See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/257366107

Preliminary validation of Spanish "Eyes Test-Child version"

Article in Ansiedad y Estres · October 2013

CITATIONS READS

3 644

3 authors:

Pilar Rueda Rosario Cabello

University of Malaga University of Granada
8 PUBLICATIONS 43 CITATIONS 45 PUBLICATIONS 612 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Pablo Fernández-Berrocal
University of Malaga
245 PUBLICATIONS 5,698 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Emoción y Cognición View project

Emotional intelligence in gifted students View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Rosario Cabello on 03 June 2014.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Ansiedad y PRELIMINARY VALIDATION OF SPANISH “EYES TEST-CHILD VERSION”
Estrés
ISSN: 1134-7937
Pilar Rueda1, Rosario Cabello2, Pablo Fernández-Berrocal1
2013, 19(2-3), 173-184
Resumen: El Test de los Ojos para niños (Baron-
Cohen, Wheelwright, Spong, Scahill, & Lawson,
2001) mide la teoría de la mente (TM) de niños y
adolescentes de 8 a 17 años utilizando una tarea de
reconocimiento emocional. Este test fue diseñado
para la evaluación de las habilidades de reconoci-
miento emocional y mentalización y se ha utilizado
ampliamente en diversos contextos culturales como
herramienta de diagnóstico de desórdenes relacio-
nados con déficits de TM, como los desórdenes del
espectro autista, la esquizofrenia o problemas de
conducta. Este estudio presenta los datos prelimi-
nares de la validación al castellano del Test de los
Ojos para niños en una muestra no clínica de ado-
lescentes españoles. Se analizó la distribución de
respuesta, la dificultad de los ítems y las puntua-
ciones de la versión en castellano en una muestra
de 354 adolescentes de entre 14 y 16 años. Ade-
más, se exploró si el grado de acierto estaba aso-
ciado con la edad o el género. Tanto la distribución
de respuesta, como la dificultad de los ítems y las
puntuaciones obtenidas por la muestra española
coincidieron con la versión original del instrumen-
to. Las puntuaciones obtenidas en el Test de los
Ojos para niños no se relacionaron con la edad pe-
ro sí con el género de los participantes. Las chicas
obtuvieron puntuaciones mayores, coincidiendo
con los resultados de estudios previos. En resumen,
estos resultados sugieren una validez adecuada de
la versión en castellano del Test de los Ojos para
niños.
Palabras clave: Test de los Ojos para Niños, Eva-
luación, Reconocimiento Emocional, Teoría de la
Mente, Adolescencia.
The ability to interact and communicate
with others is a key aspect to human func-
*Corresponding author:
Pablo Fernández-Berrocal
Faculty of Psychology, University of Malaga,
Campus Teatinos s/n
Málaga, 29071, Spain. E-mail: berrocal@uma.es
© Copyright 2013: de los Editores de Ansiedad y Estrés
1
Málaga University (Spain)
2
Huelva University (Spain)
Abstract: The Eyes Test-Child version (Baron-
Cohen, Wheelwright, Spong, Scahill, & Lawson,
2001) is a test that measures advanced theory of
mind (ToM) skills through an emotional recognition
task. The test was designed for the diagnosis of emo-
tional recognition and mentalization, and it has been
widely used across different cultures as a tool for the
diagnosis of disorders associated with a deficit in
ToM skills, such as autism spectrum disorders,
schizophrenia or behavioral disorders. This study re-
ports the preliminary validation of the Spanish “Eyes
Test-Child Version” in an adolescent nonclinical
population. We examined distribution of response,
item difficulty, and scores on the Spanish version
with a sample of 354 adolescents aged 14 to 16
years. Additionally, we analyzed whether the right
responses were associated with age and gender. Re-
sults showed that distribution of response, item diffi-
culty, and scores on the Spanish sample coincided
with the original version. Eyes Test scores were not
related to the age of adolescents. Females scored
higher than males, which replicates earlier studies.
Key words: Eyes Test-Child Version, Assessment,
Emotional Recognition, Theory of Mind, Adoles-
cence.
Title: Validación preliminar del “Test
de los Ojos para niños” en
castellano
tioning, if not its foundational stone (Blair,
2008). Relating with others and communi-
cating effectively with them requires,
among other functions, the ability to recog-
nize the emotional states of another person,
the ‘other’. This means recognizing what
emotion the other person is feeling and ac-
174 Pilar Rueda, Rosario Cabello, Pablo Fernández-Berrocal
knowledging that it might be a different
emotion than mine at a given moment. This
ability to attribute mental states such as
emotions, wishes, intentions or beliefs, dif-
ferent from our own is called theory of
mind (ToM; Baron-Cohen, Leslie, & Frith,
1985; Baron-Cohen, Wheelwright, Hill,
Raste, & Plumb, 2001). Although the term
was first developed by Premack and Wood-
ruff (1978) within the primatology context,
Baron-Cohen et al. (1985) started using it
to explain the bases of social interaction
and, with it, the cause of deficits in this ar-
ea that characterize autistic disorders (Bar-
on-Cohen, 1995; Baron-Cohen et al.,
1985).
Emotional recognition and theory of
mind
Emotional recognition, mentalization,
and empathy processes are highly intercon-
nected (Blair, 2008; Jones, Happé, Gilbert,
Burnett, & Viding, 2010; Lawrence, Shaw,
Baker, Baron-Cohen, & David, 2004).
ToM comprises the ability to detect social
stimuli and to use them to make social in-
ferences (Sabbagh, 2004). It has also been
conceptualized as composed of two do-
mains referred to intrapersonal events
(recognition of own emotions and mental
states) and external or interpersonal events
(recognition of emotions and mental states
in others (Tine & Lucariello, 2012). Emo-
tional recognition is a core aspect of men-
talization. Being able to recognize how
others feel and to reason about their mental
states (wishes, intentions, beliefs) allows us
not only to develop empathetic behaviors,
but also to establish successful social rela-
tionships (Baron-Cohen, 1995, 2011; Bar-
on-Cohen, Wheelwright, Hill et al., 2001;
Baron-Cohen, Wheelwright, Spong et al.,
2001; Blair, 2008; Lawrence et al., 2004).
Basic research in this field has demon-
strated the importance of social relation-
ships since childhood for personal and so-
cial development (Oberle, Schonert-Reichl,
& Thompson, 2010; Tkach & Lyubo-
mirsky, 2006). Adolescence is a critical pe-
riod of life characterized by both physical
and psychological changes (Kerpelman et
al., 2012; La Greca & Moore, 2005; Nat-
vig, Albrektsen, & Qvarnstrom, 2003). The
complexity of social abilities is one of the
most important aspects during this period,
impulsed by the great importance that peer
relationships have in this moment of life
(Sternberg, 1990; Tonks, Williams, Framp-
ton, Yates, & Slater, 2007; Wentzel, 1998).
The ability to relate with others responding
to external demands of greater complexity
has been related, first, with the develop-
ment of the prefrontal cortex (Perna, 2002)
and, secondly, with an environmental adap-
tation process regulated by more complex
social norms (Turkstra, 2000). Social ex-
changes require fast cognitive and emo-
tional processing (Gutiérrez-García & Fer-
nández-Martín, 2012; Matsumoto, Hwang,
López, & Pérez-Nieto, 2013). This emo-
tional information is automatically extract-
ed and processed from aspects such as
body posture, voice tone or gaze (non ver-
bal communication). Regarding the face,
which has been considered the greater
source of emotional information (Joseph &
Tanaka, 2003; Knapp & Hall, 2010), some
studies have stated that eyes provide the
greatest emotional information. This in-
formation is key not only for the recogni-
tion of basic emotions such as happiness or
sadness, but also for the recognition of
complex mental states such as admiration
or jealousy (Bach, Ropar, & Mitchell,
2007; Baron-Cohen, Wheelwright, & Jol-
liffe, 1997).
Development of the Eyes Test-Adult
Version and Child Version
Some authors have stated that the emo-
tional recognition difficulties typical of pa-
thologies such as autism are caused not on-
ly by ToM deficits, but also by a difficulty
in looking attentively at the counterpart’s
eyes (Baron-Cohen 1995; Baron-Cohen et
al., 1985; Baron-Cohen et al., 1997; Golan,
 Preliminary Validation of Spanish “Eyes Test-Child Version”
Baron-Cohen, & Golan, 2008; Joseph &
Tanaka, 2003). Based on this deficit and
the importance of eye information for men-
talization abilities, Baron-Cohen and col-
leagues developed the Eyes Test ("Reading
the Mind in the Eyes Test"; Baron-Cohen,
Wheelwright, Hill et al., 2001; Baron-
Cohen, Jolliffe, Mortimore, & Robertson,
1997). The goal of this test was to over-
come the simplicity and the ceiling effect
that other ToM tests based on false belief
tasks (e.g., Sally and Anne Test; Baron-
Cohen et al., 1985) presented for adults
(Baron-Cohen et al., 1997; Baron-Cohen,
Wheelwright, Hill et al., 2001; Baron-
Cohen, Wheelwright, Spong et al., 2001).
The task consists of choosing among four
options the mental state represented on a
photo that only shows men’s and women’s
eye area. The test assesses emotional
recognition as well as “advanced” mentali-
zation skills given that the participant must
associate the emotional expression of the
eyes with the understanding of complex
emotional states such as jealousy or desire.
Diverse studies have found positive corre-
lations between the Eyes Test and other
measures of emotional recognition
(Alaerts, Nackaerts, Meyns, Swinnen, &
Wenderoth, 2011; Montgomery, Stoesz, &
McCrimmon, 2013).
The Eyes Test-Child Version (Baron-
Cohen, Wheelwright, Spong et al., 2001)
was adapted from the adult version to
broaden the use of the test with children
and adolescents. The task is the same but
the number of items was reduced from 36
to 28, based on original item's difficulty for
children aged 8 to 12.
Studies that have used this instrument in
adults and children (Eyes Test-Child ver-
sion; Baron-Cohen, Wheelwright, Spong et
al., 2001) have shown that mentalization
and emotional recognition skills are affect-
ed in disorders such as autism (Baron-
Cohen, Wheelwright, Spong et al., 2001;
Jarrold, Butler, Cottington, & Jiménez,
175
2000; Joseph & Tanaka, 2003), behavioral
disorders (Sharp, 2008), borderline person-
ality disorders (Fertuck et al., 2009; Sharp
et al., 2013), and in children at risk of psy-
chosis (Gibson, Penn, Prinstein, Perkins, &
Belger, 2010).
Relationship between the performance
on the Eyes Test and age
There are two lines of study related to
performance on the Eyes Test and age. On
the one hand, some studies stress that emo-
tional recognition is a skill that is improved
with age (Baron-Cohen, Wheelwright,
Spong et al., 2001; Tonks et al., 2007). On
the other hand, some studies have failed to
find that relationship between performance
on this test and age (Rutherford, Trou-
bridge, & Walsh, 2012; Sharp, 2008; Sharp
et al., 2013). In regards to the first group of
studies, Baron-Cohen, Wheelwright, Spong
et al. (2001) found that the mean of correct
answers of older children (above the age of
twelve) was greater than that of younger
children (8 years old), indicating an effect
of age on mentalization and emotional
recognition abilities. Along the same line
but focused on a smaller age range (9 to 15
year olds), Tonks et al. (2007) described
that scores on the test did not increase line-
ally but decreased at age 14 and increased
again at age 15. This apparent relationship
between the number of correct answers on
the test and age had not been found on all
of the studies. For instance, among adoles-
cents between the ages of 14 and 18, no
differences were found between the scores
of the oldest ones and those of the youngest
ones (Rutherford et al., 2013). Sharp (2008,
2013) informed too of results in which test
performance and age were not related for
subjects between the ages of 9 and 13 years
(Sharp, 2008), and between the ages of 12
and 17 years (Sharp et al., 2013).
Relationship between performance on
the Eyes Test and gender
Gender has proven to be another rele-
vant variable of the performance on emo-
176 Pilar Rueda, Rosario Cabello, Pablo Fernández-Berrocal
tional recognition and mentalization tasks.
Scientific literature that has compared the
achievements of boys and girls in emotion-
al recognition tests such as the Eyes Test
(Baron-Cohen, Wheelwright, Spong et al.,
2001; Rutherford et al., 2012; Waka-
bayashi, Sasaki, & Ogama, 2012), has
shown that girls score higher than boys in
tasks that require recognizing emotions in
others or making social inferences (Baron-
Cohen, Wheelwright, Spong et al., 2001;
Rutherford et al., 2012). Two non-
mutually-exclusive theoretical perspectives
have explained this gender effect on emo-
tional recognition. On the one hand, ac-
cording to the Neurobehavioral Model
(Nelson & de Haan, 1997) it has been ar-
gued that biological structures responsible
for emotional recognition mature earlier in
girls than in boys (Herba & Phillips, 2004;
McClure, 2000). On the other hand, from
the perspective of the Social Constructivist
Model (Meadows, 1996), it has been stated
that interactions between parents and their
children are different since birth, depend-
ing on whether the baby is a girl or a boy
(Malatesta, Grigoryev, Lamb, Albin, &
Culver, 1986; Malatesta & Haviland,
1982), making girls more sensitive and
willing to emotional information and emo-
tional contact than boys (Fivush, 1991;
Rutherford et al., 2012). These different
patterns of education from early childhood
makes friendship among girls more inti-
mate and close during adolescence com-
pared to that among boys (Hughes, 1998).
Aims of this study
The Eyes Test-Child Version has prov-
en to be useful for the study of emotional
recognition and ToM in both clinical and
non-clinical adolescent populations. Given
that currently there is no validation of this
instrument in Spanish, our study aims to:
-­‐ Examine distribution of response,
item difficulty, and scores on the Eyes
Test-Child Version in a nonclinical
adolescent population, and
-­‐ Analyze whether there are age and
gender effects on scoring.
Method
Participants
Participants were 354 adolescents
(46.2% male), aged 14 to 16 years (M =
14.97, SD = 0.76), who completed the
Spanish Eyes Test-Child Version. Partici-
pants with special needs, learning disabili-
ties or known disorders were not included
in the study. Participation was voluntary,
and all adolescents and their parents pro-
vided informed consent.
Instruments
The Eyes Test-Child Version (Baron-
Cohen, Wheelwright, Spong et al., 2001)
was used to generate the Spanish Eyes
Test-Child Version. Two translators, both
with PhDs in psychology and experts in
cognition and emotion, created the Spanish
version of the instrument, which was then
back-translated to English by two inde-
pendent translators. In this version, as in
the English-language original, participants
were shown 28 photographs of different
individuals’ eyes areas and asked to choose
among four words the one that best de-
scribed the mental state of the person
shown. Each correct answer was worth one
point, thus scores could range between 0
and 28. The test-retest reliability for the
Eyes test, as measured by intraclass corre-
lation coefficient, was .60 (Hallerbäck,
Lugnegård, Hjärthag, & Gillberg, 2009).
Procedure
The test was part of a larger set of
measures given during school hours. The
participants were tested collectively in a
quiet room by two researchers. The re-
searcher made sure that students under-
stood all the emotional words. The assess-
ment took 60 minutes. Those participants
with learning disabilities or special needs
were also given the tests, although their re-
sults were not included in this study since
 Preliminary Validation of Spanish “Eyes Test-Child Version”
we were not doing a special group of com-
parison with them.
Results
Descriptive analysis
Table 1 shows general characteristics of
the sample and measures of central tenden-
cy and variation for sociodemographic
groups in the Eyes Test-Child Version.
Distribution of response on the Eyes Test-
Child Version
The percentage of participants who
chose each word on each item is listed in
Table 2. It is worth highlighting that the
most frequent answer across all items was
always the target (correct) answer. In 23 of
the 28 items on the Eyes Test-Child ver-
sion, the target response was selected by
over 50% of the participants, and in no case
was it below chance level (for four re-
sponse alternatives: 25%). The proportion
of items selected by more than 80% of the
participants (“easy items”) was 18% (items
4, 8, 11, 16, and 20). In five items (“diffi-
cult items”) the target word was selected by
less than 50% of the participants (items 1,
3, 19, 25, and 26). For these five items, the
target word was selected between 37% -
44.6% and the foil word (wrong answer)
Table 1. General Characteristics of the Sample and Measures of Central Tendency and Varia-
tion in Eyes Test-Child Version (N = 354).
Sociodemographic group N Eyes test Mean (SD)
Total sample 354
Gender
Male 163
Female 191
Age
14 108
15 148
16 98
177
was selected by a percentage above chance
level, ranging between 26.8%-40.7%.
Distribution of scores on the Eyes Test-
Child Version
Figure 1 summarizes the distribution of
the Eyes Test-Child version scores in our
adolescent sample. Distribution of scores
shows that almost 17% of our sample
scored less than 14.6 points on the Eyes
Test-Child version, corresponding to 1
standard deviation below the mean. This
adolescent group can be described as hav-
ing “low empathy.” In contrast, we can see
other group of adolescents who scored 1
standard deviation above the mean. Con-
cretely, approximately 14% of participants
formed the group that can be described as
having “high empathy” (Vellante et al.,
2013).
Age and gender differences
To study the effect of gender (fe-
male/male), and the effect of age on the
scores obtained on the Eyes Test-Child
version, a 2x3 analysis of variance
(ANOVA) was conducted. Three age
groups were created: 14, 15 and 16 years.
ANOVA results revealed a main effect
of gender, F (1, 348) = 16.39, p < .001, η2=
0.045, which means that girls scored signif-
icantly higher (M = 19.29, SD = 3.70) than
boys (M = 17.59, SD = 4.00). This result
Max-Min
18.51 (3.93) 27-9
17.59 (4.00) 27-9
19.29 (3.70) 26-9
18.55 (3.57) 26-9
18.62 (4.10) 27-9
18.51 (4.08) 25-9
178 Pilar Rueda, Rosario Cabello, Pablo Fernández-Berrocal

Table 2. Spanish Version of the Eyes Test-Child Version. Distribution of Responses in Per-
centages for Items (N = 354).

Item Answer A Answer B Answer C Answer D

1 34.5 10.2 44.6 10.7
2 11.9 5.9 6.5 75.7
3 37.0 22.6 5.1 35.3
4 7.3 82.5 1.4 8.8
5 4.0 74.3 11.6 10.2
6 4.2 5.9 62.7 27.1
7 7.6 7.3 79.4 5.6
8 84.2 4.2 3.4 8.2
9 15.8 5.1 9.3 69.8
10 20.9 10.2 61.6 7.3
11 6.2 82.2 5.4 6.2
12 11.9 6.2 6.5 75.4
13 61.9 12.4 8.5 17.2
14 12.4 60.7 13.8 13.0
15 57.1 6.2 16.9 19.8
16 85.3 4.2 3.7 6.8
17 7.9 11.3 21.5 59.3
18 74.0 11.0 7.3 7.6
19 8.5 40.7 8.5 42.4
20 5.1 7.1 85.3 2.5
21 71.5 10.5 12.1 5.9
22 4.0 13.8 7.9 74.3
23 7.6 76.3 10.5 5.6
24 66.7 7.3 19.5 6.5
25 9.9 26.8 16.9 46.3
26 11.6 9.0 45.8 33.6
27 9.3 11.9 65.3 13.6
28 15.3 6.2 56.2 22.3
“Correct” responses according to original study are in bold.
 Preliminary Validation of Spanish “Eyes Test-Child Version”
Figure 1. Distribution of Spanish Eyes Test- Child Version Scores, 28 items (N = 354).
indicated that gender accounted for 4% of
the variance in Eyes Test scores, a small ef-
fect size according Cohen’s standards (Co-
hen, 1992). The main effect of age group
was not significant, F (2, 348) = .075, p >
.10, η2= 0.0001. In addition, the interaction
effect was not significant,
F (2, 348) = .042, p > .10, η2= 0.0001,
indicating that the effect of gender was the
same for all age groups.
Discussion
The Eyes Test is an instrument widely
and internationally used to study emotional
recognition and theory of mind skills, par-
ticularly in clinical populations (Baron-
Cohen, Wheelwright, Spong et al., 2001;
Gibson et al., 2010; Jarrold et al., 2000; Jo-
seph & Tanaka, 2003; Sharp, 2008; Sharp
et al., 2013). In this sense, it is an instru-
ment that allows the identification of defi-
cits in these skills, a basic step towards dif-
ferential diagnosis of autistic spectrum dis-
orders or schizophrenia (Bach et al., 2007;
Henry, Bailey, & Rendell, 2008; Jarrold et
al., 2000).
Studies about the validity of this in-
strument have mostly focused on exploring
179
measures of central tendency and variation,
and the distribution of response by items
(Baron-Cohen, Wheelwright, Spong et al.,
2001; Hallerbäck et al., 2009).
