Cited by 4,555Autism Spectrum Disorder ResearchChild and Animal Learning DevelopmentFace Recognition and Perception

The “Reading the Mind in the Eyes” Test Revised Version: A Study with Normal Adults, and Adults with Asperger Syndrome or High‐functioning Autism

Baron‐Cohen, Simon, Wheelwright, Sally, Hill, Jacqueline, Raste, Yogini, Plumb, Ian·2001·Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry

Abstract

In 1997 in this Journal we published the “Reading the Mind in the Eyes” Test, as a measure of adult “mentalising”. Whilst that test succeeded in discriminating a group of adults with Asperger syndrome (AS) or high‐functioning autism (HFA) from controls, it suffered from several psychometric problems. In this paper these limitations are rectified by revising the test. The Revised Eyes Test was administered to a group of adults with AS or HFA ( N = 15) and again discriminated these from a large number of normal controls ( N = 239) drawn from different samples. In both the clinical and control groups the Eyes Test was inversely correlated with the Autism Spectrum Quotient (the AQ), a measure of autistic traits in adults of normal intelligence. The Revised Eyes Test has improved power to detect subtle individual differences in social sensitivity.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/1469-7610.00715

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

  • RMET scores were similar to those seen in other publications with autistic participants.

    “Likewise, scores in the RMET are similar to those seen in other publications with autistic participants [41, 71].”
  • Deficits in the Reading the Mind in the Eyes task (RMET) were unrelated to the presence of self-injury, its range or frequency, or its use for the functional purpose of communicating with others.

    “deficits in the popular ‘Reading the Mind in the Eyes’ task (RMET) [41] were unrelated to the presence of self-injury, its range or frequency or its use for the functional purpose of communicating with others”
  • 8 weeks of cognitive-based compassion training significantly enhances accuracy in inferring others' mental states in the Reading the Mind in the Eyes Test and increases neural activation in the inferior frontal gyrus and dorsomedial prefrontal cortex.

    “Another study also reported that 8 weeks of cognitive-based compassion training could significantly enhance the accuracy in inferring others' mental states in the Reading the Mind in the Eyes Test [39] and increased the neural activation in the inferior frontal gyrus and dorsomedial prefrontal cortex, which are important for the theory of mind [40].”
  • ToM tasks measure the ability to employ mental states in explanations and predictions of behavior and can be distinguished from tasks that may only require emotion recognition or only require empathic sharing of mental states.

    “These ToM tasks measure the ability to employ mental states in explanations and predictions of behavior and as such can be distinguished from tasks that may only require emotion recognition (e.g., Baron-Cohen et al., 2001; Oakley et al., 2016), or only require empathic sharing of mental states (e.g., Quesque et al., 2024; Reniers et al., 2011).”
  • The Eyes Test is proposed to measure a single construct.

    “While the Eyes Test is proposed to measure a single construct (Baron-Cohen et al., 2001), as noted previously others have suggested that there might be subscales composed of those items that represent positive, negative, and neutral affect (Harkness et al., 2005; Maurage et al., 2011; Konrath et al., 2014).”

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Baron‐Cohen, S., Wheelwright, S., Hill, J., Raste, Y., & Plumb, I.
Affiliations
University of Cambridge (GB)
Venue
Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2001-02
Volume
42
Issue
2
Pages
241-251
ISSN
  • 0021-9630 (ISSN-L)
  • 1469-7610
OpenAlex
W4294333904
Cited by
4,555
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 223 · 2025: 261 · 2024: 273 · 2023: 268 · 2022: 303 · 2021: 350 · 2020: 381 · 2019: 320 · 2018: 299 · 2017: 292 · 2016: 230 · 2015: 262 · 2014: 193 · 2013: 211 · 2012: 143
FWCI
5.94
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Autism Spectrum Disorder Research
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Child and Animal Learning Development
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Face Recognition and Perception
Keywords
Reading the Mind in the Eyes Test, mentalization, theory of mind, Asperger syndrome, high-functioning autism, autism spectrum disorder, test revision, psychometric properties, Autism Spectrum Quotient, autistic traits, social sensitivity, adults

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