Skip to content Skip to sidebar Skip to footer
Página inicial / Reading the Mind in the Voice Task

Reading the Mind in the Voice Task

Postar um comentário
  • Research
  • Open Admission
  • Published:

Examination-retest reliability of the 'Reading the Mind in the Eyes' test: a one-twelvemonth follow-upwardly study

Molecular Autism book 4, Article number:33 (2013) Cite this article

  • 32k Accesses

  • 94 Citations

  • 28 Altmetric

  • Metrics details

Abstract

Background

The 'Reading the Mind in the Eyes' (Eyes) examination is an advanced test of theory of mind. Information technology is widely used to assess individual differences in social cognition and emotion recognition across dissimilar groups and cultures. The present study examined distributions of responses and scores on a Spanish version of the test in a non-clinical Spanish developed population, and assessed examination-retest reliability over a ane-yr interval.

Methods

A full of 358 undergraduates of both sexes, age eighteen to 65 years, completed the Spanish version of the examination twice over an interval of i year. The Bland-Altman method was used to calculate exam-retest reliability.

Results

Distributions of responses and scores were optimal. Test-retest reliability for total score on the Optics test was .63 (P <.01), based on the intraclass correlation coefficient. Exam-retest reliability using the Bland-Altman method was adequately adept.

Conclusions

This is the first study providing testify that the Eyes examination is reliable and stable over a 1-twelvemonth menstruum, in a non-clinical sample of adults.

Background

Psychology researchers have developed reliable instruments for evaluating social cognition and emotional and social processing in both the laboratory and the dispensary [1]. Social cognitive studies examine how people process data in the social surroundings, peculiarly perceiving, interpreting, and responding to the mental states (intentions, feelings, perception, and behavior), dispositions, and behaviors of others [2–v]. These processes are tightly linked to processes referred to equally emotion recognition and 'theory of mind', that let individuals to imagine the mental state of others [half-dozen] to both predict their beliefs and respond appropriately. Numerous studies have shown that deficits in emotion recognition and theory of mind compromise social interaction and are related to atmospheric condition such as schizophrenia [7, 8], autism [9–11], eating disorders [12–14], bipolar disorder [15, 16], social anxiety [17], and borderline personality disorder [18].

Dissimilar instruments have been developed to assess deficits in social cognition in adults. Instruments designed to assess emotion recognition crave the individual to place emotions and their intensity on the ground of different stimuli, such as facial expressions in the 'facial emotion identification job' [xix], spoken phrases in the 'Reading the Mind in the Vocalisation' exam [20] or computer-generated, distorted facial pictures (morphing) [21]. Instruments to assess theory of mind, in contrast, oft require individuals to read short stories and reply questions about them [22]. These instruments are intended to appraise theory of mind in individuals with autism or Asperger Syndrome, but may also be applicable to other conditions [23].

To provide more than detailed information almost theory of heed dysfunction, Baron-Cohen et al. adult the 'Reading the Mind in the Eyes' test, an advanced test of theory of mind [23]. The first version consisted of 25 photographs of actors and actresses showing the facial region around the eyes. The participant is asked to choose which of two words all-time describes what the person in the photograph is thinking or feeling. These words refer to both basic mental states (for example, 'happy') and complex mental states (for example, 'arrogant') [23]. In this mode, the Optics exam aimed to evaluate social knowledge in adults by assessing their ability to recognize the mental state of others using simply the expressions around the eyes, which are key in determining mental states [24].

The original 'Reading the Listen in the Optics' examination had some limitations considering the number of items and the binomial response format did not sufficiently differentiate individuals receiving higher scores. Thus a revised 'Reading the Heed in the Eyes' test was created, in which the number of items was increased to 36 and the number of possible responses (single-word descriptors of possible mental states) was increased to 4, reducing the maximum correct guess rate to 25% [1]. The possible mental land descriptors refer mostly to complex mental states. This advanced test was designed to take sufficient belittling complexity to be appropriate for adults with and without psychopathology, brain impairment or dementia, to assess factors that might contribute to social difficulties. In this fashion, the exam is intended to allow assessment of social cognition in an developed population with average intelligence.

Although conceived as an avant-garde theory of mind test [1], the Eyes test is too used to assess emotion recognition. Completing the musical instrument requires not only the ability to recognize emotional expressions but as well the power to determine the complex cognitive mental state of an individual based on a partial facial expression. Together, these abilities presuppose that the private possesses a mental country lexicon and knows the pregnant of mental land terms [1].

