Baron-cohen Flashcards
aim
- see if the revised eye test ‘works’
- test if AS/HFA would be impaired on ‘Reading the Mind in the Eyes’ task
- if there is inverse correlation between eyes test and AQ test.
- to see if females score higher on the eyes test than males (female superiority).
what was the theory being tested
Theory of mind (mentalizing/mind reading/social intelligence) -> ability to attribute mental states to oneself/another person (ability = main way we make sense/predict other persons b). Relates to empathy
Autism - difficult to u people have own plans/thoughts/
views + difficult u people’s beliefs/attitudes/emotions.
orginal test
Test of social sensitivity. But only first stage TOM = assigning appropriate mental state (eg. compassion)
Not 2nd stage: content of mental state (friend’s loss)
Comparing p’s with AS & HFA and without
- 25 photographs eyes of different actors
- Chose which of two words describes what person is thinking/feeling
- Testing theory of mind, requires empathy
problems with the orginal test
1) Forced choice, 2 choices (50%) + always opposites - Score 17/> to be above chance = ceiling effect
2) Narrow range of scores = range of scores in which the test can reveal individual dif whilst still being above chance = 9 (25-17) = too narrow. Eg. Parents HFA/AS predicted being below GP with ‘‘broader phenotype’’ but scored same as HFA/AS = not able to distinguish
3) Small number of examples (25) = ceiling effect
4) Use of basic + complex emotions - too easy
5) Solved by gaze direction (Eg. Ignoring facing away)
6) Imbalance males and female faces
7) Might not have understood words (delay present)
research method
Lab experiment: not everyday situation - emotions from photo not a regular task), high standardised
IV & DV
IV: type of participant in each condition
DV: 1) Scores on the Eye Test
2) Scores on the AQ
3) Group 1 and 4 got their IQ measured (matched pairs)
sampling techniques
Volunteer, Opportunity, Random
- AS: recruited by ad in UK AS magazine
- From adult community/education classes at Exeter or the public library at Cambridge
- Studying for undergrad in Cambridge University.
groups
4 (1 active, 3 control)
group 1) AS/HFA
group 2) adult comparison group
group 3) student comparison group
group 4) IQ matched group
sample
1) Active AS/HFA, no 15, age: 29.7, IQ: 115
2) adult comparison, no 122, age: 46.5
3) student comparison, no 103, age: 20.8
4) IQ matched group, no 14, age: 28, IQ: 116
group 1
adult males with HFA/AS (diagnosed using DSM or ICD)
n = 15
IQ = 115
age = 29.7
self selecting: UK advert in Autistic Society Magazine and support groups
sample 2
not given AQ as ‘normal’ adults - no diagnosis
n = 122
age (mean of 88 people) = 46.5
selected: education classes in Exeter, public library users in Cambridge. (Range: unemployed, workers to professionals)
group 3
‘normal’ adult students from Cambridge, no diagnosis
- n = 103
- 53 male, 50 female (not representatives of general pop - higher IQ)
- mean age: 20.8 years
group 4
randomly selected from in general pop
n = 14
IQ = 116
IQ matched with group 1 (prove intelligence not factor)
age = 28 (not significant differ)
procedure
- 36 sets of eyes (m18:f18), with 4 choices of emotion
- > (15 x 10 cm), black & white from magazine - p’s tested in quiet room in Cambridge or Exeter
- read glossary + told they could refer back any point
- Group 1 asked to judge the gender of each of the faces. (control)
- p’s in groups 1, 3 and 4 were given the AQ test.
controls
- Carefully selected sample: Socio-economic classes, educational levels
- Age & IQ matched (1 & 4)
- Glossary of terms, to ensure poor performance on revised eyes test not due to errors in comprehension
- AS/HFA group asked to judge the gender of each person in each photo (make sure they see the world as we do, testing social impairments)
- correct word - emotion judged by 8 judges (5 agree)
apparatus
The AQ
The eyes test (15 x 10 cm)
A quiet room in Cambridge/Exetter
main results
AS/HFA worse in identifying emotion, target word
1) did not differ in checking of glossary (not > than 2)
2) G2 and G3, sex differences apparent, not significant
3) AS/HFA scored 33 or above on sex recognition test
4) AQ test, AS/HFA scored higher than student
5) IQ matched comparison group
6) Significant dif m and f AQ scores in student group
7) negative correlation between AQ & ET (-0.53) -> suggesting as p’s AQ increases (more autistic traits), ability to correctly identify emotion decreases.
conclusion
1) RET overcame problems of original version= a valid test of social intelligence (in adults) useful in identifying subtle impairment
2) AS/HFA have deficit in cognitive process TOM as they cannot see the perspective of other people.
3) sex difference between control groups (males performing worse on ET = more autistic traits)
strengths
Reliable
Useful
quantitative
weaknesses
Lacks ecological validity
use of quasi experiment
generalisability
Ethical issues
how was the study reliable
Measures standardised (same test) - study can be replicated to check reliability - improves internal validity = validity improved on modified version (normal lower than ceiling)
how was the study useful
can be used in the application of the real world
- evidence that a core deficit in AS/HFA is ToM
- assessment tool in contributing to a diagnosis
how did this study lack ecological validity
persons eyes would not be static and only shown for limited amount of time. (use videos of eyes)
how did this study lack generalisability
hard to generalise (even with group 1) need large group for statistical analysis not representive to all individuals with HFA/ASG3 not representative of ‘normal population’ as above average IQ
ethics
Participants (especially AS/HFA) may felt psychological distress.
1) not understood emotions could have stressed them. Can’t give fully informed consent, don’t know concept of investigating
issues and debates
The application of psychology to everyday life Individual/Situational explanations
Nature vs Nurture
Children as participants
