Once again, it depends what they mean. What do they mean by 'collect information' and what do they mean by 'categories of things'. Because I like learning about things, I like going on research dives and learning odd bits of information. But I don't think I approach it in such a systematic way that this question suggests.
I checked against an extended version of the same test (AQ-50), and this question had some added clarification;
(e.g. types of car, types of bird, types of train, types of plant, etc.).
I could be interested in learning about any of those, but it would not be motivated by its belonging to the category. It would be if the particular car, bird, etc had some inherent interest, or was relevant to something else I was involved with
Okay, if I was going to learn about fish, it might go something like "I mentioned to someone about how spawning salmon return to their place of birth. But is that actually true?" *Learns about salmon life-cycle. *Learns about biological study of animal migration. *Learns about migration in different animals. *Learns about how understanding has developed over time. *Learns how it influenced ideas on geoscience, commerce, anthropology
It's like I'm on a random walk through the tree of knowledge, rather than cataloguing a few select branches.
I do like how the class of lobe-finned fish can be interpreted to include human beings. That just tickles me.
Definitely agree. You should see my bookmark, and file folder structures.
Again, I have a problem with the question. I get that the question is trying to measure systemization, but that can take many forms. Narrowing it down to just "information about" might have highly literal autists answering 'no' even though they've been collectors of whatevers since they can remember.
This question amuses me because if you was going to take it completely literally, which seems like a reasonable approach for someone that is autistic, then you would read this as do you collect information and store it in some way such as files on the computer or a database. Which no, I don't do that. But I do like to learn about lots of different things.
It's funny, both you and @PancakeLegend@mander.xyz were careful to avoid over-literal interpretations (unlike me haha), but still you came to quite different understandings. You - "yes, I have a broad interest in learning". Pancake - "yes, I am systematic with information"
This question has always confused me to a degree. I often said that my knowledge is in narrow wells that are very deep, but I think that's just what being a specialist is.