Psychometric test accuracy

[tawarien]

I made an account here as I wanted to find out more about autism, especially if I may be autistic.
I mostly read here and only posted once since then.

In parallel, among other things, I did take some psychometric tests from the site Embrace Autism | The ultimate autism resource.

I am diagnosed with ADHD and can identify with it as well. However, to my surprise, the ASRS v1.1 (ADHD test) was under the threshold.
On the other hand, I reached the threshold on the following tests: AQ, EQ, RAADS-R, RBQ-2A, and TEQ.
I did not reach the threshold on the following tests: CAT-Q and SQ.
The Aspie quiz was inconclusive (the 2 scores were less than 35pt apart).
If I went just by the tests, I would say there is a high chance I'm autistic.

Because of that, I'm curious about how this community sees the reliability and accuracy of those tests?
Is it common to score high on many of them and not be autistic, or is this rare or even impossible?

 

[Matthias]

The problem is there is no clear boundary between autism and normal/neurotypical. There is a continuum of autistic traits ranging from very mild to severe with many people being half autistic and half "normal". In these causes, psychiatrists only diagnose autism when they believe the autistic traits cause "clinically significant impairments."

If two people have the same autistic traits but one person has friends, a romantic partner, and a job while the other person struggled to maintain friendships and employment, they'll likely diagnose the second person as autistic and tell the first person they're not autistic.

 

[tawarien]

I agree that there probably is no clear boundary. But I think there is a difference between being autistic and being diagnosed with autism. And in my opinion, I do not believe that being autistic requires that the person struggles because of the traits.

For example, there may be an autistic person that starts struggling later in life, and if tested, that person is diagnosed with autism. But if that person would get tested at another point in life where they did not struggle, that person may not have been diagnosed. But in both cases, the person is autistic. The person would even be autistic if they never get tested by a psychiatrist or never struggle.

 

[Matthias]

I agree there is a difference between being autistic and being diagnosed with autism or meeting the criteria for autism. I think most people who are autistic don't meet the criteria for autism.

I think the reason for that is because doctors specialize in diagnosing and treating diseases/disorders. Since autism is treated as a medical/mental health condition, doctors can't diagnose it unless someone has impairments that are severe enough to qualify as having a disorder.

 

[Crossbreed]

ASD0.5...

Spoiler

Half-Aspergers...!

 

[Alexej]

Firstly Hi and Welcome to the Forums @tawarien

I have done quite a few tests and some of them multiple times (I have a spreadsheet with the results)
I would regard the tests as indicative and not absolute, however I do have a formal diagnosis.

 

[Neonatal RRT]

As you suspect, the written testing portion of the diagnostic process, is only part. However, there can be a strong correlation between those who score "high" on say, the AQ test and the RAADS-R, and the likelihood of an autism diagnosis. If you are in that "grey area" where you are just meeting thresholds, then obviously, more information is needed,...and this is where the DSM-5, intellectual performance testing, and a psychologist are helpful.

Although there is some value in the written testing, the questions are subject to interpretation and bias, as these questions are how you see yourself,...from your perspective,...it's your subjective opinion,...and depending upon how you are feeling at that moment while taking the test, it may influence the scores. Sometimes it can be helpful to take these tests repeatedly to see if the scores are consistent.

 

[tawarien]

Firstly Hi and Welcome to the Forums @tawarien

I have done quite a few tests and some of them multiple times (I have a spreadsheet with the results)
I would regard the tests as indicative and not absolute, however I do have a formal diagnosis.

I have a spreadsheet as well and even added all the questions and scoring formulas so I can better see what the impact of individual answers is and how consistent they are when I take them multiple times. Considering them only indicative is probably the right approach.

As you suspect, the written testing portion of the diagnostic process, is only part. However, there can be a strong correlation between those who score "high" on say, the AQ test and the RAADS-R, and the likelihood of an autism diagnosis. If you are in that "grey area" where you are just meeting thresholds, then obviously, more information is needed,...and this is where the DSM-5, intellectual performance testing, and a psychologist are helpful.

Although there is some value in the written testing, the questions are subject to interpretation and bias, as these questions are how you see yourself,...from your perspective,...it's your subjective opinion,...and depending upon how you are feeling at that moment while taking the test, it may influence the scores. Sometimes it can be helpful to take these tests repeatedly to see if the scores are consistent.

For a few tests I are in the "grey area" and are not much over the threshold, but for most I'm far enough over the threshold that following under it would mean I had to answer many questions differently. However, the "grey area" is not well defined and outside of reaching the threshold its not clear what a score means. Taking them repeatedly is for sure a good advice, I probably will let some time pass and take them again to see if they are significant differences.