Tackle difficult, mundane tasks with fun, friendly support at any time!
ADHD LoveSome warnings 5 users report the basics being behind a paywall. Nothing confirmed. Checked: 400 reviews.
From our automated analysis, 26 Oct 2026. Every label links to its evidence in the full report below.
This analysis describes version 4.5.0 of the app, analyzed 2026-10-26 .
The store currently lists version 4.5.0, updated 2026-10-05.
Store screenshots supplied by the developer.
Tackle difficult, mundane tasks with fun, friendly support at any time!
dubbii has helped over 500,000 people with household chores, self care routines, admin tasks, and more. Having somebody body double you alongside any tricky or daunting job can really help, especially if you have ADHD. We’ve taken the most requested tasks and created videos to help get you started and finished, working alongside as your body doubles.
LIVE BODY DOUBLING
• We host daily live body-doubling sessions to keep you focused and on-task
• Join our community of body-doublers for a productive power-hour every weekday
• Get motivated, stay focused and inspire others
BODY DOUBLING
• Follow along with videos of Rich & Rox from ADHD Love
• Tackle loads of tasks, with more being constantly added
• Break down everyday tasks into micro-steps to reduce overwhelm…
From the developer’s store description.
For developers and the curious
The evidence, sources, measurements and versions behind every label above.
Open observations that have not cleared the evidence bar.
Paywall blocks the basics: raised by 5 distinct reviewers (about 1 in 80 reviews we read)
This observation has not cleared the required evidence standard.
The core of the app — not extras — sits behind payment, or previously-free function moved behind a paywall.
Nothing was published as a thing to watch for in this assessment. That is not a finding that nothing is wrong with the app.
400 reviews read for this analysis. Each observation keeps the sample and store it was based on.
Devastated. I thought I finally found something to help me but the only function I wanted from this app is locked behind a paywall. I'm not paying 6$ a month just to join a scheduled video call. I'll find something else.
I find it upsetting that you have to pay for the subscription to use anything but one task in the app. I understand needing to make a profit, but considering the target audience it seems a little bit like an ADHD trap and completely…
I want so badly to be able to use this app as intended but the thing that the whole app is based around (body doubling) is locked behind a subscription, I can't even see if this method works for me without paying and I'm genuinely…
A sampled review illustrates one person’s experience. It does not establish a finding on its own.
“Not assessed” means we could not measure it. It is never a zero and never a pass.
No package has been scanned for this app, so nothing is published about what it ships. That is an absence of evidence, not a finding.
Supporting measurements: not a complete list of possible harms or positives. Measurement vocabulary 1.4 · how these are measured
This analysis describes version 4.5.0 of the app, analyzed 2026-10-26 .
The store currently lists version 4.5.0, updated 2026-10-05.
Each store’s release notes, as the developer wrote them. They are the developer’s words, not ours.
No release notes were provided for this version.
Appworthy
dubbiiAssessed 2026-10-26 from 400 user reviews. We have not scanned the app's package, so nothing on this page was read from inside the app itself.
What the stores publish. Store ratings are the stores’ numbers, not Appworthy’s, and are never averaged across stores.
This assessment is produced automatically. One independent signal is read — user reviews — and each candidate finding is filed under the source that supports it.
No charge stands on one kind of evidence — with one published exception. A finding is either a measured fact that anyone can reproduce (an ad SDK is in the package; every subscription bills weekly; the privacy label omits a tracker we can see), or it is an interpretation — and an interpretation needs independent sources to agree before it reaches the catch list. The exception is a harm only users can see: a charge may publish from reviews alone, as “Reported by N users”, once enough reviewers raise it to clear that charge’s own published bar. That agreement rule is what replaced the human reviewer, not a model’s confidence.
There is no overall score, on purpose. A 0–99 number was published here until 2026-09-15. It was withdrawn because it discriminated too weakly to be the instrument — 44.7% of every pair of apps tied — and because a single number is a verdict where a count is an observation. What publishes instead is a row of measurements, each of which says what was counted and, where we could not look, says that instead.
Findings under One source only are real reports we do not stand behind as findings. They are shown because withholding them entirely would hide a genuine complaint, and labelled because publishing them as charges would be an accusation off a single source.
Write to [email protected], or use the form. Name the finding, the app version and the evidence that needs correcting. Factual corrections are free and never depend on buying anything.