Studies of social cognition impairments in clinical populations show that typical individuals score significantly higher on the Eyes test than do individuals with schizophrenia [7, 8], autism [9, 10], eating disorders [12, 13, 25], and social anxiety [17] (for a review, see [26]). These studies indicate that the Eyes test is reliable for assessing social cognition in adults. The Optics exam has besides proven useful for assessing social intelligence and its subtle harm in different cultures, as shown in studies using translations of the Eyes test into Turkish, Hungarian, Japanese, French, German, and Argentinian Spanish [vii, 27–31].

Most studies with the Optics test accept not reported information on test-retest reliability [26]. This is essential because the Eyes test, like tests explicitly designed to test emotion recognition [32], has psychometric backdrop that prevent straightforward adding of Cronbach's alpha. Calculating this parameter is complex considering researchers are limited to comparing the number of correct responses between individuals. Thus, many studies involving the Eyes test do not include Cronbach's alpha, making it incommunicable to draw reliable intergroup comparisons, such as comparisons between clinical and control groups or comparisons between the same group before and afterward an intervention. Intergroup comparisons are also important for cantankerous-cultural studies, which aim to test if cultures differ more in how they identify complex mental states than simpler mental states [26]. Such studies are of import for indicating whether the Eyes test should be adapted specifically for different cultures.

Contempo studies accept addressed this gap by reporting acceptable exam-retest stability for the developed version of the Eyes test [26, 33] equally well as for the child version [34]. The time intervals for retesting in these studies were relatively short, ranging from 2 weeks to 1 month. In order to provide the beginning cess of long-term test-retest reliability of the Eyes test, as well every bit the first detailed validation of the test in a Spanish population, the present study (1) examined the distribution of responses and scores on a Castilian version of the Eyes exam in a nonclinical Spanish population, and (2) assessed the 1-yr test-retest reliability.

Method

Participants

A full of 358 first-yr psychology undergraduates enrolled at the Universidad Nacional de Educación a Distancia (UNED, Spain) took role. The sample comprised 75 men and 283 women, with a mean age at the first testing of 34.23 years (sd, 9.02; range, 18 to 65). This bias toward female participants only reflects the sex ratio in those who choose to study psychology at the undergraduate level. All participants were volunteers who gave written informed consent and who received personalized reports of results at the finish of the study. The study was carried out in accordance with the Announcement of Helsinki. Ethics approval was obtained from the Enquiry Ethics Commission, UNED.

Procedure

The commencement testing took place during May and June 2011; the second testing took place during the same months in 2012. During both testing sessions, the survey was administered using a computer programme that recorded identification data for each participant, displayed test items and saved the responses.

Measures

The revised Eyes test [1] was used to generate a Spanish version of the Optics test. Two translators, both with PhDs in psychology and experts in cognition and emotion, created a Spanish version of the instrument, which was then dorsum-translated into English by 2 contained translators. In this version, every bit in the English language-language original, participants were shown 36 photographs of eye regions of individuals and asked, for each photograph, to choose one of four possible words to describe the mental state of the person shown. One signal was assigned for each right response, so scores could range from 0 to 36. This Castilian version is available from the authors on request.

Statistical analysis

Data were analyzed using the Statistical Parcel for the Social Sciences (SPSS), version 19.0. (Armonk, NY: IBM Corp). The Bland-Altman plot to compare test and retest results was calculated using the MedCalc program, version 12.3 (MedCalc™, Mariakerke, Belgium, http://www.medcalc.be). All tests were two-tailed and were conducted at the 5% level of statistical significance.

Results

Table 1 shows the right answer for each item on the Spanish version of the Optics test, and the percentages of participants that selected each reply on the exam and retest.

Table ane Castilian version of the 'Reading the Mind in the Eyes' examination

Full size table

Nearly all items on the test were answered correctly by more than 50% of participants. The merely exception was detail nineteen, which was answered correctly by but 39.0% of respondents during the test and by only 40.4% during the retest. The next nearly frequently selected answer B was chosen by 36.2% and 34.four% of respondents during testing and retesting, respectively. The mean percentage of items correctly answered was 75.51% on the test and 75.46% on the retest. There were no significant differences in the percentages of respondents choosing the right respond across all items during testing and retesting (t = .093, P <.926). In fact, for all items, the correct answer was chosen far more often than the side by side most frequently selected pick.

