Cited by 239Autism Spectrum Disorder ResearchChild and Animal Learning DevelopmentFace Recognition and Perception

The “Reading the Mind in the Eyes” Test: Complete Absence of Typical Sex Difference in ~400 Men and Women with Autism

Open access
Baron-Cohen, Simon, Bowen, Daniel C., Holt, Rosemary J., Allison, Carrie, Auyeung, Bonnie, Lombardo, Michael V., Smith, Paula, Lai, Meng-Chuan·2015·PLOS ONE

Abstract

The "Reading the Mind in the Eyes" test (Eyes test) is an advanced test of theory of mind. Typical sex difference has been reported (i.e., female advantage). Individuals with autism show more difficulty than do typically developing individuals, yet it remains unclear how this is modulated by sex, as females with autism have been under-represented. Here in a large, non-male-biased sample we test for the effects of sex, diagnosis, and their interaction. The Eyes test (revised version) was administered online to 395 adults with autism (178 males, 217 females) and 320 control adults (152 males, 168 females). Two-way ANOVA showed a significant sex-by-diagnosis interaction in total correct score (F(1,711) = 5.090, p = 0.024, ηp2 = 0.007) arising from a significant sex difference between control males and females (p < 0.001, Cohen's d = 0.47), and an absence of a sex difference between males and females with autism (p = 0.907, d = 0.01); significant case-control differences were observed across sexes, with effect sizes of d = 0.35 in males and d = 0.69 in females. Group-difference patterns fit with the extreme-male-brain (EMB) theory predictions. Eyes test-Empathy Quotient and Eyes test-Autism Spectrum Quotient correlations were significant only in females with autism (r = 0.35, r = -0.32, respectively), but not in the other 3 groups. Support vector machine (SVM) classification based on response pattern across all 36 items classified autism diagnosis with a relatively higher accuracy for females (72.2%) than males (65.8%). Nevertheless, an SVM model trained within one sex generalized equally well when applied to the other sex. Performance on the Eyes test is a sex-independent phenotypic characteristic of adults with autism, reflecting sex-common social difficulties, and provides support for the EMB theory predictions for both males and females. Performance of females with autism differed from same-sex controls more than did that of males with autism. Females with autism also showed stronger coherence between self-reported dispositional traits and Eyes test performance than all other groups.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1371/journal.pone.0136521

Cites

128 of 128 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 129 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Baron-Cohen, S., Bowen, D. C., Holt, R. J., Allison, C., Auyeung, B., Lombardo, M. V., Smith, P., & Lai, M.-C.
Affiliations
  • University of Cambridge (GB)
  • Centre for Addiction and Mental Health (CA)
Corresponding author
Lai, Meng-Chuan
Venue
PLOS ONE
Published
2015-08-27
Volume
10
Issue
8
Pages
e0136521
ISSN
1932-6203 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1943649909
Cited by
238
References
129
Citations by year
2026: 12 · 2025: 10 · 2024: 19 · 2023: 18 · 2022: 29 · 2021: 29 · 2020: 28 · 2019: 28 · 2018: 24 · 2017: 27 · 2016: 14
FWCI
13.02
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • PLoS ONE (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • CentAUR (University of Reading) (acceptedVersion, other-oa)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
  • Edinburgh Research Explorer (University of Edinburgh) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • Apollo (University of Cambridge) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
Funders
  • Wellcome Trust (091774, 091774/Z/10/Z)
  • National Institute for Health and Care Research
  • Medical Research Council (G0600977)
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
autism spectrum disorder, theory of mind, Reading the Mind in the Eyes Test, sex differences, extreme male brain theory, empathy, Autism Spectrum Quotient, social cognition, autistic adults
MeSH terms
Autism Spectrum Disorder, Adult, Female, Humans, Male, Reading, Sex Characteristics, Support Vector Machine

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