>>40940173
>>40940205
ok so i remember having done this before. and you know what? these tests are so bogus. ive explained my issues with them before and ill do it again.
for one, many of these questions are so unclear it's impossible to answer fully accurately or broadly enough. for example
>I often notice small sounds when others do not.
is this talking about a small click on the background of a room being more noticeable and more bothersome to you? is it hearing conversations well with background noise? i notice the small sounds of a room very often but i can't understand what someone is saying to me if there's a little bit of background noise in a room or restaurant or something. how do i answer this question when the two scenarios are kinda opposite?
also many of them have an answer that should land between "definitely agree" and "slightly agree" and it's very difficult choosing one or the other. a more nuanced set of options would be helpful.
and finally there's the obvious lean of a lot of these questions like
>I am fascinated by numbers.
gee wow i wonder which way my results will go if i answer yes to this question! the questions are so obvious the test taker can't possibly answer this without bias or a motive. subconsciously, even. i don't have autism so im going to subconsciously try and push my test results in that direction by subconsciously downplaying some answers. im fascinated by numbers? sure but not as much as other people like math majors and scientists. so i should answer "slightly yes" i tell myself. the baseline is so undefined it lets me bend the test.

if someone gave me this test in person id spend more time complaining to them about the shortcomings of the test than i would spend actually taking it, i reckon.