Converting the mean percentages above to the 0 to 36 scale of the Eyes test gave mean indicate scores of 27.18 (sd = 3.59) on the exam and 27.24 (sd = 3.67) on the retest (t = .36, P <.722). Examination-retest stability was assessed using the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC), which was .63 for the total score (P <.01). Table 2 shows test-retest correlations for each of the items. Correlations for all items except item eighteen were positive and pregnant. Although results for detail 18 showed 330 of 358 possible coincidences, no significant linear correlation was found. This issue does non mean that exam and retest results for particular 18 were independent, but rather that they were not linearly related. The Bland-Altman plot [35] was used to examine test-retest concordance. This graphical approach allows for the examination of the agreement between repeated measurements by plotting the differences between test and retest scores against the hateful value of the test and retest scores for each participant. Confidence intervals for the mean difference are calculated to determine if the mean difference deviates significantly from zero (Effigy i).

Effigy 1
figure 1

Banal-Altman plot of the optics examination-retest assessment (due north) = 358.

Full size image

Table 2 Spearman'due south Rho correlations betwixt test and retest for each item for correct and wrong answers (n = 358)

Total size table

The mean deviation betwixt test and retest responses across all participants was −0.06 (SD = 3.12), indicating no pregnant alter in results between testing and retesting one yr later. The 95% conviction interval (CI) for the hateful divergence was −vi.17 to half dozen.05; thus, the CI included 0. Virtually results fell inside the 95% CI, and those that did not failed to show any tendency, suggesting that they reflected chance variation. Estimated measurement error based on within-subject standard deviation was iii.63, and the coefficient of repeatability was half dozen.24.

Give-and-take

The chief purpose of the current study was to examine the long-term reliability of the Spanish translation of the Optics test in Spain. To our knowledge, this is the first written report providing evidence that the Optics test is reliable and stable over a 1-year catamenia in a nonclinical population sample. To determine the reliability of the Spanish version of the Eye test, nosotros analyzed the distribution of responses for each item during testing and retesting one year later. The results point that non all items are equally difficult, which should increase the discriminant ability of the test. The distribution of difficulty across all items of the test was approximately normal and greater than 50% for the correct response. Despite the fact that less than 50% of the respondents correctly answered item 19, the majority did in fact cull the correct answer. In the Italian version of Optics examination similar percentages were obtained [26]. Further research should exist conducted to determine if the item should be eliminated due to ambiguity or retained because information technology is hard, and therefore useful in testing emotional discrimination.

Test-retest reliability using the ICC indicated a significant correlation betwixt the total scores on the examination and retest, demonstrating that results were stable over time. They also indicate that no learning occurred in the report population [34]. Particular-past-item correlation analysis between test and retest showed that responses to all items except item 18 were stable over time. This finding implies that emotion recognition judgments, both right and incorrect, persist over time. The relatively long interval of 1 year betwixt test and retest farther suggests that such persistence is not due to take chances but to the beingness of stable cognitive dispositions in recognizing complex emotions [i].

Nosotros used the graphical method of Bland-Altman to appraise test-retest concordance on our Spanish translation of the Eyes test. This arroyo allowed u.s. to clarify the position of test-retest differences relative to the test-retest mean. This analysis showed that near responses on all items were concordant with one another; mean differences were 0, and most differences barbarous within the 95% CI. The differences were homogeneous and appeared to be distributed randomly across all items of the exam, with no evidence of a systematic bias or tendency. The minor differences and their homogeneity lead us to conclude that the Optics test is reliable and stable for up to 1 year, not only with respect to full scores but also to the distributions of answers for each item. These results may aid guide the identification of items that discriminate between clinical and nonclinical populations in farther studies.

This study is not without limitations. Get-go, the proportion of women in our examination population was much higher than that of men, raising the possibility of gender bias. Second, this written report examined exam-retest reliability over a relatively long catamenia of ane yr. Future studies should likewise investigate the stability of the Spanish version over shorter fourth dimension periods, since stability is expected to exist greater over shorter periods [26].

Several studies using Eyes test have analyzed gender and age differences without conclusive results [26]. Our study did not address these bug. Futurity studies should investigate these differences and explore the mechanisms past which gender and historic period influence the development of theory of listen and emotional recognition. Additionally, it would be interesting to examine how other objective measures of emotion recognition, empathy, and emotional intelligence are related with Eyes test.

