Autism and pre-employment tests: building a fair assessment process for neurodiverse candidates
3 minutes
How autism affects pre-employment testing, and what to do about it.
Neurodiversity covers a wide range of conditions, including ADHD, dyslexia, dyspraxia, and dyscalculia, and autism is one of the most talked-about among them. It brings its own particular set of strengths and challenges into a hiring process, especially when it comes to pre-employment testing.
The tests that trip autistic candidates up aren't usually the ones you'd expect. Cognitive ability tests that measure logical and abstract reasoning tend to be where autistic candidates do particularly well. It's the more unusual formats, like situational judgement tests, that can cause problems.
With a bit of thought about test design, you can build a process that plays to the genuine strengths of autistic candidates instead of tripping them up on a format that was never designed with them in mind.
Understanding the strengths autistic candidates bring to testing
One of the more consistent findings in autism research is that people with high-functioning autism tend to do particularly well on tasks involving inductive reasoning and logical, non-verbal reasoning.
Those are exactly the skills that matter for roles in technology, engineering, data analysis, and anywhere else that leans on analytical thinking and attention to detail.
Autism exists on a spectrum, so this won't be true for every candidate. But it's a strong enough pattern that it's worth recruiters not writing off autistic candidates based on assumptions about their capability. In tests that reward logic and abstract reasoning, autistic candidates often come out ahead of their neurotypical peers.
Where traditional testing methods fall short
The main place autistic candidates run into trouble is the situational judgement test. SJTs present a hypothetical scenario and ask candidates to pick, rate, or rank different responses to it.
That format assumes a kind of flexible, hypothetical thinking that doesn't come naturally to a lot of autistic people, who tend to think in more literal terms. Imagining yourself into a scenario that hasn't happened, and then choosing between several imperfect options, can be genuinely difficult.
Take a typical SJT question: "What would you do if a customer complained about the service?" For an autistic candidate, none of the listed options might match what they'd actually do, because their instinct is to follow an established procedure, or because they can see problems with every option on offer. That's not a lack of judgement. It's a mismatch between the test format and how they think.
Adjusting pre-employment tests for autistic candidates
The good news is that SJTs don't need to be scrapped, they need to be adjusted. Instead of asking candidates to pick a single best action, ask them to rate or rank the effectiveness of each option.
That small change matters more than it looks. Rating or ranking lets candidates respond analytically rather than committing to a single action that might not sit right with them, which suits a more literal thinking style much better.
It's also worth making the whole test as unambiguous as possible. Clear, direct instructions and structured response formats help far more than open-ended "what would you do?" phrasing, and they make the test easier for everyone to navigate, not just autistic candidates.
Where cognitive strengths translate well
Away from SJTs, cognitive ability tests that focus on logic, patterns, and abstract reasoning tend to suit autistic candidates well, and they don't usually need much adjustment.
These formats reward exactly the kind of thinking that's often a genuine strength for autistic candidates, which means a well-designed cognitive assessment can be one of the fairer parts of your process rather than a barrier.
The key is making sure you're not relying too heavily on the parts of your process, like unadjusted SJTs, that work against these strengths instead of with them.
Best practices for fairness in your assessment process
Adjust SJT formats. Ask candidates to rate or rank responses rather than pick a single best action, so the test doesn't force an uncomfortable hypothetical judgement.
Keep instructions unambiguous. Clear, structured wording helps autistic candidates navigate the test without second-guessing what's actually being asked.
Lean on cognitive ability tests where you can. They tend to be a fairer measure for autistic candidates, and a strong indicator of genuine capability.
Ask for feedback. Autistic candidates and other neurodiverse individuals will tell you things about your process that no internal review ever will.
Conclusion and next steps
Autism brings real strengths to a hiring process, but conventional test formats, particularly situational judgement tests, can obscure that instead of revealing it.
With some adjustments to how you frame those tests, and by leaning on the cognitive assessments where autistic candidates tend to shine, you can build a process that's both fairer and better at spotting genuinely strong candidates.
If you're rethinking how your process handles neurodiverse candidates, it's something we help hiring teams with regularly at Test Partnership. The fixes are usually simpler than people expect.
Primary author
Ben Schwencke
Chief psychologist at Test Partnership. MSc in Organisational Psychology with over ten years experience in psychometric testing.
Contributed to by:
