What does the task of reading that frog book test specifically?

It isn’t just how capable you are in working out the picture book, they are looking for other behaviours as well. 
I thought I had done reasonably well with the book, in the feedback afterwards I was told that I didn’t look up once and tell them the story, I was in ‘my world.’

All best wishes Zuriiix . double and treble think - seems familiar to me!  Being natural is a complex thing that perhaps ought to be the simplest thing in the world!

Yes :-)

It looks at how you interpret and communicate something that is not your special interest, with someone who is not close, in a one on one situation. It reveals how you think.

It is a behavioural test because they deduce what you are doing from your behaviours. 

It could be another book, or another similar task. But there are some attributes of the book that are interesting.

It is not so much that talking about it will help you game the test, it is more than it will make it more stressful. You don't need to try to do anything. You just need to do what you feel comfortable with. Just behave like you normally would in that situation. 

Sorry if my intent got misinterpreted I’m not trying to invalidate the existence or validity of the test I’m just asking what it means. Since everything about it was abstract and seemingly unrelated from eachother I was just curious, (also a tad nervous about what I’m actually going to be told at my results).

Haha I think I just doubled down on my social act during my session. I made sure that I made consistent eye contact and avoided stimming, maybe it was just mental pressure or something. But by the end of it, I was so uncomfortable that I ended up needing a few seconds looking off the horizon to muster anything. Obviously I don’t have any clue if I actually have ASD, so I don’t know what any of this alludes to (if anything at all) but I did way better on the practical tasks rather than those question bits.

Hiya Zuriiix  and everyone else. :-)

I agree with you about child test for adults being a bit dull and as Cinnabar_wing picks up on maybe a little demeaning.

At the risk of over-focus on one response what Cinnabar_wing   highlights about "blanking" the peri-assessment period by dissociation somewhat (have come now to realise this happens a lot in times of what the psychologists call "cognitive dissonance" - where there is a big switch in how one sees the world possible but the "facts" are really difficult to match up).

The response have also triggered a bit of research (yes I appreciate the irony :-)  ) and reflection by myself on whether one is allowed to talk about the test tasks specifically. 

From this, I haven't been able to identify specific rules of the forum which indicate this (moderator please correct me if I am wrong!).  Except that we are all restricted from medically over reaching in respect of making formal diagnoses of one another of course.

Overall I think that the peer support process I have found in the forum helps demystify the tests rather than trying to dismantle them or "game" the system.

Here's a "deeper dive" if interested.

As for the "pros and cons" of pre-assessment research:

Pros:

Personally I found that as a "high masking" autistic person researching a lot pre-assessment helped me "rehearse the scripts" of things that otherwise my default masking behaviour might try to hide from other people (and most sadly perhaps - myself... )

I had some pretty severe concerns that my underlying "condition" was potentially a psychiatric one - finding out about the tests, what they meant and how they were "me" went some way to reassuring me pre-diagnosis that was less likely and enabled me to self-advocate.

This reduced self blame.

Cons

I got a bit too "hooked up on it" with intrusive thoughts and i got unsure if I was exaggerating my autism.  This got me stuck in a bit of a loop of self doubt.  (punchline of a joke with a baby polar bear saying: " If I'm really a polar bear why am i so blooming cold!)  I found to start with that "knowing the behaviour was there I kind-of got caught in the trap of someone telling me not to look at someone's nose...  obviously the first thing you want to do is look at it!!

So this blended into over-analysis and maybe made the stress increase.

There may also be a risk that the "echo chamber" of people saying things to someone makes them believe something that the formal tests might not reveal.  And I have identified a few people on the forum talking about how upsetting it was to have come to believe one is autistic before assessment but the assessment turns out not to say they are...  I believe this could be pretty distressing for some people.

Then there's the "gaming" the test bit...

well, since other people are involved in giving information to the assessment - by explaining their experiences of the person - unless they are "trained and skilled" in gaming the result too that changes the potential bias back.

Yep, as other good people in the thread have said - the test is not about self reporting only - it is about observations the tester makes of the individual being tested.

There is "gaming" bit is perhaps the strangest one.

I must admit i still personally get hung up on it.  (hehe maybe I'm the baby polar bear :-)  ).  I personally find it tricky sometimes to tell the difference between the masking behaviour being a survival/coping mechanism and something I do for personal reward - intentionally deceiving someone.  It has taken a long time for me to acknowledge that masking is maybe weirdly a subconscious thing that one does consciously.  The biggest thing I have had to get my head around is just how much hard work the masking is - the testors are trained to identify this.  I suspect that someone who might be intentionally out to deceive might by their nature do so as easily as a fish swims in water - personally I find deceiving someone (except in jest or good faith) incredibly hard to do.

So as for intentionally "gaming" the tests - unlikely.

As for getting me to not research something I'm interested in - and maybe this is the same for some other autistic people - well, my monotropism+stress makes me "deep dive" every time.  Autism diagnosis for me was a stressful time.  I had to research under the circumstances - and think questions such as you have posed and the answers it generates were for my particular "spiky autism profile" essential (hehe a several hundred word response to your thread proves that maybe?)

So, Zuriiix if you want to explore further what the test are "about" with respect to autism maybe consider the pro's and con's I've shared here - then maybe that'll help you decide :-)

It's not like the first rule of autism club is that we don't talk about autism club (to reference the movie)  I like intellectual debate (maybe it's a bit like sparring) but really dislike fighting!

Best Wishes

Phased

I agree. I am not sure it is best to undermine tests.

I was confused by it at the time, a year ago. I thought I was too good at it, but got quite a high score, so thought about it.

I think it is quite a good exercise, which is why they retain it. It is deceptively simple like all good tests, which is why as adults you think it is beneath you. But that' misses the point.

It doesn't prove anything on its own, but it is contributory data. I think it may be hard to fake.

Ohhh that makes sense. In my head I thought it was mainly about the content of what u said. Now that I’m thinking about it, I used zero gestures and went through it cordially. Since I was in a clinical room with an assessor I sorta just went through it like how you would explain something to a doctor. But I know for a fact if this was my house and I was explaining this to a child, I’d definitely go all the way with gestures and expressions. Maybe they did it this way to strip yourself of any context where you’d act and get you to express naturally? I have no clue at this point so I suppose I should just wait for the follow up haha

I think it's looking for things like expression in the voice, facial expressions, gestures, pointing etc. 

Honestly, I think it's an outdated test based on an old fashioned concept of autism based on one specific portrayal. Even more so for adults as many of us can put on a front to, for example, read to a child. So we may be able to do all those things for the sake of a book but not in other situations.

I suspect that it is supposed to test the ability to string a narrative together and if you use gestures to illustrate what you are saying, because autistic people are not supposed to have imaginations, be able to create imaginary conversations, or use gestures. Plus autistic people are supposed to get hung up on the details of why a frog is eating bread, when frogs do not eat bread and suchlike. All outdated idiotic nonsense, in my opinion. I'm just glad that my assessment was by a consultant psychiatrist, who just had a long conversation with me about my traits, difficulties and history.

I don't think we are meant to talk about the tasks specifically in case it influences someone who hasn't done it yet, though I think everyone has heard of the existence of the frog book! though I totally understand wanting to talk to someone about it.

I don't know what it tests, I think we aren't meant to know in case it effects the way we answer, but I do wish they could find a way to test whatever it does test in a more dignified way for adults!

(I think I might have done it at the start off my assessment, not everyone does, but I was so nervous at that point I think I might have dissociated a little, as I actually have blanked it from my memory though I think it's in the report!)

Good luck for your results, hope you don't have to wait too long!