Numerous international studies using the Optics test have shown group differences in emotion recognition and theory of mind between individuals diagnosed with schizophrenia [7, 8] or autism [9–11] and typical control groups. The Spanish version of the Eyes examination volition help in the diagnosis and effective implementation of intervention programs for individuals with impairment in social noesis in Castilian-speaking countries. This test will let the comparison of an individual's score with the normative scores of Spanish samples and will enable researchers and clinicians to describe with accuracy whatever change of their scores before and later intervention programs.

Conclusions

In decision, the results from the current study suggest that the Eyes test is a reliable measure of theory of listen and recognition of complex emotions in adults, and that information technology is stable over a 1-year period in a nonclinical population. This Spanish version of the Eyes examination volition be useful in time to come research into social noesis in laboratory and clinical contexts, including cross-cultural and clinical investigations into autism and related neurodevelopmental conditions, in Spain and in other Spanish-speaking countries.

Abbreviations

CI:

Confidence interval

ICC:

Intraclass correlation coefficient

sd:

Standard deviation.

References

  1. Baron-Cohen S, Wheelwright S, Colina J, Raste Y, Plumb I: The "reading the listen in the eyes" test revised version: a study with normal adults, and adults with asperger syndrome or high-operation autism. J Kid Psychol Psychiatry. 2001, 42: 241-251. 10.1111/1469-7610.00715.

    CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar

  2. Brothers Fifty: The neural basis of primate social communication. Motiv Emot. 1990, xiv: 81-91. 10.1007/BF00991637.

    Commodity  Google Scholar

  3. Fiske ST, Taylor SE: Social cognition: From brains to civilisation. 2013, London, UK: SAGE Publications Limited

    Book  Google Scholar

  4. Kunda Z: Social knowledge: Making sense of people. 1999, Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press

    Google Scholar

  5. Baron-Cohen South: Mindblindness: An Essay on Autism and Theory of Mind. 1995, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press

    Google Scholar

  6. Pinkham AE, Penn DL, Perkins DO, Lieberman J: Implications for the neural basis of social cognition for the study of schizophrenia. Am J Psychiatry. 2003, 160: 815-824. ten.1176/appi.ajp.160.5.815.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar

  7. De Achával D, Costanzo EY, Villarreal Thou, Jáuregui IO, Chiodi A, Castro MN, Fahrer RD, Leiguarda RC, Chu EM, Guinjoan SM: Emotion processing and theory of mind in schizophrenia patients and their unaffected start-caste relatives. Neuropsychologia. 2010, 48: 1209-1215. x.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2009.12.019.

    Commodity  PubMed  Google Scholar

  8. Green MF, Olivier B, Crawley JN, Penn DL, Silverstein S: Social noesis in schizophrenia: recommendations from the measurement and treatment inquiry to improve cognition in schizophrenia new approaches conference. Schizophr Bull. 2005, 31: 882-887. ten.1093/schbul/sbi049.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar

  9. Baron-Cohen S: Essential Departure: Men, women and the farthermost male brain. 2003, London, UK: Penguin

    Google Scholar

  10. Baron-Cohen S: Autism: the empathizing-systemizing (E-S) theory. Ann N Y Acad Sci. 2009, 1156: 68-80. 10.1111/j.1749-6632.2009.04467.x.

    Commodity  PubMed  Google Scholar

  11. Lombardo MV, Chakrabarti B, Lai M-C, Businesswoman-Cohen S: Self-referential and social cognition in a case of autism and agenesis of the corpus callosum. Mol Autism. 2012, 3: 14-10.1186/2040-2392-3-14.

    PubMed Cardinal  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar

  12. Adenzato M, Todisco P, Ardito RB: Social cognition in anorexia nervosa: show of preserved theory of mind and dumb emotional functioning. PloS i. 2012, 7: e44414-ten.1371/journal.pone.0044414.