Primarily, this has been the case be-
cause measures of emotional recognition,
such as the Eyes Test, cannot be subject to
the regular analyses of reliability run on
verbal scales (Scherer, Clark-Polner, &
Mortillaro, 2011). Nevertheless, this in-
strument has been adapted to other lan-
guages without including the distribution of
response by items, which obstructs statisti-
cal procedures and comparisons with the
original version, and between groups (Hal-
lerbäck et al., 2009). Thus, the purpose of
this research study was to present prelimi-
nary data on the measures of central ten-
dency and variation, the distribution of re-
sponse, item difficulty, and scores on the
Eyes Test-Child version in a nonclinical
adolescent population, and to analyze
whether score percentages are related to
participants’ gender and age.
The Spanish version of the Eyes Test-
Child Version has shown a response distri-
bution comparable to that obtained by Bar-
on-Cohen, Wheelwright, Spong et al.
(2001). Concretely, the most frequent an-
180 Pilar Rueda, Rosario Cabello, Pablo Fernández-Berrocal
swer in all items was always the target an-
swer. In most items, the target answer was
chosen by more than 50% of the respond-
ents and it was never below chance level.
The proportion of “easy items” (selected by
more than 80%) was small.
In items 1, 3, 19, 25, and 26, the target
word was selected by less than 50% of the
participants. Given these data, a key ques-
tion should be raised in emotional recogni-
tion tests such as the Eyes Test: Are we
faced with “difficult items” or wrong-
designed items? Hallerbäck (2009) used the
Eyes Test-Child version with an adult sam-
ple (mean age 24 years), supposed to be a
more “skilled” group in emotional recogni-
tion. For items 3, 19, 25, and 26 Hallerbäck
found that the target word was selected by
more than 50% of the adults. This would
indicate that these items are difficult for
adolescents but are well designed, because
a more emotionally-skilled respondent can
identify them correctly.
In contrast, item 1 seems to be a bad
item because it does not discriminate
among our adolescents or among Hal-
lerbäck’s (2009) sample. As Hallerbäck in-
dicated, it is likely that the lightning on the
photo for item 1 is not adequate since half
of the face is dark.
Relationship between performance on
the Eyes Test and age
No significant differences were found
among the percentage of correct answers of
the three age groups considered in this
study. Data obtained in previous studies re-
garding the relationship between perfor-
mance on the test and age is not consistent.
The literature shows evidence both in favor
of and against a relationship between accu-
racy on this test and age. The first data
supporting this relationship surfaced with
the development of the instrument, among
children and early adolescents aged be-
tween 8 and 12 years. The mean of correct
answers obtained by the oldest respondents
was greater than that of the youngest ones
(Baron-Cohen, Wheelwright, Spong et al.,
2001). Jarrold et al. (2000) also document-
ed a positive relationship between age and
the scores obtained by a sample of re-
spondents whose ages ranged from 9 to 24
years (the child version of the test was used
for respondents aged 16 years or less, while
the adult version was used for the older re-
spondents). In contrast, other authors have
not found this positive relationship between
age and task performance among respond-
ents aged 14 to 18 years (Rutherford et al.,
2012), 9-13 years (Sharp, 2008), and 12-17
years (Sharp et al., 2013). Future studies
will need to analyze the relationship be-
tween maturity development and emotional
recognition and mentalization skills among
participants whose ages range across the
entire adolescence. This would allow for a
more precise observation of changes evolv-
ing during this period. Longitudinal studies
from infancy would also be beneficial in
order to know better the genesis and devel-
opment of these abilities.
Relationship between performance on
the Eyes Test and gender
In our study, adolescent females scored
higher than males in all age groups on the
Eyes Test. This result coincides with previ-
ous studies that show that both girls and
women have better emotional and social
skills than their same-age male counter-
parts, as well as an earlier interest towards
social contact (Rutherford et al., 2012). A
small but consistent effect is present, as
well, in emotional recognition from child-
hood to adolescence (McClure, 2000).
From the Neurobehavioral Model's per-
spective, (Nelson & de Haan, 1997) such
differences in emotional identification be-
tween boys and girls have their origin in an
earlier maturation of the relevant structures
before the age of 3 (Herba & Phillips,
2004; McClure, 2000). One of these struc-
tures, the amygdala, has been found to have
a strong density of sexual hormones
(Brodal, 2004). According to the Social
 Preliminary Validation of Spanish “Eyes Test-Child Version”
Constructivist Model (Meadows, 1996),
such differences are caused by the different
socializing processes that boys and girls
experience since childhood (Malatesta &
Haviland, 1982; Malatesta et al., 1986).
These differences in socialization between
boys and girls are incremented with the de-
velopment of language because parent-girl
interactions are richer in emotional lan-
guage than parent-boy ones (Fivush, 1993).
Girls are taught to be more attentive to the
emotions of others than boys, and to under-
stand that their conduct has an impact on
how others feel and express their feelings
(Fivush, 1991). These processes of joint
biological and socializing maturation
would explain the differences in the Eyes
Test scores of boys and girls aged 14 to16
in the current study. However, other factors
such as ethnicity, culture, and socioeco-
nomic level should be explored in order to
clarify the mechanisms by which gender
and age influence the development of emo-
tional abilities (Fernández-Berrocal, Cabel-
lo, Castillo, & Extremera, 2012).
The current study presents certain limi-
tations that should be taken into account
when pursuing similar future research.
