Sneakiness of Assessors and Other Questions

Post Reply New Topic

Starting in late Feb., the day before the clinic closed due to the virus, I completed my ASD/psych eval (we still have one questionnaire to complete by phone next Wed, even though the assessor has already started my write-up).
On the main, full day of testing, the assessor, a friendly young doctoral intern, mentioned that she'd be recording in the one room we started in so that she could later "remember" what happened. I suspect she did the same in the next room I was put in for my "breaks," as it also has a one-way glass window, and in the ADOS-2 testing room as well. I think when they say "observation," it isn't just the obvious ADOS-2 observation, it's like...when you're "having lunch" or "recharging on your own" in a room. For those who are new to this, these are known as psych observation rooms.
They also perform these actions they call "presses" or "manipulatives," and again, not just during the ADOS-2 or whatever, but while you think you're just "hanging out" in the same room with them "waiting for the supervisor" who is "running 45-minutes late" or some similar thing.
When I was taking the ADHD tests on the computer and yelling at the screen, I now know why the assessor didn't care how loud I was, and why she told me not to worry (I was concerned about the noise) because they, as in the others who worked there, were "used to it." It's because--duh--they were likely even observing that. (I had forgotten there was the one-way glass right in front of the computer desk.)
What are these "presses" or "manipulatives?" Well, some that I recognized from reading here, there and everywhere were:
The assessor muting the sound on the computer so I would either a) ask her to fix the sound or b) see if I'd troubleshoot it myself.
The assessor yawning over and over to see/hear if I'd either yawn back (via a mirror-neuronal impulse), ask her if she's tired, has had a long night/day, etc.--or simply not react.
The assessor waiting if I'd ask her to bring me Kleenex when I was crying (my cat recently died). That one was likely unplanned but they know how to seize opportunities.
The assessor tapping the desk with a pencil to see if she could drive me to a meltdown (no true meltdown happened but I got very, very annoyed by it).
The assessor trying to converse with me about this or that thing, be it inside or outside of my special interests.
Because I had read about people going through this stuff, I was on my guard, and I do feel like it altered my behavior. Some things come naturally--for example, when the woman who conducted the ADOS-2 smiled, she was waiting to see if I'd smile back (I didn't, but that was natural). When I read online that the ADOS-givers are supposed to "do everything big" or be "extra empathetic," the reality of it just seemed like too much and felt patronizing.
Hell, I screamed in the "break room" because the cream from a chocolate Cadbury egg got on my face, which I now know is how they were able to know to rush in and show me to the bathroom. They seemed more in a tizzy than I did.
I wonder about the ethics of all these things. What if I had had to change clothes? Not sure if there's sound, but what if I had had to make a personal phone call?
And the assessor kept texting someone (the supervisor?) before and after asking me things, "conversing with" me or talking to me, as if the supervisor (or someone) were prompting her.
I am almost sure that to get a "baseline reading" on my empathy level, she was told to kick my foot under the table to see if I'd apologize. It worked but only later did I figure some of these ruses out.
I "know" she was asked to put on a "serious voice" and ask me for "several people" to be "collateral" (corroborators--i.e. a former therapist, my psych, etc.) even though we had previously discussed involving just one. To this date she has not called any, but as she left it open for me to decide how much of a window I'd authorize, and I'd decided on 3 months, which is quite a long time, she probably just decided to just go ahead and believe me. I'm 52, so although I authorized my mom as a source, she has not (yet?) called her.
How do you feel about this type of thing? What are your experiences? Did their ruses seem obvious? They only were evident to me because internet. I don't want a false positive and have heard it's possible to tip things in or out of your favor. I've also heard it's in actuality not that easy to do because of micro-expressions and reflexes.

(icons, emojis, smilies and all that)

Well, mine wasn't like that at all. I never got the impression that anyone was trying to catch me out or contrive ways to observe distinct signs. They just interacted with me quite normally as far as I could tell. In fact I felt reasonable relaxed considering I was talking to new people.

I'm trying to think why assessors would feel the need to be disingenuous or contrive ways to prompt responses that may show or not show diagnostic features. That seems a bit unethical to me. I am of the view that the whole process should be open, honest and transparent.

This is a teaching clinic with a sliding scale, which may explain things a bit.

Mine was through the psych department of a local four-year college.

It sounds awful

I know when I walked in there was an older man who was a student, too (I asked). Who knows how many people were observing?
Good for you; what did they say when you suggested better methods of behaving surreptitiously?

Aspi wrote:

How do you feel about this type of thing?

Meh.  As a systems engineer, I know that you cannot really know everything about a system unless you see how it operates under all possible conditions -- normal, abnormal, and adverse.

Aspi wrote:

What are your experiences?

Similar to yours, except there were more student-observers involved.

Aspi wrote:

Did their ruses seem obvious?

So obvious that I wrote my own "expert" report advising them on how to improve their examination processes!

The Heisenberg principle should be better known to assessors. Observation changes human behaviour more often than not.
I am somewhat reminded of a series of questions I've been getting from a business, which mostly reveal that the surveys are written by people who don't know what to ask, and won't actually be any wiser from the answers, just strongly opinionated.

I agree but they think we don't know when they're either watching/studying us or paying attention to our reactions to them.

They did dx the ASD and never admitted to the sneakiness, effectively drawing it out.