1. Baron-Cohen

2. Background
Autism –Difficulty communicating and forming relationships, using language/abstract concepts
“Social Sensitivity”
Theory of Mind (ToM)
1. Involves 2 stages of understanding someone else’s mindset
a-stage 1- relative mental state of another person (compassion)
b- stage 2- the content of that mental state (compassion for her mother’s loss)
2. *NOTE- Eyes Test ONLY involves stage 1
3. Also referred to as ‘social intelligence’ by Baron-Cohen

3. Purpose 1. To test if the results would be replicated
fixed the problems or if it would produce the same results?
2. To test if there is an negative correlation in a sample of normal adults between the R-ET and the Autism Spectrum Quotient (AQ)
3. To test if there is a gender difference on the R-ET

4. Hypotheses
Yes, yes, and yes

5. Methodology Natural experiment (can’t assign autism)
Questionairre (self report)

6. Variables IV= (1) AS/HFA or Control and (2) Gender
DV= (1) R-ET score, (2) AQ score, and (3) gender identification for AS/HFA group

7. Participants Group 1 (AS/HFA) B. Group 2 (general population controls)
15 male adults with AS/HFA
Self-selecting from U.K. National Autistic Society magazine ad
Normal IQ range (x=115) and mix of socioeconomics and education
B. Group 2 (general population controls)
122 adults (as controls) from adult community & education classes from Exeter or from public library at Cambridge
55 males & 67 females
Broad mix of occupations and education
Group 3 (students from Cambridge)
103 undergraduate students (71 in science and 32 in other majors)
53 males and 50 females
Assumed to have higher IQ than other Ps (though not specified)
Group 4 (IQ-matched controls)
14 randomly selected adults who were IQ-matched with Group 1
IQ x=116
No mention of gender (assuming male though)
No mention of how selected/recruited

8. Sampling Technique
Mixed: Opportunity sample and Self Selecting

9. Procedure Summary Quiet Room Paper and Pencil Describe apparatus:
36 questions
4 answer choices
Black and white photos

10. Data Type
Quantitative: Numerical scores for both R-ET and AQ Test

11. Findings Distribution of 17-36 with mean of 24
Group 1 scored significantly lower than all other groups (21.9) compared to 26.2, 28 and 30.9
Groups two and 3 tested gender and females did score higher but not significantly. (supported)
Group 1 significantly higher AQ than 3 and 4

12. Conclusions
Revised eyes test is solid

13. Strengths and weaknesses
A. Strengths
1. Quantitative data from rather large sample
2. The R-ET is easy to administer and replicable
3. Pilot evaluations of target words & foils with researchers
4. Pilot testing of original 40 questions with controls
5. Experimental validity- measures autistic traits
6. No main ethical concerns
B. Weaknesses
1. Mainly ecological validity
Testing done in a room is different than the everyday
context that you would encounter in social settings
Looking at B&W photos of still eyes is very different than one would encounter in social settings