What your CAT-Q score means
Where any total sits in the range, what the subscale split changes, and why the number on its own is not a result.
The short answer
The CAT-Q produces a total between 25 and 175 across 25 items. Most people arrive here with one number and a question about what it means. The short version is that the total tells you how much camouflaging effort was reported overall, and almost nothing about what kind of effort it was. The split across the three subscales is where the useful information sits.
Where a total sits in the range
Every CAT-Q item is answered on a seven point scale, so 25 items give a floor of 25 and a ceiling of 175. A total on its own is easier to read once you know two things about it: how far through that range it sits, and what average response per item it implies. Both are arithmetic. Neither is interpretation.
A total near the middle of the range implies an average response near the middle of the scale, which is the answer most people give when a statement is partly true of them. A total near the top implies agreement with almost every statement, which is a different picture. The table below gives both figures for the totals people search for most often, so you can find yours without doing the sums.
NeuroType does not publish a CAT-Q cutoff. The published research this site records does not give one that can be applied to a single person's total, and inventing a line would encourage the total to be read as a verdict. What follows describes position and composition instead.
Common CAT-Q totals at a glance
Position is how far through the 25 to 175 range the total sits. Average is the mean response per item across 25 items. Widest band is the largest spread any one subscale could take at that total, so a bigger number means the total is more ambiguous on its own.
| Total | Position in range | Average per item | Widest subscale band |
|---|---|---|---|
| 40 | 10% | 1.6 | 15 points |
| 50 | 17% | 2 | 25 points |
| 60 | 23% | 2.4 | 35 points |
| 70 | 30% | 2.8 | 45 points |
| 80 | 37% | 3.2 | 54 points |
| 90 | 43% | 3.6 | 54 points |
| 100 | 50% | 4 | 54 points |
| 110 | 57% | 4.4 | 54 points |
| 115 | 60% | 4.6 | 54 points |
| 121 | 64% | 4.8 | 54 points |
| 125 | 67% | 5 | 50 points |
| 129 | 69% | 5.2 | 46 points |
| 130 | 70% | 5.2 | 45 points |
| 133 | 72% | 5.3 | 42 points |
| 135 | 73% | 5.4 | 40 points |
| 137 | 75% | 5.5 | 38 points |
| 140 | 77% | 5.6 | 35 points |
| 142 | 78% | 5.7 | 33 points |
| 143 | 79% | 5.7 | 32 points |
| 145 | 80% | 5.8 | 30 points |
| 147 | 81% | 5.9 | 28 points |
| 150 | 83% | 6 | 25 points |
| 151 | 84% | 6 | 24 points |
| 154 | 86% | 6.2 | 21 points |
| 160 | 90% | 6.4 | 15 points |
| 165 | 93% | 6.6 | 10 points |
| 170 | 97% | 6.8 | 5 points |
Why two people with the same total can have little in common
The CAT-Q has three subscales with different numbers of items, so each has its own possible range: Compensation 9 to 63, Masking 8 to 56, Assimilation 8 to 56. A total is the sum of the three, and the same sum can be reached in genuinely different ways.
Compensation covers working out and applying strategies for social situations: rehearsing what to say, copying gestures, studying how other people manage a conversation. Masking covers monitoring and adjusting how you come across while an interaction is happening. Assimilation covers the pressure to fit in and the strain of not feeling able to be yourself in company.
Somebody whose total came mostly from compensation is describing preparation and effort. Somebody whose total came mostly from assimilation is describing pressure and cost. Those are different experiences, they tend to have different consequences over time, and if it ever comes to a conversation with a professional they are different things to raise. The total flattens all of that into one figure.
The three subscales and their possible ranges are Compensation 9 to 63, Masking 8 to 56, Assimilation 8 to 56. Here is what that looks like at two totals from the table.
A total of 80
37% of the way through the range, an average of about 3.2 per item. Each of these splits adds up to exactly 80.
Evenly spread
- Compensation29 of 63
- Masking26 of 56
- Assimilation25 of 56
Compensation led
- Compensation63 of 63
- Masking9 of 56
- Assimilation8 of 56
Masking led
- Compensation16 of 63
- Masking56 of 56
- Assimilation8 of 56
Assimilation led
- Compensation16 of 63
- Masking8 of 56
- Assimilation56 of 56
A total of 170
97% of the way through the range, an average of about 6.8 per item. Each of these splits adds up to exactly 170.
