Written by Kristin Delgado, Manager of R&D
The war for talent only seems to be intensifying by the day, and yet there’s a competitive advantage that many organizations seem to overlook. Research shows that cognitively diverse teams are more innovative, more agile, and ultimately deliver better results. Neurodiverse individuals – those with ADHD, autism, dyslexia, or other cognitive profiles – often bring valuable skills to their roles such as attention to detail, creative thinking, spatial reasoning, and more. However, certain assessments used to evaluate talent can in some instances act as barriers that inhibit the ability to create a diverse workforce. As organizations seek new ways to drive better business outcomes, intentionally setting out to create a workforce with diversity of thought may be just what is needed to stand out among competitors.
Not all assessments are designed equal
Once you’re invested in working to increase your neurodiverse talent population, you may be wondering where to start. Often talent decisions involve cognitive ability tests since they are established predictors of job success, but some traditional test designs may rely on outdated assumptions about human information processing. These cognitive tests may inadvertently screen out neurodiverse job candidates not because they can’t do the job, but because they don’t test the ‘right’ way. In other words, these tests are built around rigid scoring rules such as reading quickly, working within strict time limits, or thinking in a step-by-step, verbal way. Neurodiverse candidates may reach the same correct answers using different thinking patterns or at a different pace, so the test flags them as ‘wrong’ even though their approach would be just as effective on the job. Alternatively, inclusive test design allows us to measure how effectively individuals can think through and solve real-world problems.
Hiring systems that rely on traditional cognitive tests can disadvantage neurodiverse groups because those groups will tend to have lower scores due to test design rather than reflecting true differences in ability. Studies have indicated that neurodiverse individuals consistently score lower on traditional cognitive test batteries with effect sizes ranging from .5 to 1.0 standard deviations – a startling difference to research scientists that needs to be addressed.
Traditional assessment design vs. inclusive assessment design
Traditional assessment designs have been around for decades and while effective in many regards, they do create some barriers when it comes to inclusivity. Some examples of those are:
- Overreliance on speed disproportionately affects candidates with ADHD, anxiety, or working memory differences who may require special testing accommodations such as extra time.
- Language-heavy formats introduce challenges for candidates with dyslexia, auditory processing disorders, or English as a Second Language backgrounds.
- Distracting or flashy visuals, cluttered screens, or complex navigation can create cognitive overload, overwhelming those with sensory sensitivities or attention regulation challenges.
To overcome these challenges, assessment providers need to keep fairness in mind from the very beginning to design these tests without bias. Some ways to do this include:
- Reduce time pressure by removing or reducing speed constraints when possible.
- Minimize reliance on verbal content by using formats that are less dependent on language, culture, or prior knowledge.
- Utilize clean, intuitive user interfaces with short test lengths to reduce testing fatigue, distraction, and stress.
- Go beyond right and wrong answers by using process-based behavioral scoring, which means evaluating the way an individual works through a task (e.g., sequence of moves, strategies used) rather than only checking for a single correct answer. This style of scoring puts more emphasis on efficiency, strategy, and problem-solving style, not just speed or correctness.
Mindgage: A cognitive ability assessment built with an inclusive design
The Mindgage suite was intentionally built with these principles in mind, and our early research shows that it’s working. Mindgage contains four modules that measure different abilities of the test taker:
- Crunch which measures numerical ability by assessing how a candidate interprets and works with numerical information
- Flow which measures mental rotation ability by assessing how a candidate understands and conceptualizes new information as well as thinks critically
- Seek which measures perceptual ability by assessing how a candidate processes and retains visual information as well as makes spatial judgments
- Sync which measures verbal ability by assessing how a candidate understands and interprets written language
Both the Flow and Seek modules use interactive, visual tasks that allow candidates to demonstrate cognitive strengths without being penalized for processing differences or reading fluency. The scoring algorithms focus on how a user approaches a problem, not just whether they got it right.
In a recent study conducted by Talogy with over 1,000 participants who took the Mindgage assessment (including neurodivergent individuals with autism, ADHD, dyslexia, and more), we found that:
- Flow and Seek showed no significant score differences between neurodiverse and neurotypical participants.
- When differences did emerge (in modules like Crunch and Sync), effect sizes were small and likely linked to the verbal or speeded nature of those modules.
- There were consistently high user experience ratings around fairness, clarity, and engagement.
What does this all mean? These findings suggest that inclusive assessment designs behind assessments like Mindgage allow effective prediction for roles requiring cognitive ability without penalizing neurodivergent candidates. In short, when given a fair shot to perform, neurodivergent candidates performed just as well as neurotypical candidates on these pre-hire assessments.
Creating an inclusive workforce through better assessments
To build teams that innovate, adapt, and thrive, you need to assess in ways that reflect the full range of human cognition. That begins with an inclusive assessment design which results in more accurate hiring decisions and a diverse workforce that reflects the different ways people think, solve, and lead. In today’s talent landscape, this is a talent optimization strategy that gives organizations a real competitive advantage.
About the author: Kristin Delgado, M.S. is an accomplished R&D Manager at Talogy, where she leads the Innovation and Data Science Lab. For over 15 years, Kristin has been pivotal in driving innovation in assessment solution design and enhancing measurement accuracy and predictive validity through cutting-edge assessment methodologies and advanced psychometric techniques. Her extensive experience has positioned her as a key influencer in the field, consistently pushing the boundaries of talent management solutions through the integration of technology and data science.
