Emotion Recognition in Social Understanding

EMOTION RECOGNTION IN SOCIAL UNDERSTANDING

Emotion Recognition in Social Understanding

Mehvish N Khan

Dr Jennifer L Mayer

KHA12348108

University of Roehampton

1


Abstract

Despite research suggesting that individuals with autism are associated with difficulties to

understand and identify emotion of others and self (Loveland et al., 1997), the results

provided are inconsistent. Pervious research has established that autistic traits are found

across the general population (Robinson et al., 2011) with higher levels of autistic traits

correlating to lower empathy (Gökçen et al., 2014). However Capps et al., (1992) found that

identifying emotion in ASD is in fact unharmed. The current study aimed to explore these

inconsistencies, by introducing alexithymia (a sub-clinical construct described as difficulty to

recognise emotional states. The current study hypothesised that that there would be

significant correlations between autistic traits, empathy and alexithymia, More specifically, it

was further hypothesised that alexithymia would act as a potential mediator between the

autistic traits and empathy relationship in an attempt to explain the lack of empathy

expressed. The Autistic Quotient (AQ), Empathy Quotient (EQ) and the Toronto Alexithymia

Scale-20 (TAS-20) were used and results were collected from 100 participants (n= 88

females and n=12 males) from the general population. Following a correlational analysis,

significant correlations were established between autistic traits, empathy and alexithymia.

After conducting a multiple regression analysis, the findings showed that alexithymia did not

act as a mediator in the relationship between autistic traits and empathy meaning it cannot

explain the low empathetic deficits that are expressed. These findings suggest that co-

occurring alexithymia is a possibility in explaining the emotional deficits of autism and

clinicians need to consider implementing this in the diagnostic principles.

Keywords

Autistic traits, empathy, emotion recognition, alexithymia, social understanding

2


Emotion Recognition in Social Understanding

Autism Spectrum Disorders (ASD) is a pervasive neurodevelopmental disorder

characterised by impairments in social communication and social interaction and restricted

and repetitive behaviours. More specially, deficits in social communication and social

interaction lead to complications in shared interests, emotions and are unable to initiate or

respond to social interactions. Nonverbal deficits in social interactions are also present in

ASD, ranging from abnormalities in eye contact and body language, deficits in understanding

gestures and the lack of facial expressions (American Psychiatric Association, 2013).

Kanner’s (1943) first description of autism mentioned the difficulty to share emotional states

with others. This inability to understand mental state and emotion recognition has been

established by several researchers since (Baron-Cohen, 1995; Hobson, 1993).

Emotion is a fundamental aspect required to experience social interaction and is

essentially needed for the process of development (Golan & Baron-Cohen, 2006) as it allows

the individuals to recognise the intentions of others to adopt an appropriate response (Bal, et

al., 2010). Emotion understanding is an appropriate concept to research in ASD, as the core

deficits in ASD involve social communication and social interaction deficits. Research

conducted in this area has resulted in some inconsistencies. A majority of findings have

established deficits in emotion (Hobson, 1986; Mazefsky & Oswald, 2007; Weeks & Hobson,

1987) however some research has found no evidence that there are impairments in emotion

(Adolphs, Sears & Piven, 2001; Castelli, 2005). Facial-emotion recognition is the

fundamental research carried out in this area; yet unclear results have been established, with

studies finding evidence for (Ashwin, Chapman, Colle & Baron-Cohen, 2006) and against

(Castelli, 2005) deficits of emotion-recognition in autism.

3


Persons with autism unveil a large selection of abnormalities in the social domain such

as impairment in using social gaze, inability of joint attention contact, lack in peer interest,

preference for companionless play and atypical affective behaviour (Frith, 1989; Sigman,

Mundy, Sherman & Ungerer, 1986; Tantam, 1992). Through observation, research has shown

that autistic individuals have a strange and inappropriate reaction to emotions when it comes

to other people (Loveland et al., 1997). Autistic individuals have demonstrated to intact

emotion abilities and emotion concepts involving happiness, sadness, fear and anger (Capps,

Yirmiya, & Sigman, 1992). However, they may express deficits in emotions that contradict

between their expectations and their knowledge e.g. surprise (Baron- Cohen, Spitz & Cross,

1993) and attempting to relate that emotional expression to a social context (Heerey, Keltner

& Capps, 2003). However, it has also been found that autistic individuals may understand

certain types of emotions for example those caused by desire but have difficulties in

understanding the emotions which may be caused by thoughts and beliefs (Baron-Cohen,

1991), indicating that emotion understanding of others is possible to an extent depending on

factors e.g. the nature of the emotion.

Key factors have been suggested as the reasons behind these inconsistent findings in

research, which need to be taken in consideration in future research. A meta-analysis review

conducted by Weigelt, Koldewyn and Kanwisher (2012) established that there are issues with

methodology as this was widely varied across studies, so thorough attention needs to be made

on what methodology is suitable to provide the reliable and accurate results. A second issue

with research developing inconsistent results is the differences in demographic variables e.g.

IQ and age. Some clusters are seen to show deficit in autism, as it may only be present in a

certain stage of development or a particular functioning range (Harms, Martin & Wallace,

4


2010). Finally, a call of concern is raised in research suggesting that subdivisions in the ASD

cohort are the reason behind these inconsistencies (Weigelt, Koldewyn & Kanwisher, 2012)

such as alexithymia, which future research needs to study.

An important component when looking into emotion is empathy. Empathy, a key

ability, is required in order to get through daily routines as it is the ability to understand the

feelings of other individuals and what their thoughts could be (Baron-Cohen and

Wheelwright, 2004; Decety & Lamm, 2006; Eisenberg, 2000; Wispé, 1986). It needs to be

noted that empathy involves two major components: affective empathy, the ability to share

feeling of others and cognitive empathy, the capacity to distinguish in self-other discrepancy

(Bird et al., 2010; Rogers, Dziobek, Hassentab, Wolf & Convit, 2007). When a person

empathises, the experience of emotional state of another person takes place, raising

consciousness that we are aware of our own mental states and the states of others (Eisenberg,

2000; de Vignemont & Singer, 2006). Empathy is considered to be a motivation to unselfish,

pro-social behaviour (Eisenberg & Miller, 1987). On the other hand, studies by the likes of

Björkqvist, Österman, and Kaukiainen, (2000) and Geer, Estupinan, and Manguno-Mire,

(2000) have established that individuals who express a lack of empathy are related to anti-

social behaviour.