    PubMed Central  CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar

  13. Harrison A, Tchanturia K, Treasure J: Attentional bias, emotion recognition, and emotion regulation in anorexia: state or trait?. Biol Psychiatry. 2010, 68: 755-761. 10.1016/j.biopsych.2010.04.037.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar

  14. Baron-Cohen S, Jaffa T, Davies S, Auyeung B, Allison C, Wheelwright S: Practice girls with anorexia nervosa have elevated autistic traits?. Mol Autism. 2013, four: 24-

    PubMed Key  Commodity  PubMed  Google Scholar

  15. Derntl B, Seidel E-Yard, Kryspin-Exner I, Hasmann A, Dobmeier Grand: Facial emotion recognition in patients with bipolar I and bipolar II disorder. Br J Clinical Psychol. 2009, 48: 363-375. 10.1348/014466509X404845.

    Article  Google Scholar

  16. Ryu V, An SK, Jo HH, Cho HS: Decreased P3 amplitudes elicited by negative facial emotion in manic patients: selective deficits in emotional processing. Neurosci Lett. 2010, 481: 92-96. x.1016/j.neulet.2010.06.059.

    CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar

  17. Machado-de-Sousa JP, Arrais KC, Alves NT, Chagas MHN, de Meneses-Gaya C, Crippa JADS, Hallak JEC: Facial impact processing in social feet: tasks and stimuli. J Neurosci Methods. 2010, 193: 1-6. 10.1016/j.jneumeth.2010.08.013.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar

  18. Frick C, Lang S, Kotchoubey B, Sieswerda S, Dinu-Biringer R, Berger 1000, Veser S, Essig Yard, Barnow S: Hypersensitivity in deadline personality disorder during mindreading. PLoS One. 2012, 7: e41650-10.1371/journal.pone.0041650.

    PubMed Fundamental  CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar

  19. Ihnen GH, Penn DL, Corrigan Pow, Martin J: Social perception and social skill in schizophrenia. Psychiatry Res. 1998, 80: 275-286. 10.1016/S0165-1781(98)00079-one.

    CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar

  20. Rutherford MD, Baron-Cohen S, Wheelwright S: Reading the mind in the voice: a study with normal adults and adults with asperger syndrome and high functioning autism. J Autism Dev Disord. 2002, 32: 189-194. 10.1023/A:1015497629971.

    CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar

  21. Scrimin S, Moscardino U, Capello F, Altoè G, Axia G: Recognition of facial expressions of mixed emotions in school-age children exposed to terrorism. Dev Psychol. 2009, 45: 1341-1352.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar

  22. White South, Hill Eastward, Happé F, Frith U: Revisiting the strange stories: revealing mentalizing impairments in autism. Kid Dev. 2009, lxxx: 1097-1117. x.1111/j.1467-8624.2009.01319.ten.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar

  23. Baron-Cohen S, Jolliffe T, Mortimore C, Robertson M: Another advanced test of theory of mind: evidence from very high functioning adults with autism or asperger syndrome. J Child Psychol Psychiatry. 1997, 38: 813-822. 10.1111/j.1469-7610.1997.tb01599.x.

    CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar

  24. Adams RB, Rule NO, Franklin RG, Wang E, Stevenson MT, Yoshikawa South, Nomura Thou, Sato Due west, Kveraga Thou, Ambady N: Cross-cultural reading the mind in the eyes: an fMRI investigation. J Cogn Neurosci. 2010, 22: 97-108. x.1162/jocn.2009.21187.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar

  25. Medina-Pradas C, Blas Navarro J, Alvarez-Moya EM, Grau A, Obiols JE: Emotional theory of listen in eating disorders. Int J Clin Heal Psychol. 2012, 12: 189-202.

    Google Scholar

  26. Vellante M, Baron-Cohen South, Melis K, Marrone 1000, Petretto DR, Masala C, Preti A: The "reading the mind in the eyes" test: systematic review of psychometric properties and a validation study in italy. Cogn Neuropsychiatry. 2012, 18: 326-354.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar

  27. Bora E, Vahip S, Gonul As, Akdeniz F, Alkan M, Ogut M, Eryavuz A: Evidence for theory of mind deficits in euthymic patients with bipolar disorder. Acta Psychiatr Scand. 2005, 112: 110-116. ten.1111/j.1600-0447.2005.00570.x.

    CAS  Commodity  PubMed  Google Scholar

  28. Havet-Thomassin Five, Allain P, Etcharry-Bouyx F, Le Gall D: What well-nigh theory of mind after astringent brain injury?. Encephalon Inj. 2006, 20: 83-91. ten.1080/02699050500340655.

    CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar

  29. Kelemen O, Kéri Southward, Must A, Benedek K, Janka Z: No evidence for impaired "theory of heed" in unaffected starting time-degree relatives of schizophrenia patients. Acta Psychiatr Scand. 2004, 110: 146-149. 10.1111/j.1600-0047.2004.00357.x.

    CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar

  30. Kunihira Y, Senju A, Dairoku H, Wakabayashi A, Hasegawa T: "Autistic" traits in not-autistic Japanese populations: relationships with personality traits and cerebral ability. J Autism Dev Disord. 2006, 36: 553-566. 10.1007/s10803-006-0094-one.

    Commodity  PubMed  Google Scholar

  31. Voracek M, Dressler SG: Lack of correlation between digit ratio (2D:4D) and Baron-Cohen's "reading the mind in the eyes" examination, empathy, systemising, and autism-spectrum quotients in a general population sample. Personal Individ Differ. 2006, 41: 1481-1491. 10.1016/j.paid.2006.06.009.

    Article  Google Scholar

  32. Bänziger T, Scherer KR, Hall JA, Rosenthal R: Introducing the MiniPONS: a short multichannel version of the profile of nonverbal sensitivity (PONS). J Nonverbal Behav. 2011, 35: 189-204. 10.1007/s10919-011-0108-3.

    Article  Google Scholar

  33. Yildirim EA, KaŞar M, Güdük M, AteŞ E, Küçükparlak I, Özalmete EO: Investigation of the reliability of the "reading the heed in the eyes exam" in a turkish population. Turkish J Psychiatry. 2011, 22: 177-186.

    Google Scholar

  34. Hallerbäck MU, Lugnegård T, Hjärthag F, Gillberg C: The reading the listen in the eyes test: examination-retest reliability of a Swedish version. Cogn Neuropsychiatry. 2009, xiv: 127-143. x.1080/13546800902901518.

    Commodity  PubMed  Google Scholar

  35. Bland JM, Altman DG: Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement. Lancet. 1986, 1: 307-310.

    CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar

Download references

Acknowledgements

RC and PFB were supported in part past project SEJ-03036 from the Department of Economics, Science, and Business, Junta Andalucia (Spain). SBC was supported by the European union, the MRC, and the Wellcome Trust during the period of this work. He was part of the NIHR CLAHRC for Cambridgeshire and Peterborough NHS Foundation Trust.

Author information

Affiliations

  1. Section of Basic Psychology, Faculty of Psychology The National Distance Education Academy (UNED), Madrid, Spain

    Enrique K Fernández-Abascal

  2. Section of Developmental Psychology and Education, Faculty of Education Science, Academy of Huelva, Huelva, Spain

    Rosario Cabello

  3. Department of Bones Psychology, Faculty of Psychology, University of Malaga, Campus Teatinos, south/n, 29071, Malaga, Spain

    Pablo Fernández-Berrocal

  4. Autism Enquiry Centre, Department of Psychiatry, Cambridge University, and Form Clinic, Cambridgeshire and Peterborough NHS Foundation Trust (CPFT), Cambridge, UK

    Simon Businesswoman-Cohen

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Pablo Fernández-Berrocal.

Additional information

Competing interests

The authors declare they have no competing interests.

Authors' contributions

EGFA conceived of the report, participated in the information drove, analyzed the information and led preparation of the manuscript. RC and PFB conceived of the study and wrote the first draft of the manuscript. SBC contributed to writing the manuscript. All authors contributed to the estimation of data, helped to draft and revise the manuscript and have read and approved the final manuscript.

Authors' original submitted files for images

Rights and permissions

Open Admission This article is published under license to BioMed Central Ltd. This is an Open Access commodity is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License ( https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0 ), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Fernández-Abascal, E.1000., Cabello, R., Fernández-Berrocal, P. et al. Test-retest reliability of the 'Reading the Heed in the Eyes' test: a one-year follow-upward study. Molecular Autism four, 33 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1186/2040-2392-4-33

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI : https://doi.org/10.1186/2040-2392-four-33

Keywords

  • Reading the mind in the eyes
  • Reliability
  • Assessment
  • Social cognition
  • Theory of mind

funkariestabox.blogspot.com

Source: https://molecularautism.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/2040-2392-4-33

Talvez você goste destas postagens

Postar um comentário for "Reading the Mind in the Voice Task"