits like extraversion, conscientiousness,
agreeableness, and maybe most importantly, they
reported being less stressed, depressed, and
anxious than the engineers and physicists. Really?
Despite the high pressure nature of the job,
round -the -clock shifts lives on the line. It
suggests maybe a certain psychological resilience
or perhaps the specific blend of cognitive and
personality traits common in meteorologists helps
them cope better with those demands. That's fascinating,
because the job is demanding, always on, rotating
shifts. Mental health has to be a factor. Absolutely.
Understanding work -related mental health is
crucial. The study used the OCEAN model. Openness.
conscientiousness, extraversion, agreeableness,
neuroticism, to look at these traits. And the
high conscientiousness makes sense. You need
to be meticulous, extraversion for communication,
openness for adapting to new data. Right. It
paints a picture of a profession that perhaps
attracts or cultivates a specific psychological
profile suited to its unique challenges. This
brings us to something called the systemizing
chaos paradox. It sounds intriguing, especially
thinking about social interactions. It really
is. The research points out that both weather
and social systems are technically chaotic dynamical
systems. Okay, what does that mean in plain English?
It means they're incredibly sensitive to initial
conditions. The present state determines the
future, sure, but even a tiny, tiny change in
the present can lead to a massively different
future outcome. The butterfly effect. Exactly.
A butterfly flaps its wings in Brazil. The same
applies, metaphorically, to social situations.
A slightly wrong word, a misread expression.
Can send the whole conversation off track. Precisely.
An approximate understanding of the present social
situation doesn't guarantee you'll predict even
an approximate future state. It's unpredictable.
So how is this a paradox for systemizers? Well,
systemizers excel with rules, logic, predictable
outcomes. Their strength is applying that systematic
approach. But when you apply that rigid, rule
-based thinking to the fluid, emotionally complex,
often illogical world of human interaction...
It doesn't always compute. It often doesn't.
Expected if -then doesn't work reliably. This
mismatch can cause anxiety, confusion, misinterpretations.
You expect input A to lead to output B, but you
get output Z. And it's stressful because the
rules seem broken. It's not a lack of trying.
It's a mismatch between the cognitive style and
the system being analyzed. A fundamental cognitive
clash. And this has real -world implications,
for instance, in how we communicate weather warnings.
Like with the National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration, NOAA, and their Weather Ready
Nation initiative. Exactly. That initiative is
all about getting critical safety information
to everyone, including vulnerable populations.
This research suggests that for autistic people,
communication might be more effective if it leans
into their systemizing strengths. So less emotional
appeals, more facts and rules. Potentially. More
technical details, clear step -by -step safety
protocols. At 7 p .m., do X. At 8 p .m., expect
Y. Maybe hands -on demonstrations or clear visual
aids. Things that provide structure and concrete
information rather than abstract or purely narrative
warnings. Tailoring the message to how different
brains process information best makes total sense.
It's a bit effective translation. So let's circle
back one last time to Rob. Thinking about this
systemizing chaos idea. It offers such a profound
perspective on his life, doesn't it? It really
does. Maybe the apparent chaos of weather with
its underlying physics, its mathematical models,
its learnable rules actually felt more manageable,
more comforting to his systemizing mind. Compared
to the inherently less predictable chaos of navigating
social dynamics throughout his life and career.
Exactly. It reframes everything. Those past struggles,
maybe moments of feeling out of sync socially,
aren't deficits. They're reflections of a brain
optimized for a different kind of system. And
it highlights his incredible strengths, the pattern
recognition, the focus, the comfort with complex
data as being perfectly suited for his chosen
field. It gives him and us this new lens. It
turns difficulties into understood differences
and his success becomes even more remarkable.
A validation of his talents and his unique way
of experiencing the world. What an exploration
this has been. We started with Rob's story, his
recent diagnosis, and it's opened up so much.
This drive to systemize pulling people towards
meteorology. That deep connection, that weather
salience. And understanding how these different
cognitive styles aren't just about career paths,
but about well -being, about effective communication,
especially when safety is involved. It really
underscores the importance of this ongoing research.
It's not just for meteorology. It's about fostering
a more inclusive approach everywhere. recognizing
diverse strength. Looking beyond the surface,
valuing different ways of thinking and interacting.
Keep exploring, keep questioning. There's always
more to discover about these connections. So
as you go about your day, maybe take a moment,
think about your own cognitive blueprint. How
does it shape your path, your passions, your
connection to the world from the tiniest detail
to those huge atmospheric shifts? What hidden
strengths might your own forecast within reveal
about you? A fascinating thought to ponder. You've
been listening to Meteorology Matters. If you
want to follow Rob Jones's work and insights,
you can find him on Instagram. His handle is
Meteorologist. He's also on TikTok as TV Meteorologist.
And you can subscribe to Rob Jones Hurricane
on YouTube. That YouTube channel also has the
Meteorology Matters podcast playlist, by the
way. Great resources to check out. Definitely.
Thank you so much for joining us today on this
really extraordinary journey into the science
and the psychology of weather.