Plan for the Day

● Warm Up – Original Eyes Test

○ Take out a piece of paper and number it 1-25 going down.
○ On same paper, evaluate weaknesses of this test.
● Group Work – Identify Original Issues and Revised Corrections
○ Open scholarly article to page 2 & 3 and find section titled “Problems with
Original Version of Test”
○ Each person will pick one of the problems numbered 3-8 to read silently.
○ After reading, discuss what you read and fill out the form on your table listing
the original issue and how it was revised.
● Lesson – Baron Cohen’s Eye Test Study (2001)
● Exit Ticket – Comprehension Check
○ Split a paper in half with another student and answer the question I will say
aloud.
 Essential Question:

How do you read the emotion that is conveyed by

another person’s face?

What do you look for?

 Baron-Cohen’s
Eye Test Study
(2001)
“Reading the Mind in the Eyes” Test Revised
Version: A study with normal adults and
adults with Asperger’s Syndrome or High
Functioning Autism
 Key Terms

1. Ceiling Effect – this occurs when a test is too easy and all P’s in
a condition score the top score. This is problematic as it does
not allow the research to analyze individual differences.

2. Pilot Study – used to check the validity of the procedures.

○ Not done to check if an experiment will work
 Key Terms

3. Quasi-experiment – quasi means “almost” and refers to the fact

that these experiments often have lots of control over the

procedure, but not over how P’s are allocated to conditions within

the study.

○ Assigned to certain experimental condition due to a

characteristic or common trait (ex: autism diagnosis)

 Background

● Autism is a failure to develop particular cognitive processes linked

to social interaction that occurs in approximately 1% of the
population.
○ Individuals with autism share difficulties in:

■ social functioning

■ communication

■ coping with change

■ often alongside unusually narrow interests.

 Background

● The word autism is used as a general term to refer to a range of

disorders from High Functioning Autism (HFA) and Asperger’s
Syndrome (AS).

● In children, autism is characterized by a triad of impairments:

1. Difficulties with social interaction
2. Difficulties with verbal and non-verbal communication
3. A lack of imaginative play
 Background / Psych Being Investigated

● Baron-Cohen suggests that people with autism lack or have an

underdeveloped cognitive process called ‘theory of mind’ aka social
sensitivity.

● Theory of Mind - a cognitive ability enabling us to realize that others have

different beliefs, knowledge, and desires from our own.
○ Empathy is often linked to theory of mind.
○ Those with autism may find it difficult to understand others’ points of view.
 Background

● There were already several tests available to measure one’s Theory of

Mind, but most were designed for children.
○ Ex: Sally-Anne Test

● Our current study is a “redo” of a 1997 one for various reasons.

○ Researchers were not happy with original version & wanted to
“upgrade” their measure to improve the study and make it more valid.
 Sally Anne Test -
https://www.youtube.com/watch?
v=QjkTQtggLH4
 Background

● Baron-Cohen developed a social sensitivity test for adults called

the “Reading the Mind in the Eyes” task.
○ Tested their ability to attribute emotional labels to others.

● He suggests that this task tests the ability to assign an appropriate

mental state to another.
 Background

Original “Eyes Test” (1997) Results & Successes:

1. Differentiated adults with AS & HFA from controls
2. Success in developing a test of social sensitivity to reveal subtle mind-reading
difficulties in adults with AS & HFA.
3. Demonstrated that “normal” adults could judge mental states from even
minimal cues (expressions from around the eyes)
4. Having established that testing for social sensitivity among controls and
adults with autism was feasible, this enabled Baron-Cohen to consider how to
make the test better (overall purpose of this 2001 study).
 Aims

1. Main aim was to test a group of adults with AS or HFA on

the Revised Eyes Test (R-ET) to see if the results would be
replicated.

2. Another aim was to test if there was a negative correlation

in a sample of normal adults between the Revised Eyes
Test (R-ET) and the Autism Spectrum Quotient (AQ).

3. Another aim was to test if there is a gender difference on

the eyes test.
 Problems with Original Eyes Test (1997)
Issues with Original Study New design elements

Forced choice of only 2-word responses. Led to Forced choice remained but 4 options
too narrow of a range for significance and to now. There were 36 pair of eyes used
the ceiling effect (too many scores in the top rather than 25; this meant that individual
range) differences could be examined better in
terms of statistics.
There were basic and complex mental states so Only complex mental states were used
some of the pairs of eyes were ‘too easy’ to
identify (happy, sad) and others ‘too hard’ so it
made comparisons difficult.
There were some pairs of eyes that could be These were deleted
‘solved’ easily because of eye direction
(noticing / ignoring)
 Problems with Original Eyes Test (1997)

Issues with Original Study New design elements

There were more female than male pairs of The new study used an equal amount of
eyes used in the original test. male and female pairs of eyes.

