Common Autistic Personality Test Unreliable, Psychologists Say
Researchers and psychologists at the Universities of Bath, London, and Cardiff have discovered that a common test for assessing autistic personality traits does not have high levels of reliability and may not accurately capture the symptoms of autism.
This indicates that studies incorporating scores from this test may not be valid, which raises new concerns regarding its application as a screening tool for autism in the general population.
People are asked to answer a 10-item Autism-Spectrum Quotient (AQ10) questionnaire to see if they have personality traits that are linked to autism. These kinds of questionnaires can take many different forms, but the AQ10 is the shortest and one that general practitioners use the most.
The Public Foundation for Wellbeing and Care Greatness (Pleasant), the public authority body liable for making suggestions for clinical practice and to the NHS, suggests the AQ10 as an evaluating device for chemical imbalance in grown-ups. The questionnaire's results are used in large-scale studies to measure autistic traits in the general population for research purposes.
In order to learn how autism may be linked to other social behaviors and difficulties, these autistic traits and tendencies are linked to their performance on other tasks.
Researchers examined the efficacy of AQ10 in measuring autism. This report published in article. The Report showed that "The study analyzed data from over 6,500 general population participants".
The team now suggests that the reliance on AQ10 as a measure of autistic traits should be questioned, as their findings revealed that the measure had poor reliability across multiple statistical techniques. They suggest that we require brand-new systems to better reflect the diversity of autistic personality traits among people
Senior author and expert on cognitive processing at the University of Bath's Department of Psychology, Dr P U N-I T Shah, provided the following explanation: Our findings add to the growing body of literature indicating that the current research-based measures of autism and autistic traits are inadequate.
A lot of what we know about autism and how to help people with it has been gleaned from studies utilizing these tools. However, the findings and conclusions are also unreliable if the measure of autism is unreliable, as we suggest. The validity of these studies' findings is unclear without reliable measures, which may be hindering our efforts to support autistic people or those who have been diagnosed with autism.
The P H D researcher on the team, Emily Taylor, added: This is a significant finding that should hopefully spur a concerted effort to examine and improve autism research and clinical practice tools. The next step would be to carry out follow-up studies on similarly large clinical samples because our analyses utilized a large sample that did not have any medical diagnoses.
We have primarily focused on a measure of autistic traits, but we are aware of similar reliability issues with mental health tool measures. In order to improve their application in the management of mental health issues in society, future research will require far more "basic" science to examine and address these issues
You must be logged in to post a comment.