Research conducted on the ASD population has established that they have a weak

emotional (affective) empathy and cognitive empathy (Baron-Cohen, 1995; Blair, 1995;

Smith, 2009) and research has provided strong evidence those individuals with ASD

particularly have deficits in cognitive empathy (Baron-Cohen, 2002; Blair, 2005; Bons et al.,

2013). In regards to affective empathy, mixed results have been reported. No significant

difference was found between ASD adults and control on affective empathy when using the

5


Multifaceted Empathy Test (Dziobek et al., 2008). Similarly, Schwenck et al. (2012) found

alike results in children with an ASD diagnosis. Once the children watched video clips, which

expressed emotion, they were asked to indicate how much it had affected them. Ratings

provided by ASD children were no different to the control group of children. Research has

continued support this (Deschamps, Been & Matthys, 2014; Hadjikhani et al., 2014). These

studies therefore imply that the ASD population has an intact affective empathy.

Yet, there is research that presents finding suggesting affective empathy in ASD is

limited. Sigman, Kasari, Kwon & Yirmiya (1992) observation on responses to adult distress

found that children with ASD expressed lower concern towards their parents and the

experimenter, compared to a control group. Similar findings have been resulted in adult ASD

populations, who showed limited responses whilst observing the pain of others, using

electromyography (Minio-Paluello, Baron-Cohen, Avenanti, Walsh & Aglioti, 2009). More

generally, research has found that individuals with ASD do understand the concept of

empathy.

Yirmiya, Sigman, Kasari and Mundy (1992) study established that to some extent

children with ASD did express empathy. Their research consisted of high-functioning (HF)

autistic children who watched a number of video clips of emotion being expressed by

children. Following each clip, they were required to identify what the emotion was.

Compared to a control group, who were not diagnosed with ASD, the HF autistic children

scored lower in identifying the emotion, illustrating difficulties in empathy. However,

Yirmiya et al., (1992) also reported that empathy was not completely absent. Inconsistent

findings raise concern on if the difficulties in emotional empathy are common across the

entire ASD population. The severity of autistic traits expressed by a certain sample size could

6


have an affect on the results. Research has found that HF autistics report lower empathy than

low-functioning (LF) autistic (Gleichgerrcht, Torralva, Rattazzi, Marencco, Roca & Manes,

2013), so the distinguish needs to be made on the severity of the traits. Also, methodological

flaws could be possible reason e.g. ignoring other potential sub-clinical constructs is the

reason behind the mixed results. From this suggestion, the current study was conducted. More

specifically, it was addressed that alexithymia could be co-occurring in the ASD population

and, to an extent, explain the impairment of emotion experience in ASD.

Alexithymia, a subclinical construct, has been defined and characterized by the deficit

in recognizing, describing and distinguishing feelings of emotional arousal from bodily

sensations (Nemiah, Freyberger & Sifneos, 1976; Taylor, Bagby & Parker, 1997). More

specific difficulties associated with high levels of alexithymia include poor social skills and

lack of interest with others. (Vaheule, Desmet, Meganck & Bogaerts, 2007). Alexithymia has

a prevalence rate of 10% in the general population (Salminen, Saarijärvi, Äärelä, Toikka &

Kauhanen, 1999) however between 40-65% of individuals with autism have been reported to

have alexithymia (Hill, Berthoz & Frith, 2004; Lambardo, Barnes, Wheelwright & Baron-

Cohen, 2007; Bird & Cook, 2013). Taylor, Bagby and Parker (1999) have associated increase

of alexithymia with failure to experience positive emotions, emotional distress, and limited

imagination. Even though there is a clear overlap in the difficulties experience in alexithymia

and ASD, the clinical profession has not taken much consideration in implementing

alexithymia as a possible reason for the deficits reported in ASD. It needs to be noted that

autism and alexithymia are independent constructs. For an ASD diagnosis, alexithymia is not

necessarily required and is not a universal in autism. Equally, large amounts of people

express severe levels of alexithymia, yet they do not demonstrate autistic-related symptoms.

This concept describes ‘the alexithymia hypothesis’ proposed by Bird & Cook (2013.

7


Recently, alexithymia has been associated with broader emotion research such autism.

Tani et al., (2003) research found that individuals with Asperger’s Syndrome (AS)- a milder

form of autism- were more alexithymic compared to control individuals. One reason why

alexithymia is suspected to be a co-occurring construct with autism, as alexithymia traits are

associated with impairment in emotional recognition e.g. atypical ranking of emotional face

expressions (Lane et al., 1996; Swart, Kortekaas & Aleman, 2009). Hill, Berthoz & Frith

(2004) further found support after results established that 27 high functioning autistic adults

reported to have higher alexithymia, who were compared to a similar age group. Berthoz,

Lalanne, Crane & Hill (2013) found that more than half of the ASD sample in their study (37

ASD participants in total) were considered to be alexithymic. Bertnoz & Hill (2005) further

found that these traits in emotion were consistent and steady across time in ASD; therefore

implying that the role alexithymia has is a possibility for the emotion difficulties experienced

by ASD individuals.