The possible two responses were always Semantic opposites were removed and the
‘semantic opposites’ (happy vs sad), which ‘foil choices’ (those that were incorrect)
made choosing between them too easy. were more similar to the correct answer.

There may have been comprehension A glossary of all terms used as the choices
problems with the choice of words used as on the eyes test was available to all
the forced choice responses. participants at all times.
 Sample
● Group 1 (AS/HFA)
○ 15 adult males with AS/HFA diagnosis, mean age of 29.7 yrs
○ IQ mean of 115
○ Self-selecting (volunteers) - U.K National Autistic Society magazine
ad.

● Group 2 (general population = controls)

○ 122 adults from adult community & education classes from Exeter
or from public library at Cambridge.
○ 55 males & 67 females.
○ Mean age of 46.5 yrs.
○ Broad mix of occupations and education.
 Sample
● Group 3 (students from Cambridge)
○ 103 undergrad students, mean age of 20.8 yrs.
○ 53 males & 50 females.
○ Assumed to have higher IQ than other Ps (due to acceptance
into Cambridge).

● Group 4 (IQ-matched controls)

○ 14 randomly selected adults, mean age of 28 yrs.
○ IQ-matched with Group 1, IQ mean of 116
○ No mention of gender (assuming male though)
○ No mention of how selected/recruited.
 Hypotheses
H1 – The AS/HFA group would score significantly lower on the R-ET than the control
groups.

H2 – The AS/HFA group will score significantly higher on the AQ measure.

H3 – Females in the ‘normal’ groups (Groups 2 & 3) will score higher than males on
the R-ET.

H4 – Males in the student group (Group 3) would score higher than females on the
AQ test.

H5 – AQ and the R-ET scores would be negatively correlated.

 RM, RD, IV, & DV

Method & Design of the Study Dependent Variables

● Quasi-Experiment (since the 4 ● 1. R-ET score
groups of P’s is naturally occurring) ● 2. AQ score
● Independent Measures & Matched ● 3. Gender Identification for Group 1
Pairs Design were used - AS/HFA group

Independent Variables
● 1. AS/HFA or Control group
● 2. Gender
 Materials

Apparatuses (Psychometric Tests)

● Revised Eyes Test (given to all groups)
○ Was pencil & paper test with black and white photos
○ Revised Eyes Test
○ AQ (given to AS/HFA, students, and IQ-matched groups)

Data Collection & Type

● Via pencil/paper questionnaires
● Quantitative only
 Procedure

Step 1 - Developing the Revised Eyes Test (R-ET)

● Baron Cohen & Wheelwright created target words and foils for each photo.
● Then piloted on a group of 8 judges (4 M, 4 F)
● Criterion for approval:
○ At least 5 judges had to agree on the target word for each photo
○ No more than 2 judges could pick any single foil word.
■ If this happened, the target words and/or foils were re-piloted
until the criteria was met for each.
 Procedure
Step 2 - Implementing the tests
1. Each test was individually administered in a quiet room at either
Cambridge or Exeter
2. Group 1 (AS/HFA group) had to judge the gender of each photo as a
control task
○ Too easy for other groups during pilot study.
3. Ps in groups 1, 3, and 4 completed the AQ test
4. Ps were asked to read through the glossary of terms and to ask questions
as needed to ensure that each understood the term.
 Results
Scores overall ranged from 17-35, with a mode of 24
.
1. The AS/HFA group performed significantly worse than the other groups
(H1 = supported) on the Revised Eyes Test (R-ET).

○ AS/HFA score mean = 21.9

○ Group 2 X = 26.2
○ Group 3 X = 28.0
○ Group 4 X = 30.9

2. On the AQ test, the AS/HFA group scored significantly higher than groups
3 and 4 (H2 = supported)

○ AS/HFA score X = 34.4

○ Group 3 X = 18.3
○ Group 4 X = 18.9
 Results – write it

3. Females scored higher on the R-ET (H3 = Supported)

4. Males scored higher on the AQ test (H4 = Supported)

5. There was a significant negative correlation (-0.53) between

scores on AQ and R-ET (H5 = Supported).
 Conclusions
1. Current study replicated findings of previous test and showed that AS/HFA adults

are significantly impaired in identifying social interaction cues.

2. Current study reconfirmed that AS/HFA adults scored significantly higher on the

AQ test than the general population.

3. The modifications made enabled the R-ET to be more sensitive in the

measurement of adult social intelligence.

4. The results of the study demonstrated that the R-ET is useful in identifying

impairments related to AS/HFA

5. Gender differences on the R-ET most likely would have been significant if the

sample was larger.

 Time to evaluate the study

● Determine the methodological strengths & weaknesses of this

study.

● Determine the ethical strengths & weaknesses of this study.

● How can we apply this to everyday life?

● Which issues/debates are applicable?

● How does this study support the cognitive approach?