Baron-Cohen BA Flashcards
AIM 1
1) To test adults with high-functioning autism (HFA/Asperger syndrome-AS) on the “revised eyes test” to see if the deficits on the original test were still seen.
AIM 2
To see if there is a negative correlation between autism spectrum quotient (AQ) and eyes test scores.
AIM 3
To see if females scored higher on the eyes test than males.
Research Methodology
Baron Cohen-et al used experiments and correlations: the scores of different groups/genders of pps were compared and the researcher also wanted to see if there was a correlation between the AQ and eyes test scores.
Design and Variables
2 main variables for the experiments: the group a pp was in and sex: male versus female. Both were independent measure designs. The dependent variables were the eyes tests and AQ scores.
The co-variables for the main correlation were the AQ score and eyes test score.
Correlation is always association, never…
Causation
Hypotheses
AS/HFA will score significantly lower on eyes test than the control group groups.
AS/HFA will score significantly higher on the AQ than other groups.
“Normal” females, in group 2,3 will score higher on males eyes test.
“Normal” males (group 3). will score higher than females on AQ test.
Scores on the AQ and eyes test will be negatively correlated.
The procedure was:
highly standardized and all pps were exposed to the same photographs, chosen using pilot studies.
It was a naturalistic/quasi experiment and pps were assigned to a condition based on a given characteristic (autism or not.
its almost a lab one-as it was performed individually in a quiet room, not a lab or natural environment)-quasi
- because the independent variable occurs naturally
SAMPLE-Group 1
HFA/AS Adults (15males with HFA/AS):
-mean age=29.7
-mean IQ=115
Volunteer sample from adverts in UK National Autistic society magazine or support groups. All diagnosed using established criteria. Socioeconomic status and education level matched GROUP 2.
SAMPLE-Group 2
General Population Controls (122 neurotypical adults)
-mean age=46.5
From adult community and education classes in Exeter or public libraries in Cambridge (Both UK), Broad range of occupation and education levels.
SAMPLE-Group 3
Students(103(55males and 50females) neurotypical and undergraduate students from Cambridge University.
-mean age=20.8
Assumed to have high IQ due to very high university entry requirements,
SAMPLE-Group 4
IQ-matched controls (14 randomly selected people from the general population)
-mean age=28.0
-mean IQ=116
Matched on IQ and age to GROUP 1
PROCEDURE A
Pps in all 4 groups took the revised eyes test in a quiet room, alone, in either Exeter or Cambridge.
The test required them to select which of the 4 words matched the expression for each set of eyes.
PROCEDURE B
Pps with HFA/AS (Group 1) were also asked to determine the gender of the eyes as a control task. The other groups did not need to do so as neurotypical adults scores have a ceiling effect. Pps were also asked if they were unsure of any words in the glossary and to read the meaning of these.
EYES TEST Development
Two adults created the target words and foils for each item. These were then presented to groups of 8 judges (4 males and 4 females),who had to agree on target word for an item to pass and no more than 2 judges could choose the same foil (5 had to agree).
A bit on the eyes test data
Furthermore, data for groups 2,3 were combined. For the 255 responses, at least 50% needed to select some foil. 4/40 items failed to meet these criterias, leaving 36 items on revised test.
Black white photos of diff male and female eye regions,taken from a magazine.
Problems and solutions-
Problems with the original test and solutions in the revised new test.
-There were only 2 possible responses for each questions. A person would need to score more than 17/25 to ensure their score was not due to chance.
-Parents of children with autism scored similarly to people with HFA or AS, even though they did not have the conditions themselves.
-There weren’t many possible scores above chance level, leading to a ceiling effect. This meant that the test wasn’t very sensitive to individual differences.
To remedy these issues, Baron-Cohen et als new test increased number of items on test(from 25-36) and increased number of response options for each question (2-4).
Some items were too easy as they were basic mental states (“happy” “sad”“angry”) which can even be determined by very young children: solution:
The new version contained only complex mental states, requiring the attribution of a belief to a person.
Some items could be guessed from eye direction, such as “noticing”
These were omitted on new test.
An unequal number of male and female faces (more females)-which may have caused bias.
Equal number of male and female faces used in revised version.
The target word and the foil(incorrect answer) were always semantic opposites (e.g sad vs happy) which was too easy.
In the new version, the 3 foils were similar to target word to increase difficulty.
It was unclear whether some people could understand all words.
A glossary included in new version.
RESULTS 1
-group 1 performed significantly worse than other groups.
-Females scored higher than males, although this result was not found to be significant.
-Group 1 scored significantly worse than 3 and 4 on the AQ. Note: Group 2 did not take AQ test).
-males scored higher on AQ Than females.
RESULTS 2
-No correlation between eyes score test and IQ.
-Negative correlation between AQ score and eyes test score (-0.53) for all 3 groups.
-In student group, eyes test score was negatively correlated with the social skills category (-0.27) and communication category (-0.25) of the AQ.
-Adults with HFA/AS scored 35/36 or above on the gender recognition test.
CONCLUSIONS
The revised eyes test was successful in being a more sensitive test for adult social intelligence than the original test.
Neurotypical adults scores significantly below the ceiling, allowing test to be a more subtle measure of individual differences.
