Examination of the reliability and factor structure of the Autism Spectrum Quotient (AQ) in a non-clinical sample
Open accessThe claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
The Autism-Spectrum Quotient (AQ) has good internal consistency and test-retest reliability and has been translated into many languages.
“The test has good internal consistency and test-retest reliability and has been translated into many languages [57, 58].”
From A 'choice', an 'addiction', a way 'out of the lost': Exploring self-injury in autistic people without intellectual disability (2019) · cites this paper as [57]
The Introduction reports cross-cultural AQ use, and the References name a Japanese version, but these passages do not establish translation into many languages. More importantly, Results §3.1 calls internal consistency marginal for the total score (α = 0.67) and marginal to low for its domains, contrary to the claim that it is good. The paper does not report test–retest reliability. (LLM, conf=0.85)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 19 · Cited by 217
Research works printed but not linked: 1
- S. Baron-Cohen, S. Wheelwright, R. Skinner, J. Martin, E. Clubley. (2001). The autism spectrum quotient (AQ): Evidence from Asperger syndrome/high functioning autism, males and females, scientists and mathematicians. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 31 (2001), p. 603
- Authors
- Hurst, R. M., Mitchell, J. T., Kimbrel, N. A., Kwapil, T. K., & Nelson-Gray, R. O.
- Affiliations
- University of North Carolina Wilmington (US)
- University of North Carolina at Greensboro (US)
- Corresponding author
- Hurst, R.M.
- Venue
- Personality and Individual Differences
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2007-11
- Volume
- 43
- Issue
- 7
- Pages
- 1938-1949
- ISSN
- 0191-8869 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2023722896
- Cited by
- 217
- References
- 19
- Citations by year
- 2026: 4 · 2025: 11 · 2024: 10 · 2023: 8 · 2022: 14 · 2021: 23 · 2020: 20 · 2019: 12 · 2018: 13 · 2017: 11 · 2016: 9 · 2015: 17 · 2014: 13 · 2013: 15 · 2012: 15
- FWCI
- 2.17
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- libres.uncg.edu
- Locations
- Personality and Individual Differences (publishedVersion)
- NC Digital Online Collection of Knowledge and Scholarship (The University of North Carolina at Greensboro) (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Autism Spectrum Disorder Research
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Management Science and Operations Research › Psychometric Methodologies and Testing
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Personality Traits and Psychology
- Keywords
- Autism Spectrum Quotient, autism spectrum disorder, autistic traits, high-functioning autism, screening measures, factor structure, internal consistency, psychometric properties, non-clinical sample, three-factor model
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
