Published on 12, July, 2020
Over the past week or so I've read quite a few details in different threads about what happens at an ADOS appointment on this forum (I include myself in that by the way as I've mentioned some things mentioned in my report that I found surprising and a "difficult read").
I've heard it said in the past that, whilst there is no explicit "secrecy" around ADOS and I certainly wasn't asked kindly not to discuss mine, that "they" don't like details being published - and I think there are good (for us) reasons for this. I think that if I had known in advance *exactly* what would happen and, more critically, *why*, then this would have created the risk that I would mask more (consciously or subconsciously) out of a desire to "do the right (i.e. NT) thing" and/or this would have led me to rehearse my behaviour beforehand and/or doubt the objectivity of the result (i.e. reflecting afterwards was I masking? Was I trying to display the autistic signs I had decided that I have?).
This would have led to more doubt about whether I had been diagnosed objectively via a gold standard test, and the little monster that says "there's nothing wrong with you & you're faking it" would have been bigger and louder.
As it was, because I knew very little about the specifics when I went for mine, I can look at my report and say "Yep, I didn't know they were looking for *that*, *then*, and my behaviour was 100% spontaneous and neither embellished nor masked, and it's 100% me".
What do you think? My leaning is that we should exercise caution in posting too many details here. Generalities of course are fine, but I think that discussing the specifics of the exercises and the reasons they exist entails the risks above.
I'd agree that it's wise to resist publishing too many details about the objectives and content of the ADOS. There are a few tests where knowing 'how' the test works will lead to the results being unreliable. the WCST (Wisconsin Card Sorting Task) which measures how much an individual perseverates, is a perfect example of another type of test where knowing how the test works will lead to ceiling scores, that is the participant may be extremely impaired but because they know how to 'do' the test their score will look as if they are not impaired at all. Incidentally I've done the WCST myself and scored 79 (severely impaired range - what can I say, I am the Queen of Perseveration!), when it was time for a re-test, I said there is no point, because I've since read up on the test and I know how to 'do' it because I now know what exactly it is looking for.
Sorry that was an extremely long and convoluted way of saying. No we shouldn't share, let's keep the details of the ADOS a secret! I should probably check that I haven't already blabbed the details elsewhere now and if I have then I'd best delete it!!!
I can perseverate like a fly repeatedly & unsuccessfully trying to fly through a closed window! I've recalled emails before now to correct a spelling mistake, and perfected software that no longer has a use. I can't think of a specific example but I'm sure this is true! I might be going back to my teenage years now when I remember a friend almost literally dragging me away from my ZX Spectrum saying "Leave it - it doesn't matter!".