The ability to identify emotional expressions has been found to be consistent and

similar for ASD individuals and those who were in an alexithymia control that was matched

(Cook, Brewer, Shah & Bird, 2013). Furthermore, the regression analysis carried out by Cook

et al (2013) revealed that alexithymia was the predictor of expression-attribution precision,

implying that alexithymia could possibly be a mediator in this relationship and could explain

the difficulty in empathizing. Recent research conducted by Aaron, Benson & Park (2015)

established that alexithymia is one possible mechanism that can explain empathetic deficits

found in ASD traits in the general population. This was supported by previous research

conducted by Lockwood, Bird, Bridge and Viding (2013). Both Aaron et al., (2015) and

Lockwood et al., (2013) found that alexithymia did not mediate empathy as a whole, but

8


aspects of it. Even though ASD as a whole is assumed to be associated with empathetic

deficits, Silani et al., (2008) and Bird et al., (2010) established that those ASD participants

with higher levels of alexithymia expressed more empathetic deficits. Reflecting back to

empathy, research has found that affective empathy is the primary reason for the impairment

in alexithymia (Silani, et al., 2008). This study found that the ability to report and distinguish

one own emotion was impaired and this was associated with alexithymia and anterior insula

activation. Anterior insula and alexithymia levels are also associated with self-reported

empathy scores. Similar relationship between empathy, anterior insula and alexithymia were

found in both ASD individuals and typical adults, suggesting that alexithymia is co-occurring

with ASD and can also be present in a typically developing population, yet as an independent

construct (Bird et al, 2010; Press & Richardson, 2011)

This research has been supported in several studies (Allen, Davis, & Hill, 2013; Bird &

Cook, 2013; Heaton et al., 2012). Further imaging research has established that individuals

who are high in alexithymia, present neural responses which are abnormal when doing tasks

that evoke empathy (Moriguchi et al., 2007). The ‘shared- network hypothesis’ is a possible

theory that can be used to explain the relationship between alexithymia and deficits in

empathy. This theory is based on the fact that networks associated with processing ones own

emotion are the exact neural networks used to process the emotions of others (Singer &

Lamm, 2009).

Traits that were only considered to be associated with autism are now become part of a

broader concept of individual differences in the general population (Constantino & Todd,

2003). Researchers believe that traits associated with ASD now lie on a continuum and can

be present in typically developing individuals, but the autistic traits are at a lower severity.

9


Regardless of this, a diagnosis of ASD is not necessarily given. Researchers have studied

these traits, known as Broader Autism Phenotypes (BAP), (Bailey et al., 1995) in family

members of those with ASD and in the general population. This development of the

continuum approach led Baron-Cohen, Wheelwright, Skinner, Martin and Clubley’s (2001)

to generate the Autism-Spectrum Quotient (AQ)- a self-administrated instrument to measure

the degree to which traits associated with the autistic continuum are present in adults with

normal intelligence- hence this measure was used in this study.

In their study, they carried out the assessment on the general population members,

individuals with Aspergers Syndrome (AS) or high functioning autism (HFA), students from

Cambridge University and the Mathematics Olympiad winners. They established that ASD

individuals scored significantly higher than the general population, as expected. Furthermore,

they found that students studying a science related course scored higher than those studying a

social science or humanities related score. Research however has been conducted on relatives

of individuals with ASD (BAP), with findings establishing that they present mild forms of

autistic traits, which are not strong enough for an ASD diagnosis. Correlations carried

between autistic traits and empathy on the general population has found that higher levels of

empathy correlated to lower autistic traits (Gökçen, Petrides, Hudry, Fredericks & Smillie,

2014). This is especially true as ASD and autistic traits are known to be across the same

continuum, therefore the severity varies (Robinson, Munir, McCormick, Koenen &

Santangelo, 2011).

Studies have established that parents of ASD children expressed more social difficulty

behaviours e.g. unsocial and lack of feelings expressed (Piven et al, 1997; Piven et al., 1994;

Wolff, Narayan & Moyes, 1988) and cognitive deficits. Szatmari et al., (2008) found that

10


parents with autistic children scored higher on alexithymia measurement tests compared to

controls. Further support of this came from a review of 1300 reports (Hughes, 2009), which

established that alexithymia was a psychological change parents with autistic children

experienced. Several researchers (Austin, 2005; Hurst, Mitchell, Kimbrel, Kwapil & Nelson-

Gray, 2007; Stewart & Austin, 2009) have established that a ‘social’ difficulty is a common

element in the general population, and heightened alexithymia levels have been reflected in

the population with ASD traits (Lockwood et al., 2013). Skuse, Mandy, & Scourfield (2005)

suggested that the continuum allowed the general population to explore further about the

severity of autistic. As the traits are distributed across the population, understanding the

borderline of severity was difficult and limited. Therefore, this continuum being functional to

the general populations overcomes these doubts and knowledge is gained on the traits

associated with autism

Thus, the current study wanted to look further at the findings established by Aaron et al

(2015), in order to examine the role alexithymia played in the relationship between autistic

traits and empathy. By addressing sub-groups, it provided an attempt to explain why

empathetic deficits are associated with autistic traits and it addressed the inconsistency of

findings from previous literature. Secondly, this study allowed to explore the possibility that

alexithymia could be a co-occurring factor, providing a foundation in why research findings

vary in understanding if empathy deficits is associated with higher levels of autistic traits.

The findings of the study could be applied to both the general population and to an extent the

ASD population as a majority of autistic individuals display alexithymic traits. From this, the

current aims were to look at the relationship between autistic traits, empathy and alexithymia,

using a sample of the general population. More specifically, this study wanted to explore the

role of alexithymia in relation to empathetic deficits by studying if alexithymia acted as

11


mediator between the autistic trait and empathy relationship. The current study proposed the

following hypothesis:

Hypothesis 1: There will be a decrease in empathy when the autistic trait levels are

higher in the general population sample.

Hypothesis 2: An increase in autistic traits will associate with higher levels of

alexithymia.

Hypothesis 3: There will be a significant negative relationship between alexithymia

and empathy.

Hypothesis 4: Alexithymia will act as a mediator between autistic traits and empathy,

providing an explanation to the low empathy experienced in autistic individuals.

Methods

12


Design and analysis

A questionnaire survey design was employed in this study consisting of one

independent variable (autistic traits) and one dependent variables (empathy) and a mediator

variable (alexithymia). Correlations and multiple regression analysis were run on the data

using IBM SPSS version 21.0.

Piloting

A pilot study was conducted prior to the current research study, using the AQ, EQ and

TAS-20 on sample of controls that was separate from the actual study (n=15). This was

carried out to establish if the required time frame provided (30 minutes) was sufficient

enough and to establish whether the participants understood the statements and items

provided on each scale. A statistical test was not conducted on the data collected, as the

sample size was small, however all the instruments seemed acceptable to use in this study.

