I think there is a greater chance that I would freeze up in this situation than I would on the job with a new problem, or an executive breathing down my neck. I don't think I'd react that way consistently, but I know it's further down the discomfort continuum. In the test:
* I'm under pressure to impress, but also be my true self. I've had little contact with you so I'm not sure how to gauge all the feedback when I have increased sensitivity.
* Sometimes don't have a real calibration for the level of the test. I've done the recommended prep, but it doesn't feel indicative of the test, or the interviewer inserts and additional level in before we've achieved the basics of the test.
* What if I want to rough something out, but feel I'm exposing what I know would be a weakness from my pre-test assessment? I've just gone and made a hash of something I knew I needed to know.
I'd say "how you collaborate" would be the biggest factor. If you start out with some code and fix up something, have me fix up something, and progressively raise the difficulty, then I'm much less likely to freeze up. I don't believe I'm particularly unique, but I don't find many tests delivered in this manner. It's more a case of "here you go for your practical test, show me what you can do kiddo" which just demonstrates how little programmers know about assessment, interviewing, and psychology.
I'm going to state the following because I think the question was directed to one individual who identified as having a particular disorder. I don't believe I have any specific disorder that would cause me to freeze up. I'm an introvert, tested under Myers-Briggs as an INTP (if you consider that any value), and am OK in networking events. In jobs I've always tended to end up in regular conversations with skip-level managers etc.