Firstly, the age range of our respondents
does not allow us to observe the evolution
of emotional recognition and ToM across
adolescence. Secondly, no other emotional
recognition and ToM instruments have
been used to assess the converging validity
of the Eyes Test. Thirdly, it would have
been interesting to obtain a test and retest
reliability, as previous adaptations of the
instrument did (Hallerbäck et al., 2009).
Strengths and future directions
One of the most relevant strengths of
this study is its sample size of 354 partici-
pants distributed equally between boys and
girls. Previous studies conducted with a
teenage population included samples that
oscillated between 19 (Baron-Cohen,
Wheelwright, Spong et al., 2001) and 164
participants (Sharp et al., 2013).
181
It is recommended for future studies to
broaden the age range from childhood to
adulthood. This would allow for deeper as-
sessment of the genesis and development
of the emotional recognition and ToM
skills. It would also facilitate distinguishing
whether the differences between boys and
girls emerge in a given maturation devel-
opment point or if they are present from the
offset, as indicated by the Neurobehavioral
Model (Nelson & de Haal, 1997).
Another key contribution of our study is
that it provides the first standardized data
of the Eyes Test-Child Version in a teenage
Spanish population, which broadens not
only the use of the instrument but also its
accuracy. Now, this will allow its use as a
diagnostic test by comparison of the re-
spondent’s score with the Spanish popula-
tion normative score. Future studies can al-
so contribute with standardized scores for
younger and older populations (from 8
years onward and until 18 years).
Early detection of emotional deficits is
crucial to the efficacy of social and emo-
tional education programs (Castillo, Sal-
guero, Fernández-Berrocal, & Balluerka,
2013; Ruiz-Aranda et al., 2012, 2013;
Ruiz-Aranda, Salguero, Cabello, Palomera,
& Fernández-Berrocal, 2012). The availa-
bility of easy-to-use instruments for indi-
viduals and groups reduces the gap for their
use in clinical and non-clinical populations
as well as in schools.
Acknowledgments
This research was funded in part by two
Spanish projects SEJ2007-60217 MEC and
SEJ-03036 from Department of Econom-
ics, Science, and Business, Junta Andalu-
cía. We are grateful for the contribution of
the Emotional Laboratory
(http://emotional.intelligence.uma.es).
Artículo recibido: 23-04-2013
aceptado: 17-07-2013
182 Pilar Rueda, Rosario Cabello, Pablo Fernández-Berrocal
References
Alaerts, K., Nackaerts, E., Meyns,
P., Swinnen, S. P., & Wen-
deroth, N. (2011) Action and
emotion recognition from point
light displays: An investigation
of gender differences. PLoS
ONE 6, e20989.
Bach, E., Ropar, D., & Mitchell, P.
(2007). Do the eyes have it?
Inferring mental states from
animated faces. Child Devel-
opment, 78, 397-411.
Baron-Cohen, S. (1995). Mind-
blindness: An essay on autism
and theory of mind. Massachu-
setts: MIT press.
Baron-Cohen, S. (2011). The sci-
ence of evil: On empathy and
origins of cruelty. New York:
Basic Books.
Baron‐Cohen, S., Jolliffe, T., Mor-
timore, C., & Robertson, M.
(1997). Another advanced test
of theory of mind: Evidence
from very high functioning
adults with autism or Asperger
Syndrome. Journal of Child
Psychology and Psychiatry, 38,
813-822.
Baron-Cohen, S., Leslie, A. M., &
Frith, U. (1985). Does the au-
tistic child have a “theory of
mind”? Cognition, 21, 37-46.
Baron-Cohen, S., Wheelwright, S.,
Hill, J., Raste, Y., & Plumb, I.
(2001). The "Reading the Mind
in the Eyes Test-revised ver-
sion": A study with normal
adults, adults with Asperger
Syndrome or high functioning
autism. Journal of Child Psy-
chology and Psychiatry, 42,
241-251.
Baron-Cohen, S., Wheelwright, S.,
& Jolliffe, A. T. (1997). Is
there a "language of the eyes"?
Evidence from normal adults,
and adults with autism or As-
perger Syndrome. Visual Cog-
nition, 4, 311-331.
Baron-Cohen, S., Wheelwright, S.,
Spong, A., Scahill, V., & Law-
son, J. (2001). Are intuitive
physics and intuitive psycholo-
gy independent? A test with
children with Asperger Syn-
drome. Journal of Develop-
mental and Learning Disor-
ders, 5, 47-78.
Blair, J. M. J. (2008). Fine cuts of
empathy and the amygdala:
Dissociable deficits in psy-
chopathy and autism. The
Quarterly Journal of Experi-
mental Psychology, 61, 157-
170.
Brodal, P. (2004). The central
nervous system: structure and
function. Oxford: Oxford Uni-
versity Press.
Castillo, R., Salguero, J.M., Fer-
nández-Berrocal, P, & Ball-
uerka, N. (2013). Effects of an
emotional intelligence inter-
vention on aggression and em-
pathy among adolescents.
Journal of Adolescence, 36,
883-892.
Cohen, J. (1992). A power primer.
Psychological Bulletin, 112,
155-159.
Fernández-Berrocal, P., Cabello,
R., Castillo, R., & Extremera,
N. (2012). Gender differences
in emotional intelligence: the
mediating effect of age. Behav-
ioral Psychology/Psicología
Conductual, 20, 77-89.