Participants

The current study recruited 100 participants (88 females, 12 male) through

opportunity sampling. The participant’s age ranged from 18- 29 (M= 19.92, SD= 1.52). A

majority of the participants were from a white background (White British- 26%, White other

background- 15%). Participants were collected via opportunity sampling. Roehampton

University Psychology participants who took part for course credits (0.5 credits) signed up

through the Roehampton University SONA website. Other external participants were

13


recruited through social media e.g. email, Facebook and Twitter, which was ethically

approved by the Roehampton University Psychology Extended Research Ethics Committee

(Appendix A)

Measures and materials

A Consent form (Appendix B) was present before the study began and a debrief form

(Appendix C) was provided once the study had been completed. A demographics

questionnaire was also presented (Appendix E).

The Adult Autism Spectrum Quotient (AQ) (Appendix F)

The AQ is a fifty-item questionnaire, which measures traits of autism in adults with

normal intelligence (Baron-Cohen, Wheelwright, Skinner, Martin & Clubley, 2001). This

self-administrated instrument is used in scientific purposes- who is ‘affected’ and who is not

and comparison of cases- and also for application – for screening purposes for potential

individuals, providing a referral for diagnosis. Five distinct components of structure are used

in measuring autistic traits; 1) poor social skills (e.g. ‘I enjoy social chit-chat’, reverse scored,

2) attention to switching (e.g. ‘It does not upset me if my daily routine is disturbed’), 3)

attention to detail, (e.g. ‘ I tend to notice details others do not’), 4) poor communication (e.g.

‘I frequently find that I don’t know how to keep a conversation going’) and 5) imagination

(e.g. ‘If I try to imagine something, I find it very easy to create a picture in my mind’). A

four-range Likert scale was used where respondents answered each item on a scale from

“definitely agree” (1) to “definitely disagree” (4). A scoring method proposed by Baron-

Cohen, Wheelwright, Skinner, Martin & Clubey (2001) was used; answers that were more to

14


the ‘autistic’ direction were given a score of 1, and answers toward the ‘non-autistic’ side

were given the score of 0. The AQ has demonstrated to have an acceptable internal

consistency and inter-rater reliability (Allison, Auyeung & Baron-Cohen, 2012; Baron-

Cohen, Wheelwright, Skinner & Martin, 2001). A Cronbach’s of .59 was calculated, which

is not within the internal consistency. In order to make this acceptable, the attention to detail

subscale was removed (-.025), increasing the Cronbach’s to .73.

The Empathy Quotient (EQ) (Appendix G)

The EQ is a forty-item self- assessment questionnaire, which was used to measure

empathy on adults with normal intelligence (Baron-Cohen & Wheelwright, 2004). This scale

is intended to measure how easily you are able to pick up the feelings of other people and

how strongly you are affected by other people’s feelings. This instrument was measured on a

4 point Likert scale ranging from “strongly disagree” (1) to “strongly agree” (4). The EQ

consists of 3 subscales: 1) Cognitive Empathy (CE) (e.g. ‘I can tune into how someone else

feels rapidly and intuitively’), 2) Emotional Reactivity (ER) (e.g. ‘seeing other people cry

does not really upset me’) and Social Skills (SS) (e.g. ‘ I find it hard to know what to do in a

social situation’. Participants were asked to score each item to their agreement for example

‘Friendships and relationships are just too difficult’ or ‘It is hard for me to see why some

things upset people so much. The EQ scores are 2, 1 or 0 depending on the statement and the

answer provided. A Cronbach’s of .62 was established, which is within the moderate

range. Factors were not removed, as this would lower the reliability and validity. However

the EQ has shown acceptable internal consistency, convergent validity and concurrent

validity (Preti et al., 2011; Baron-Cohen & Wheelwright, 2004). Therefore the Cronbach’s

.62 was accepted.

15


Toronto Alexithymia Scale-20 (TAS-20) (Appendix H)

The TAS-20 is a instrument designed to measure deficits in emotion processing in

adults (Bagby, Parker & Taylor, 1994). It is a twenty-item self-report questionnaire that looks

into the deficits in communication, processing in cognitive ways and identification, key

characteristics associated with alexithymia (Taylor, 1995). Scores are answered across a five-

point Likert scale, ranging from strongly disagree (1) to strongly agree (5). The TAS-20

consists of three subscales; 1) Difficulty Identifying Feelings (F1), 2) Difficulty Describing

Feelings (F2), and 3) Externally -Orientated Thinking (F3). Factor 1 (DIF) consists of seven

items, looking at being able to identify feelings (e.g., ‘ When I am upset, I don’t know if I am

sad, frightened, or angry’). Factor 2 (DDF) contains of five items looking at the ability to

involve other people in describing their feelings (e.g., ‘ People tell me to describe my feelings

more’). Finally, factor 3 (EOT) involves eight items, looking into thinking which is externally

oriented (e.g., ‘ I prefer talking to people about their daily activities rather than their

feelings’). The TAS-20 has demonstrated strong reliability across several researches (= .71

to . 81) with acceptable concurrent and construct validity and (Parker, Taylor & Bagby, 2003;

Hale, 2012). A Cronbach’s alpha of .58 was resulted, which is not within in the internal

consistency of reliability. After the removal of Factor 3 (= .16), the internal consistency

became .74, which is acceptable.

Procedure

16


The current study was an online-based study, with all the required materials- consent

form, demographics, and measureable questionnaires and debrief form- presented on an

online platform called Qualtrics®, (Qualtrics Lab Inc., Provo, UT). Participants were

required to confirm that they were over the age of 18 and were required to agree to the

consent form. They were asked to provide a 6-digit participant ID that would be used to

identify each participant and be used if the participants wanted to withdraw from the study.

Before the questionnaires were presented, respondents were required to complete a

demographic questionnaire, which asked them general questions (e.g. gender, ethnicity, year

of study etc.). Participants were presented to each questionnaire and were required to provide

one answer for each statement on the Likert scale. Once all the questions were answered and

submitted, a debrief form was presented, outling the true nature of the study and information

regarding any additional support they may require was provided. The questionnaires were

counterbalanced to avoid order effect.

Results

17


Mean, standard deviations and range scores of the total scores and subscale scores of

each questionnaire (AQ, TAS-20 and EQ) are presented in table 1.