Evenly spread
- Compensation61 of 63
- Masking54 of 56
- Assimilation55 of 56
Compensation led
- Compensation63 of 63
- Masking56 of 56
- Assimilation51 of 56
Assimilation led
- Compensation63 of 63
- Masking51 of 56
- Assimilation56 of 56
How much room for variation there is at your total
At any given total, each subscale is constrained to a band. The lowest a subscale can be is the total minus everything the other two could hold; the highest is the total minus the minimum the other two must hold. The width of the widest band is a measure of how ambiguous a total is.
Totals in the middle of the range have wide bands. Two people reporting the same mid range total can have subscale profiles with very little overlap, so reading the total alone tells you almost nothing about either of them. Totals near the top have narrow bands, because the subscale maximums start to bind and every subscale is forced high. That is the one case where the total carries information on its own, and even then it says nothing about why the camouflaging is happening or what it costs.
The widest band figure appears in the table for each total, which is a quicker way to see this than working through the arithmetic for your own number.
In the table above, 80 has the widest band at 54 points and 170 the narrowest at 5.
What a CAT-Q total cannot tell you
The CAT-Q measures camouflaging, which is the effort of adjusting how you present in social situations. It does not measure autism. Camouflaging is reported by autistic people and by people who are not autistic, and a questionnaire total cannot confirm or rule out autism, ADHD, AuDHD, social anxiety, or anything else.
It also cannot tell you why. High camouflaging effort can follow from being autistic. It can equally follow from a workplace culture, from past bullying, from anxiety, from being new to a country or a language, or from any situation where fitting in carried a cost. The questionnaire records the effort, not its cause.
A total taken once records how you answered on one day, in whatever state you were in. Fatigue, a recent difficult week, and how you happened to read a particular statement all move the number. Treat it as a snapshot rather than a measurement of something fixed.
What to look at instead of the total
Look at the three subscale scores and notice which one is carrying the weight. If assimilation is high relative to the other two, the strain of fitting in is the part worth attention, whatever the total says. If compensation is doing the work, the picture is more about effort and preparation.
If you only have a total and no breakdown, the CAT-Q on this site is free, needs no account, keeps your answers in your browser, and shows the subscale split alongside the total. If the assimilation side is what stood out, the masking reflection goes further into recovery and identity strain.
None of this is an assessment. Reflection tools can describe patterns; they cannot confirm or rule out a condition. Formal assessment requires a qualified professional who can consider your history and current situation rather than one number.
The CAT-Q on this site shows the subscale breakdown alongside the total. The masking reflection goes further into recovery and identity strain, and masking burnout and recovery covers what sustained effort tends to cost. For background on the questionnaire itself, see the CAT-Q explained.
Frequently asked questions
- Is a high CAT-Q score bad?
- The questionnaire records how much camouflaging effort was reported, not whether that is good or bad. A high total tends to describe a lot of effort spent adjusting how you present, and sustained effort of that kind is often tiring. Whether it is a problem depends on what it costs you, which is a question the number cannot answer.
- Does my CAT-Q score mean I am autistic?
- No. The CAT-Q measures camouflaging behaviour, not autism. Camouflaging is reported by autistic and non-autistic people, and a questionnaire total cannot confirm or rule out any condition. Only a qualified professional carrying out a full assessment can consider diagnosis.
- Why does NeuroType not show a cutoff?
- Because a single line encourages the total to be read as a verdict, and the total is the least informative part of the result. The subscale split is what actually differs between people. NeuroType shows where a score sits in the range and what different splits would mean, and leaves that judgement to the research literature and to clinicians.
- What is a normal CAT-Q score?
- There is no normal total that NeuroType can publish for an individual. Published averages come from specific research samples and do not transfer cleanly to one person answering online. Where a total sits in the possible range is the honest version of that question, and the table above gives it.
- Can I compare my total with someone else's?
- Only loosely. Two identical totals can come from very different subscale profiles, so the comparison usually says less than it appears to. Comparing the three subscale scores is more informative than comparing totals.
Safety note
Reflection tools can surface patterns; they can't confirm or rule out a condition. Take any concerns about your mental health or neurodevelopment to a qualified clinician.