Fertuck, E. A., Jekal, A., Song, I.,
Wyman, B., Morris, M. C.,
Wilson, S. T., ... Stanley, B.
(2009). Enhanced ‘Reading the
Mind in the Eyes’ in borderline
personality disorder compared
to healthy controls. Psycholog-
ical Medicine, 39, 1979–1988.
Fivush, R. (1991). Gender and
emotion in mother-child con-
versations about the past.
Journal of Narrative and Life
History, 4, 325-341.
Fivush, R. (1993). Emotional con-
tent of parent-child conversa-
tions about the past. In C. A.
Nelson (Ed.), Memory and af-
fect in development: The Min-
nesota Symposia on Child Psy-
chology (Vol. 26, pp. 39-77).
Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Gibson, A., Penn, D. L., Prinstein,
M. J., Perkins, D., & Belger, A.
(2010). Social skills and social
cognition in adolescents at ge-
netic risk for psychosis. Schiz-
ophrenia Research, 122, 179-
184.
Golan, O., Baron-Cohen, S., & Go-
lan, Y. (2008). The 'Reading
the Mind in films task' (child
version): Complex emotion
and mental state recognition in
children with and without Au-
tism Spectrum Conditions.
Journal of Autism and Devel-
opmental Disorders, 38, 1534-
1541.
Gutiérrez-García, A., & Fernández-
Martín, A. (2012). Ansiedad y
sesgo de interpretación de es-
tímulos ambiguos: una revi-
sión. Ansiedad y Estrés, 18, 1-
14.
Hallerbäck, M. U., Lugnegård, T.,
Hjärthag, F., & Gillberg, C.
(2009). The Reading the Mind
in the Eyes Test: test–retest re-
liability of a Swedish version.
Cognitive Neuropsychiatry, 14,
127-143.
Henry, J. D., Bailey, P. E., & Ren-
dell, P. G. (2008). Empathy,
social functioning and schizo-
typy. Psychiatry Research,
160, 15-22.
Herba, C., & Phillips, M. (2004).
Annotation: Development of
facial expressions recognition
from childhood to adolescence:
behavioral and neurological
perspectives. Journal of Child
Psychology and Psychiatry, 45,
1185-1198.
Hughes, J. D. C. (1998). Young
children's understanding of
emotions within close relation-
ships. Cognition and Emotion,
12, 171-190.
Jarrold, C., Butler, D. W., Cotting-
ton, E. M., & Jimenez, F.
 Preliminary Validation of Spanish “Eyes Test-Child Version”
(2000). Linking theory of mind
and central coherence bias in
autism and in the general popu-
lation. Developmental Psy-
chology, 36, 126-138.
Jones, A., Happé, F. G. E., Gilbert,
F., Burnett, S., & Viding, E.
(2010). Feeling, caring, know-
ing: Different types of empathy
deficit in boys with psycho-
pathic tendencies and autism
spectrum disorder. Journal of
Child Psychology and Psychia-
try, 51, 1188–1197.
Joseph, R. M., & Tanaka, J. (2002).
Holistic and part-based face
recognition in children with au-
tism. Journal of Child Psy-
chology and Psychiatry, 44,
529 – 542.
Kerpelman, J., Pittman, J., Cadely,
H., Tuggle, F., Harrell-Levy,
M., & Adler-Baeder, F. (2012).
Identity and intimacy during
adolescence: Connections
among identity styles, romantic
attachment and identity com-
mitment. Journal of Adoles-
cence, 35, 1427-1439.
Knapp, M. L., & Hall, J. A. (2009).
Nonverbal communication in
human interaction. Boston:
Wadsworth Publishing Com-
pany.
La Greca, A., & Moore, H. (2005).
Adolescent peer relations,
friendships, and romantic rela-
tionships: Do they predict so-
cial anxiety and depression?
Journal of Clinical Child and
Adolescent Psychology, 34,
49–61.
Lawrence, E. J., Shaw, P., Baker,
D., Baron-Cohen, S., & David,
A. S. (2004). Measuring empa-
thy: reliability and validity of
the Empathy Quotient. Psycho-
logical Medicine, 34, 911-920.
Malatesta, C. Z., Grigoryev, P.,
Lamb, C., Albin, M., & Culver,
C. (1986). Emotion socializa-
tion and expressive develop-
ment in preterm and full-term
infants. Child Development,
57, 316-330.
Malatesta, C. Z., & Haviland, M.
(1982). Learning display rules:
The socialization of emotion
expression in infancy. Child
Development, 53, 991-1003.
Matsumoto, D., Hwang, H.S.,
López, R.M., & Pérez-Nieto,
M.A. (2013). Lectura de la ex-
presión facial de las emocio-
nes: Investigación básica en la
mejora del reconocimiento de
emociones. Ansiedad y Estrés,
19, 121-129.
McClure, E. B. (2000). A meta-
analytic review of sex differ-
ences in facial expression pro-
cessing and their development
in infants, children, and ado-
lescents. Psychological Bulle-
tin, 126, 424-453.
Meadows, S. (1996). Parenting be-
haviour and children’s cogni-
tive development. Hove, Eng-
land: Psychology Press.
Montgomery, J. A., Stoesz, B. M.,
& McCrimmon, A. W. (2013).