Table 1- Showing the mean, standard deviation and range of the total score and subscale scores.

N=100 Mean (SD) Range

AQ Total Score a 17.04 (6.35) 3.00- 32.00AQ SS a1 2.39 (2.16) .00-8.00AQ AS a2 4.76 (2.12) .00- 10.00AQ AD a3 5.25 (2.32) .00-10.00AQ C a4 2.50 (1.97) .00- 8.00AQ I a5 2.14 (1.73) .00- 7.00

EQ Total Score b 44.73 (11.59) .00- 70.00

EQ CE b1 13.12 (4.60) .00- 22.00EQ ER b2 13.83 (4.34) .00- 22.00EQ SS b3 5.60 (2.40) .00- 11.00

TAS- 20 Total Score c 48.64 (10.49) 27.00- 80.00

TAS F1 c1 17.00 (6.05) 7.00- 30.00TAS F2 c2 13.26 (4.21) 5.00- 24.00TAS F3 c3 18.38 (3.60) 9.00- 27.00

Notes: N= number of participants

aAdult Autism Spectrum Quotient (AQ) (Baron-Cohen, Wheelwright, Skinner, Martin & Clubley,1991)

a1 AQ Social Skills; a2 AQ Attention Switching; a3 AQ Attention to Detail; a4 AQ Communication; a5 AQ Imagination,

b Empathy Quotient (EQ) (Baron-Cohen & Wheelwright, 2004)b1 EQ Cognitive Empathy; b2 EQ Emotional Reactivity; b3EQ Social Skills

c Toronto Alexithymia Scale- 20 (TAS-20) (Bagby Parker & Taylor, 1994) c1 TAS- 20 Difficulty Identifying Feelings; c2 TAS- 20 Difficulty Describing Feelings; c3 TAS-20 Externally- Orientated Thinking

Skewness and Kurtosis

18


The skewness value was looked at to test for normality and the kurtosis value was

looked at to test for homogeneity of variance. The value given for skewness was .50 for the

Autistic Quotient, -.81 for the Empathy Quotient and .36 for the TAS-20, which are within

the acceptable range. The kurtosis for the Autistic Quotient was .48, 1.47 for the Empathy

Quotient and -.051 for the TAS-20, which are all within the acceptable range. The data

should therefore be treated as normally distributed for each variable. The data was measured

at an interval level, meaning that the data met the parametric assumptions and therefore a

parametric Pearson’s Product Moment Correlation was used to determine the relationship

between the variables.

It needs to be noted that the attention to detail (AD) subscale from the Adult Autism

Spectrum Quotient and factor 3 (externally orientated thinking) from the Toronto

Alexithymia Scale-20 was removed, therefore it was not analysed and will not be discussed.

Correlation analysis

A correlational analysis was conducted to explore the relationship between autistic

traits, alexithymia and empathy. Further correlation analyses were conducted on the subscales

of each measure, as shown in table 2.

To test the hypothesis on the relationship between autistic traits and empathy, a

Pearson’s Correlation was carried out on the AQ total scores and the EQ total scores. This

correlation revealed a significant negative relationship between autistic traits and empathy

19


from a correlational coefficient, r= -.46, p<. 01. This therefore suggests that higher levels of

autistic traits relates to lower empathy, as shown in figure 1.

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 350

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

Autistic Quotient Total Score

Em

pat

hy

Qu

otie

nt

Tot

al S

core

Figure 1-A scatterplot graph showing a negative relationship between autistic traits and empathy.

More specifically, a significant negative correlation was found between the AQ social

skills subscale and the cognitive empathy subscale from the EQ, r=-.22, p<. 05 and a negative

correlation was established between the AQ social skills subscale and the EQ emotional

reactivity subscale, r= -.23, p<. 05. This suggests that an increase in poor social skills causes

impairment on the ability to describe feelings and associated those feeling to the self.

Furthermore, a significant negative correlation was established between the AQ social skills

subscale and the EQ social skills subscale, r=-.47, p<. 01.

The only significant negative correlation found for the AQ attention to switching

score in association with the EQ was with the social skill subscale, r=-37, p< .01. A Pearson’s

correlations between the AQ communication subscale and the EQ cognitive empathy

20


subscale revealed a negative relationship, r = -.43, p< .01. This therefore suggests that as the

deficit in communicating increased, it caused a decrease impact on the recognising the

thoughts and feelings of others. Communication was also negatively correlated with EQ’s

emotional reactivity r=-.40, p<. 01 and EQ’s social skills r=-.41, p<. 01. Correlations were

carried out on the AQ imagination subscale. AQ imagination was significantly negatively

correlated with EQ subscale of cognitive empathy, r= -.37, p< .01. Imagination was also

negatively correlated with AQ subscale emotive reactivity, r=. 45, p< .01 and negatively

correlated with EQ social skills subscale, r= -.23, p< .05.

A second correlation was carried and analysed to test the hypothesis on the

relationship between autistic traits and alexithymia. This analysis revealed a significant

positive relationship between autistic traits and alexithymia, r= .35, p< .01 as expected. This

implies that higher levels of autistic traits relate to higher levels of alexithymia, as shown in

figure 2.

0 10 20 30 4020

30

40

50

60

70

80

AQ Total Scores

TA

S- 2

0 T

otal

Sco

res

Figure 2- A scatterplot graph showing the positive relationship between the autistic quotient scale and the TAS-20 scale.

21


Looking more specifically into the subscales, the social skills subscale from the AQ

correlated a positive correlation with factor 1 from the TAS- 20, r=. 21, p<. 05 and positively

correlated with factor 2 of the TAS-20, r=. 28, p<. 01. The attention to switching subscale

positively correlated with factor 1 r= .37 and factor 2 from the TAS-20, r=. 33, p<. 01. The

communication subscale from the AQ was significantly correlated with factor 1 of the TAS-

20, r=. 23, p<. 05 and factor 2 of the TAS-20, r= .36, p<. 01. A further significant correlation

was established between the AQ imagination subscale and factor 1 subscale of the TAS-20,

r=. 25, p<. 05. The imagination subscale also correlated positively with the factor 2 subscale,

r= .39, p<. 01.

