3 ms·
So the reason I asked the questions isn’t just that I didn’t read it, but that I can’t without paying for it. I would assume that if you were doing a study on
by nerdjon 2y ago
So the reason I asked the questions isn’t just that I didn’t read it, but that I can’t without paying for it.
I would assume that if you were doing a study on this, you would test anyone that is taking place in it if they are not already tested.
Otherwise, your data would be possibly based on a flawed datapoint.
That is what I am asking. Are we assuming they are neurotypical or was ever child tested.
>> I don't think there any way to diagnose someone as having no neurodivergence.
That doesn’t really make sense to me. I could see that it may not be cut and dry but if you can test for it you also get not.
I acknowledge that it is a spectrum and this is complicated. But I would think just assuming neurotypical also isn’t the answer either if you are studying this.
- SuperNinKenDo 2y agoOh yes, I agree with everything you said except on being able to test for being neurotypical. That's like expecting a test for being "not sick"/"not unhealthy"/"not physically abnormal". You can test for specific conditions or indicators and get negative results, but there's no test that can produce a positive result of "nothing wrong".