CONCLUSIONS Continued
Adults with HFA/AS were impaired on the test, but they could still identify gender of eyes successfully on control task.
This validates the test as a useful way to detect subtle impairements in social intelligence for those with normal IQs, and can be used to distinguish adults with HFA/AS from controls-
As the AQ and eyes test score were relatively correlated, this suggest both can be used to measure autistic traits and their severity.
This study focused on developing a new one-
differing from other investigations.
Experiment design
-Independent groups
-matched pairs for groups 1 (autistic male adults) and 4 (IQ matched controls).
EVALUATIONS
Ethical Issues -
An ethical weakness is that it may have caused psychological harm to pps with HFA|AS. When completing the test, they may not have been able to understand the emotions shown by many eye sets, causing potential distress or embarrassment. They might have left with a lowered self esteem as a result.
EVALUATION
Methodological issues-reliability-Standardization +
A strength is the high level of standardization. The revised eyes test has a standardized procedure with each pp seeing the some 36 pairs of eyes.
Additionally, the images were always the same size, in black and white, with 4 options, including 3 foils. There was only ever 1 correct answer and all pps were provided with a glossary of terms. This high level of standardization means other researchers can check the reliability of findings and re-exam for non-significant findings, such as the difference between males and females.+reliability check
EVALUATION-Methodological issues-validity-lack of random allocation -
A weakness is that pps could not be randomly allocated to groups, as the IVs were naturally occurring( ie diagnosis of HFA) As or male (female). Due to this, there may have been pp variables between groups, particularly as some were recruited via volunteer sampling, withe each group being recruited different ways, from diff uk places. Pps within each group may have had similar features to one another, causing them to perform better or worse on the eyes test. This would reduce validity of results as any diffs between HFA/AS group and control conditions may not have been due to IV.
So a cause effect relationship which is established may not be a s valid.
EVALUATION-Methodological issues-theory of mind -
A weakness is that it may not have been measuring theory of mind, as it claimed to. At best, the study only aimed to measure the first stage of theory of mind, that is, determining a person’s mental state.
But theory of mind also involves a second stage of attributing content of a mental state to a person - understanding the reason behind their emotion- which eyes test cannot measure. Hence, it may not be a valid measure of theory of mind.
EVALUATION-Objectivity and subjectivity-Quantitative data +
A strength was that data wss objective, with no interpretates necessary on researchers part. PPs were either right or wrong in answers, as it was fixed-choice task with pre-determined correct answers, leading to quantitative data.
This means there was no room for researcher bias. (subjectivity) when analyzing answers (as it was ticking correct answers)
-increasing validity.
EVALUATION-Generalisations and ecological validity-generalising beyond sample -
-A weakness is that findings may not be generalisable to other individuals with HFA/AS.
-The sample in the HFA /AS group was very small, with only 15 male adults who had self-selected to take part. This means that they were particularly motivated /had a special interest in the study.
Therefore, may not be as representative of all individuals with high-functioning autism spectrum disorder.
EVALUATION-Generalizing to everyday life -
A weakness is that stimuli of eyes used are static and do not reflect the processing of human emotions in a real life-setting. Usually, people will use facial movlment asvell and nonverbal cues to detect emotions of another person. This reduces mundane realism of test and means that the measurements taken may not reflect a person’s real-world ability to determine a mental state of another individual.
ISSUES AND DEBATES-Individual and situational explanations
Adults with HFA/AS scored lower on eyes test compared to neurotypical adults, suporting on individual explanation for the cognitive processing of emotions show by others’ facial expressions.
However, it could be argued that people with HFA/ AS are better at recognizing emotion and emotional states of others is some situations than others, E.g, they may find this harder with some emotion than others, and easier in situations were there are fewer distractions and are allowed sufficient processing time.
ISSUES AND DEBATES-Applications to everyday life-Other clinical groups
The eyes test may be used w other clinical groups, such as those w brain damage, to determine whether they have suffered deficits in social intelligence. If patients were to gain a low grade on test, they may be given therapeutical support to aid/improve ability to detect emotions.
ISSUES AND DEBATES-Applications to everyday life-education
As the HFA /AS groups scored lower than neurotypical adults on the eyes test, the test could be used by teachers to determine a student’s level of social intelligence. A low score would indicate that the student lacks theory of mind, so extra lessons might be provided by educators to help them improve their theory of mind skills.
improvements/weaknesses
-video footage:more dynamic, enhance emotions shown, validity and valid tests of people’s sensitivity to such things.
-races
-more age gaps
-
AQ
The Autism-Spectrum Quotient (AQ) is a 50-item self-report questionnaire developed by Simon Baron-Cohen to assess traits associated with autism. It evaluates five key areas: social skills, attention to detail, communication, imagination, and systemizing. Participants respond to statements, with higher scores (typically 32 or above) suggesting a stronger presence of autism-related traits. The AQ is primarily used as a screening tool to help identify individuals who may have autism, especially those with milder forms of the condition, though it is not a formal diagnostic tool.
Theory of mind
Refers to the ability to attribute mental states to oneself and others, understanding that others have beliefs, desires, intentions, and perspectives that are different from one’s own.
Psychometric tests-
tests that are used to objectively measure an individual’s personality traits, intelligence, abilities, behavioral style and aptitude
neurotypical and…
neurodivergent