Furthermore, a Pearson’s correlation was carried to test the hypothesis on the

relationship between alexithymia and empathy. The correlation revealed a significant

negative correlation between empathy and alexithymia, r= -.37, p< .01. This finding implies

that as levels of alexithymia increased, a decrease in empathy was experienced as shown in

figure 3.

0 20 40 6020

30

40

50

60

70

80

Chart Title

Empathy Quotient Total Score

TA

S 2

0 T

otal

Sco

re

Figure 3- A scatterplot graph showing a negative correlation between the empathy quotient total score and the TAS- 20 total score.

22


Final correlations were carried out on the subscales from the EQ and the TAS-20. A

significant negative correlation was established between the EQ emotional reactivity subscale

and factor 1 from the TAS-20, r= -.20, p< .05. Emotional reactivity also had a negative

relationship with factor 2 r=-.23, p<. 05. EQ social skill subscale was correlated negatively

with the factor 1 of TAS-20, r= -.38, p< .01 and also negatively correlated with factor 2 of the

same scale, r=-.26, p< .01. No correlations were found between the cognitive empathy

subscale from the EQ and any of the factors from the TAS-20 questionnaire.

23


Table 2- Showing the Pearson’s correlations between each subscale from the AQ, TAS-20 and EQ.

Note: *p<. 05 **p<. 01 ***p<. 001 (two –tailed)

24

AQ SS

AQ AS

AQ AD

AQ C

AQ I TAS F1

TAS F2

TAS F3

EQ CE

EQ ER

EQ SS

AQ SS

-- .424**

-.008

.580**

.304**

.207*

.277**

.052 -.220*

-.228*

-.471**

AQ AS

.424**

-- -.069

.393**

.215*

.371**

.329**

-.210*

-.101 -.100

-.371**

AQ AD

-.008

-.069 -- -.056

.072**

-.049

.020 -.177

.118 -.059

.053

AQ C

.580**

.393**

-.056

-- .532 .228*

.364**

.131 -.431**

-.398**

-.409**

AQ I

.304**

.215**

.072

.532**

-- .249*

.384**

.262**

-.386**

-.453**

-.230*

TAS F1

.207*

.371**

-.049

.228*

.249*

-- .631**

.142 -.181 -.202*

-.377**

TAS F2

.277**

.329**

.020

.364**

.384**

.631**

-- .151 -.149 -.232*

-261**

TAS F3

.052

-210*

-.177

.131 .262**

.142 .151 -- -.236*

-.304**

-.134

EQ CE

-.220*

-.101 .118

-.431**

-.386**

-.181

-.149 -.236*

-- .436**

.339*

EQ ER

-.228*

-.100 -.059

-.398**

-.453**

-.202*

-.232*

-.304**

.436**

-- .360**

EQ SS

-.471**

-.371**

.053

-.409**

-.230*

-.377**

-.261**

-.134

.339*

.360**

--

EMOTION RECOGNITION IN SOCIAL UNDERSTANDING

Multiple Regression Analysis- Mediation

Figure 4- Alexithymia presented as a possible mediator between autistic traits and empathy. Standardised values (β-, p- and R2) are presented. Values associated with hypothesis 4 (the mediator alongside the predictor in the analysis of the outcome variable) are presented in brackets.

Multiple Regression Analysis (Mediation)

A multiple regression analysis was carried out to examine a possible mediation

(alexithymia) between autistic traits and empathy relationship. This was investigated using

the procedure proposed by Baron and Kenny (1986). For a mediator variable to be

considered, the following criteria needs to be met; a) the predictor significantly affects the

change in the mediator (i.e., Path from autistic traits to alexithymia); b) a significant

relationship is needed between the mediator and the outcome variable (i.e., Path alexithymia

to empathy); c) change in levels of the predictor variable significantly changes the outcome

(i.e., the total effect on autistic traits and empathy is significant); and d) the previous

β= .35, p<. 001,R2= .12

β= -.47, p<. 001, R2= .20(β=-.38, p<. 001, R2= .26)

EmpathyAutistic Traits

Alexithymia

25


significant correlation between the predictor variable and outcome becomes no longer

significant when the previous paths are controlled for, with a mediation be the strongest when

the predictor variable to outcome variable path is zero.

Referring to figure 4, criterion a) was met as there was a significant positive

relationship between autistic traits levels and alexithymia, β= .35, p< .001, R2=. 12. Criterion

b) was also met, with a significant negative relationship between alexithymia and empathy,

β=-.37, p < .001, R2=. 14. Also, criterion c) was satisfied as a significant positive correlation

was established between autistic traits and empathy, β=-.47, p< .001, R2=. 20. However,

criterion d) was not met in this study as the relationship between autistic traits and empathy

remained significant once the mediator was controlled for β= -38, p<. 001, R2= .26, therefore

implying that the alexithymia mediator cannot be accepted and that a mediation effect did not

occur between autistic traits and empathy.

Discussion

In the present study, the aim was to establish and evaluate the relationship between

autistic traits, empathy and alexithymia. More specifically, the current study wanted to look

further at the contribution alexithymia has on affecting emotion understanding by acting as a

potential mediator in the relationship. The findings of this study revealed significant

correlations between the variables, supporting three hypotheses, however the mediation

hypothesis regarding alexithymia was not supported. Subscale correlations were also

conducted to see specifically where the strongest significant correlations occurred.

In this study, it was hypothesised that there will be a decrease in the level of empathy

expressed when there is an increase in the level of autistic traits. From the results and analysis

26


conducted, this hypothesis was supported as the correlational analysis revealed a significant

negative correlation between autistic traits and empathy; therefore ‘the alexithymia

hypothesis’ (Bird & Cook, 2013) was supported. Results from previous research measuring

traits associated with ASD and empathy were replicated, illustrating that regardless of being

diagnosed with ASD, those reporting higher autistic traits are reported to have lower empathy

levels, with the literature being consistent (Baron-Cohen, 2002; Smith, 2009; Bons et al,

2013). This finding, like previous literature, supports the idea that autistic traits across the

continuum are associated with deficits in social communication and social interaction, with

empathy being a key component within this. This further indicates that those individuals that

express a higher level of autistic traits find it more difficult to attribute and understand the

emotions of others and struggle to know how these emotions affects them.

