Hey, give the person a break, they're only doing a PhD, it's not like they've been studying this for ten years or something.
There was one question that I had an issue with; the one right after they asked whether you've broken the law because of your interests should have had a third option that said "I haven't broken the law" rather than just yes/no.
They also didn't allow for the possibility of fluid, short-term interests like what occasionally happens to me when I get fascinated with a topic and spend sixteen hours a day for two weeks on it, then just as abruptly drop it when something else catches my interest. I had to talk about the long-term, lower-level interests (which still ended up in the highest intensity category because apparently the researcher doesn't realize that it is indeed possible to spend longer than six hours a day at a special interest...)
It's not perfect, but I think they are likely to get valid data out of it, and that's the important thing. I think if I were studying a psychological diagnosis, I would try to get a consultant with that diagnosis so I could get a firsthand perspective; it would have been useful in this case to interview some autistics before proceeding with designing the survey.