Limits...
Measuring empathizing and systemizing with a large US sample.

Wright DB, Skagerberg EM - PLoS ONE (2012)

Bottom Line: These re-worded items were answered more rapidly than the original items, and for the SQ produced a more reliable scale.Females had on average higher empathizing scores and males had on average higher systemizing scores.If a female-male pair was chosen at random, the female would have the higher empathizing score about two-thirds of the time, and the males would have the higher systemizing score about two-thirds of the time.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Department of Psychology, Florida International University, Miami, Florida, United States of America. dwright@fiu.edu

ABSTRACT
A large number of people completed one of two versions of the empathizing quotient (EQ) and systemizing quotient (SQ). One version had the negatively phrased items all re-worded. These re-worded items were answered more rapidly than the original items, and for the SQ produced a more reliable scale. Subjects gave self-assessments of empathizing and systemizing, and these were moderately correlated, r ≈ .6, with their respective quotients. Females had on average higher empathizing scores and males had on average higher systemizing scores. If a female-male pair was chosen at random, the female would have the higher empathizing score about two-thirds of the time, and the males would have the higher systemizing score about two-thirds of the time.

Show MeSH
The distribution of mean responses for males and females for the AQ.The distributions are drawn using a Gaussian kernel estimation method (the R default).
© Copyright Policy
Related In: Results  -  Collection


getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC3285168&req=5

pone-0031661-g011: The distribution of mean responses for males and females for the AQ.The distributions are drawn using a Gaussian kernel estimation method (the R default).

Mentions: There was a relationship between AQ scores and gender. Males had a mean of 2.32 (sd = .33) while females had a mean of 2.23 (sd = .33). The difference is statistically significant, t(5070) = 9.65, p<.001, but is only about one-quarter of a standard deviation (see Figure 11). If one male and one female were chosen at random from this sample, 56.44% of the time the male would have the higher AQ score, 40.34% of the time the female would have the higher AQ score, and 3.22% of the time they would have the same score. While treating the age bands as categorical yielded a statistically significant result, F(7,5050) = 2.32, p = .02, η2 = .003, the effect was very small and there was no discernible pattern in the results, r = .02, 95% CI from −.01 to .05, t(5056) = 1.36, p = .17.


Measuring empathizing and systemizing with a large US sample.

Wright DB, Skagerberg EM - PLoS ONE (2012)

The distribution of mean responses for males and females for the AQ.The distributions are drawn using a Gaussian kernel estimation method (the R default).
© Copyright Policy
Related In: Results  -  Collection

Show All Figures
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC3285168&req=5

pone-0031661-g011: The distribution of mean responses for males and females for the AQ.The distributions are drawn using a Gaussian kernel estimation method (the R default).
Mentions: There was a relationship between AQ scores and gender. Males had a mean of 2.32 (sd = .33) while females had a mean of 2.23 (sd = .33). The difference is statistically significant, t(5070) = 9.65, p<.001, but is only about one-quarter of a standard deviation (see Figure 11). If one male and one female were chosen at random from this sample, 56.44% of the time the male would have the higher AQ score, 40.34% of the time the female would have the higher AQ score, and 3.22% of the time they would have the same score. While treating the age bands as categorical yielded a statistically significant result, F(7,5050) = 2.32, p = .02, η2 = .003, the effect was very small and there was no discernible pattern in the results, r = .02, 95% CI from −.01 to .05, t(5056) = 1.36, p = .17.

Bottom Line: These re-worded items were answered more rapidly than the original items, and for the SQ produced a more reliable scale.Females had on average higher empathizing scores and males had on average higher systemizing scores.If a female-male pair was chosen at random, the female would have the higher empathizing score about two-thirds of the time, and the males would have the higher systemizing score about two-thirds of the time.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Department of Psychology, Florida International University, Miami, Florida, United States of America. dwright@fiu.edu

ABSTRACT
A large number of people completed one of two versions of the empathizing quotient (EQ) and systemizing quotient (SQ). One version had the negatively phrased items all re-worded. These re-worded items were answered more rapidly than the original items, and for the SQ produced a more reliable scale. Subjects gave self-assessments of empathizing and systemizing, and these were moderately correlated, r ≈ .6, with their respective quotients. Females had on average higher empathizing scores and males had on average higher systemizing scores. If a female-male pair was chosen at random, the female would have the higher empathizing score about two-thirds of the time, and the males would have the higher systemizing score about two-thirds of the time.

Show MeSH