When correlating the autistic trait subscales with the empathy subscales, significant

correlations were established through all. Unsurprisingly, the strongest negative correlation

was recognised in poor social skills associated with autistic traits and social skills in empathy.

Previous research literature has supported this with results focusing on parents with ASD

children who have reported to articulate more social difficulties e.g. unsocial and limited

feeling behaviours (Piven et al, 1997; Wolff et al, 1988). This has also been illustrated on the

general population with research finding showing that typically developing individuals’

express difficulties associated with social interaction (Autsin, 2005; Hurst et al, 2007). From

the current findings and previous literature, it is evident that deficits in social communication

and social interaction is present in the general population, suggesting that this deficit could

potentially explain the difficulties in verbal and non-verbal communication and restriction on

expressing feelings, which is associated with empathy.

27


It was also hypothesised that an increase in autistic traits would be associated with an

increase of alexithymia related traits. As expected, the results from this study supported this

hypothesis, with the Pearson’s correlation revealing a positive correlation between the two.

Previous literature looking into this relationship between alexithymia and traits associated

with autism have illustrated consistent finding to that of the current study. Research has

established that parents of autistic individuals – the general population- scored higher on

alexithymia measurements compared to a control group (Hughes, 2009; Szatmari, et al,

2008). Further research done has illustrated this more specifically in an ASD sample, with a

milder form of autism –Asperger’s Syndrome (AS)- (Tani et al, 2003) and high functioning

autistics (Hill et al, 2004) both scoring higher on the alexithymia measurement. This

therefore implies that alexithymia is a construct that is present across the autistic continuum,

in both ASD individuals and the general population. Furthermore, this result provides the

foundation that alexithymia, not autism, explains the deficits in empathy, which needs to be

taken into consideration.

Further subscale correlations were conducted to establish where specifically in the

general population sample autistic traits were associated with trait alexithymia. Interestingly,

the strongest positive correlation of significance was between the lack of imagination

subscale associated with autistic traits and the difficulty to describe feelings, which is linked

with alexithymia. From this, it can be suggested that individuals with a poorer imagination

are unable to form an image regarding others feelings, leading to the inability to describe the

feelings of others. This has been supported by previous research done by Taylor et al (1999),

which associated alexithymia traits to emotional distress and impaired imagination. From this

study and previous research it is evident that the traits associated with ASD and alexithymia

traits have a crossover effect and overlap.

28


It was further hypothesised that there would be a significant negative relationship

between alexithymia and empathy. This hypothesis was supported in this study as the

correlation analysis revealed that higher levels of alexithymia traits were associated to lower

levels of empathy. Research from previous studies assessing alexithymia to explain the

deficit in empathy has supported this hypothesis with studies focusing on neurobiological

results, illustrating that affective empathy impairment is due to alexithymia and is associated

with the activation in the anterior insula. (Silani et al., 2009; Allen, et al., 2013). More recent

literature has stated that similar relationships between alexithymia and empathy have been

resulted in ASD individuals and typically developing adults (Bird et al, 2013; Heaton et al,

2012), providing support to the results established in the current study. With this outcome,

the ‘shared-network hypothesis’ (Singer et al, 2009) can be accepted, as there is possibility

that the participants, especially near the higher end of the autistic trait continuum, were prone

to using the same neural pathways, causing difficulties in their emotion understanding. This

outcome suggests that alexithymia is a possible construct that can impact the empathy levels

expressed in the general population. Furthermore, when considering the ASD population, this

could explain that alexithymia is reason for the deficits in empathy recognition and

understanding.

When analysing the subscale correlations between alexithymia traits and empathy, a

strong significant correlation was established between the difficulties in identifying feelings

(alexithymia) and poor social skills (empathy). Previous research has supported this finding

as it has been reported that those with increase levels of alexithymia traits are more like to

express distance in social functioning and become more detached from other people (Vaheule

et al, 2007). This is a crucial result as it implies that alexithymia traits could potentially be a

29


root cause in the difficulties experienced in social situations for both ASD individuals and

those in the general population.

Overall, the correlational analysis findings between autistic traits, alexithymia traits

and empathy illustrate strong evidence that three variables link one another, and to an extent,

the deficits associated with them overlap. These findings are a significant step to addressing

inconsistent literature on the outcome associated with autistic traits and empathy. When

previous research looked at the findings relating autistic traits to deficits in empathy, varying

results were reported (Deschamps et al, 2014; Sigman et al, 1992). These inconsistencies

could be due to the group sample that was used in the research, with some participants having

higher alexithymia traits in ASD samples compared to non-ASD samples. Due to the high

occurrence of alexithymia in the ASD population compared to the non-ASD population,

samples using ASD would possess more alexithymic traits. Furthermore, the strong

correlation between alexithymia traits and autistic traits is a significant step in providing a

foundation that alexithymia could coincide with autistic traits as a construct that can perhaps

explain the deficits experienced in ASD.

A key-underlying problem with the results presented is the findings are based on

correlations, raising an issue on the cause and effect of the results. Even though the results

showed that there was association between the two variables, be it a positive correlation or a

negative correlation, there is no control over whether the outcome variable could cause the

predictor variable. For example, a negative correlation was established between autistic traits

and empathy. However, it is unknown whether lower levels of empathy from beforehand

resulted into the participant reporting more increase levels of autistic traits.

30


A final and primary aim of this study was to explore the possibility that a mediator

could explain the relationship between autistic traits relating to lower empathy. The

hypothesis proposed that alexithymia, a sub-clinical independent construct, would act as a

mediator between autistic traits and empathy, providing a reason on why deficits in empathy

are reported. However, following a multiple regression analysis, the findings revealed that

alexithymia did not mediate the relationship between autistic traits and empathy when the

variable was controlled for therefore the hypothesis was not supported. This finding was

unexpected and goes against the previous research regarding this, which established that there

was a possibility alexithymia was a mediator when testing expression-attribution in ASD

individuals (Cook et al, 2013). Due to the lack of previous research analysing alexithymia as

a mediator in this relationship and the inconsistency of results, no concrete conclusion should

be made regarding the role alexithymia plays when regarding deficits in empathy.