Emotional intelligence, theory
of mind, and executive func-
tions as predictors of social
outcomes in young adults with
Asperger Syndrome. Focus on
Autism and Other Develop-
mental Disabilities, 28, 4–13.
Natvig, G. K., Albrektsen, G., &
Qvarnstrøm, U. (2003). Asso-
ciations between psychosocial
factors and happiness among
school adolescents. Interna-
tional Journal of Nursing
Practice, 9, 166-175.
Nelson, C. A., & de Haan, M.
(1997). A neurobehavioral ap-
proach to the recognition of fa-
cial expressions in infancy. In
J. A. Russell & J. M. Fernan-
dez-Dols (Eds.). The psycholo-
gy of facial expression (pp.
176- 204). New York: Cam-
bridge University Press.
Oberle, E., Schonert-Reichl, K. A.,
& Thomson, K. C. (2010). Un-
derstanding the link between
social and emotional well-
being and peer relations in ear-
ly adolescence: Gender-
specific predictors of peer ac-
ceptance. Journal of Youth and
Adolescence, 39, 1330-1342.
183
Perna R. B. (2002). Brain injury:
Does age really matter? Brain
Injury Source, 6, 32–34.
Premack, D., & Woodruff, G.
(1978). Does the chimpanzee
have a theory of mind? Beha-
vioral and Brain Sciences, 1,
515-526.
Ruíz-Aranda, D., Cabello, R., Sal-
guero, J. M., Palomera, R., Ex-
tremera, N., & Fernández-
Berrocal, P. (2013). Programa
Intemo. Guía para mejorar la
Inteligencia Emocional de los
adolescentes. Madrid: Edi-
ciones Pirámide.
Ruíz-Aranda, D., Castillo, R., Sal-
guero, J. M., Cabello, R., Fer-
nández-Berrocal, P., & Ball-
uerka, N. (2012). Short- and
mid-term effects of emotional
intelligence training on adoles-
cent mental health. Journal of
Adolescence Health, 51, 462–
467.
Ruíz-Aranda, D., Salguero, J. M.,
Cabello, R., Palomera, R., &
Berrocal, P. F. (2012). Can an
Emotional Intelligence Pro-
gram improve adolescents'
psychosocial adjustment? Re-
sults from the Intemo Project.
Social Behavior and Personali-
ty: an International Journal,
40, 1373-1379.
Rutherford, M. D., Troubridge, E.
K., & Walsh, J. (2012). Visual
afterimages of emotional faces
in high functioning autism.
Journal of Autism and Devel-
opmental Disorders, 42, 221-
229.
Sabbagh, M. A. (2004). Under-
standing orbitofrontal contribu-
tions to theory-of-mind reason-
ing: Implications for autism.
Brain and Cognition, 55, 209-
219.
Scherer, K. R., Clark-Polner, E., &
Mortillaro, M. (2011). In the
eye of the beholder? Universal-
ity and cultural specificity in
the expression and perception
of emotion. International
Journal of Psychology, 46,
401-435.
 184 Pilar Rueda, Rosario Cabello, Pablo Fernández-Berrocal

Sharp, C. (2008). Theory of mind entiation in children with au- Vellante, M., Baron-Cohen, S.,
and conduct problems in chil- tism and Asperger Syndrome. Melis, M., Marrone, M., Petret-
dren: Deficits in reading the Autism Research and Treat- to, D. R., Masala, C., & Preti,
“emotions of the eyes”. Cogni- ment, 2012, article id. 505393. A. (2012). The “Reading the
tion and Emotion, 22, 1149- Tkach, C., & Lyubomirsky, S. Mind in the Eyes” test: Sys-
1158. (2006). How do people pursue tematic review of psychometric
Sharp, C., Ha, C., Carbone, C., happiness?: Relating personali- properties and a validation
Kim, S., Perry, K., Williams, ty, happiness-increasing strate- study in Italy. Cognitive Neu-
L., & Fonagy, P. (2013). Hy- gies, and well-being. Journal ropsychiatry, 18, 326-354.
permentalizing in adolescent of Happiness Studies, 7, 183- Wakabayashi, A., Sasaki, J., &
inpatients: Treatment effects 225. Ogama, Y. (2012). Sex differ-
and association with borderline Tonks, J., Williams, W. H., Framp- ences in two fundamental cog-
traits. Journal of Personality ton, I., Yates, P., & Slater, A. nitive domains. Empathizing
Disorders, 27, 3–18. (2007). Assessing emotion and systemizing in children
Sternberg, L. (1990). Autonomy, recognition in 9–15-years olds: and adults. Journal of Individ-
conflict, and harmony in the Preliminary analysis of abili- ual Differences, 33, 24-34.
family relationship. In S. S. ties in reading emotion from Wentzel, K. (1998). Social rela-
Feldman & G. R. Elliott (Eds.). faces, voices and eyes. Brain tionships and motivation in
At the threshold: The develop- Injury, 21, 623-629. middle school: The role of par-
ing adolescent (pp. 255-276). Turkstra, L. S. (2000). Should my ents, teachers, and peers. Jour-
Cambridge, MA: Harvard Uni- shirt be tucked in or left out? nal of Educational Psychology,
versity Press. The communication context of 90, 202-209.
Tine, M., & Lucariello, J. (2012). adolescence. Aphasiology, 14,
Unique theory of mind differ- 349–364.

View publication stats