Even though the current study was able to establish a correlation between autistic

traits and alexithymia traits in a healthy population sample, the mediation hypothesis had to

be rejected, as the study found that alexithymia did not have a mediating effect. This finding,

to some extent, supports previous literature as the nature of alexithymia as a mediator has

never been fully supported (Aaron et al, 2015; Lockwood et al, 2013). One possible reason

this mediating effect may not have occurred could be due to the population used in the study.

As the sample consisted of individuals of the general population, the severity levels of

autistic traits is much milder compared to individuals with autism, therefore the empathy

difficulties they reported may not be considered as severe deficits. The fact that alexithymia

did not explain the reduced empathy in ASD traits is interesting as previous recent research

has suggested that alexithymia traits does predict the empathy processing deficits in ASD

(Bird & Cook, 2013).

31


More general limitations of this study are the use of self-report questionnaires to

measure autistic traits, empathy and alexithymia traits. One issue with using such measures

the lack of control the researcher has on a providing answer that is adherence to the study.

For example when analysing the raw data, several participants’ scores were not true the

statements provided, causing inconsistencies with the rest of data and this therefore could

potentially be the reason in the low significant findings found. Also, some participants may

find it difficult to judge their own empathy, so future research needs to consider using

measures of empathy that allows the participants to express themselves e.g. interviews. This

also goes for alexithymia, as questionnaire measures and interviews are only used to measure

alexithymia, however with the reduced insight into ASD traits across the continuum, these

measures are seem to be problematic. Finally, with the removal of the attention to detail

subscale from the AQ and the removal of factor 3 from the TAS-20, the results from these

scales was not included in the final analysis. This raises questions on the reliability of the

questionnaires and results provided. Also, the participants were not pre-screened for autism

and alexithymia like traits, which needs to be done in the future research.

The current research has addressed several issues that were reported in previous

literature. The inconsistency in results was a concern in previous research however the

current study addressed those inconsistencies and established that empathy deficits are

associated with autistic traits across the continuum. By measuring alexithymia traits, the

current study has taken in consideration that sub-clinical constructs need to be considered

when looking at deficits associated with autism and autistic traits. Results have shown that

higher levels of alexithymia traits are associated with increase autistic traits and lower

empathy. This therefore provides a solid foundation that alexithymia could be the reason for

32


the social communication and social interaction deficits elevated in autistic traits, providing

implications in the attempt to understand empathetic deficits and strong external validity.

More importantly, the current research has illustrated that traits and deficits that are primarily

associated with ASD’s can be present in the general population, therefore supporting the idea

that autistic traits are presented across the continuum and are distributed. Even though an

ASD sample was not used in this experiment, the findings can to an extent be applied to help

with the diagnosis of the condition and be used to implement interventions. For example,

Ogrodniczuk, Sochting, Piper and Joyce (2012) found that following a 15-week intervention,

outpatient psychiatric patients showed improvement in alexithymia traits such as

interpersonal symptoms, and this maintained for over 3 months in a follow up. Such intensive

interventions could possible help the ASD population.

With the present and previous findings and the increase incidence of alexithymia in

ASD reported in preceding research, consideration needs to be taken in applying alexithymia

in the clinical and theoretical foundation. The results added to the vast amount of literature

may conclude that co-occurring alexithymia is the reason behind the emotion understanding

impairments associated with autism and autistic traits. Further research needs to be conducted

on the role alexithymia has on empathetic deficits, preferable using more suitable

methodology, as this has essential implications of intervention and could possibly result in

revising the diagnostic criteria for ASD. Future research needs to be conducted on this

interesting sub-clinical construct, by opting to use a matching ASD group, control group with

alexithymia and the general population and explore other sub-groups that could impact

deficits associated with ASD. A longitudinal study could also be considered to see how

across time, from early childhood to adulthood, higher levels of alexithymia traits could

33


affect individual’s empathy in both the typically developing population, and more crucially in

the ASD population.

Conclusion

The current study established significant correlations between autistic traits, empathy

and alexithymia, in a typically developing healthy population. This finding illustrated that

empathy is a deficit associated with increase autistic levels, addressing inconsistent finding in

the previous literature. More importantly, the correlations revealed that alexithymia could be

co-occurring factor in explaining the empathetic deficits. Results found that alexithymia did

not act as mediator between the autistic trait and empathy relationship. As the population was

a general population sample, the continuum approach can be accepted. This result is

consistent with previous findings from the ASD literature and the findings can be applied to

the ASD population, allowing clinical interventions to be placed and providing a foundation

that alexithymia is a contributor to deficits in empathy.

34


References

Aaron, R.V., Benson, T.L., & Park, S. (2015). Investigating the role of alexithymia on

the empathic deficits found in schizotypy and autism spectrum traits. Personality

and Individual Differences, 77, 215-220.

Adolph, R., Sears, L., & Piven, J. (2001). Abnormal processing of social information

from faces in autism. Journal of cognitive neuroscience, 13, 232-240.

Allen, R., Davis, R., & Hill, E. (2013). The effects of autism and alexithymia on the

physiological and verbal responsiveness to music. Journal of autism and

developmental Psychological Medicine, 42, 2453-2459.

Allison, C., Auyeung, B., & Baron-Cohen, S. (2012). Toward brief ‘red flags’ for

autism screening: the short autism spectrum quotient and the short quantitative

checklist in 1,000 cases and 3,000 cases and 3,000 controls. Journal of American

Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, 51, 202-212.

American Psychiatric Association. (2013). Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental

Health (5th Ed). Washington, DC: American Psychiatric Publishing

Ashwin, C., Chapman, E., Colle, L., & Baron-Cohen, S. (2006). Impaired recognition

of negative basic emotions in autism: A test of the amygdala theory. Social

neuroscience, 1, 349-363.

35


Austin, E. J. (2005). ‘Personality Correlates of the Broader Autism Phenotypes

Assessed by the Autism-Spectrum Quotient (AQ)’. Personality and Individual

Differences, 43, 1938-1949.

Bagby, R. M., Parker, J. D., & Taylor, G. J. (1994). The twenty-item Toronto

Alexithymia Scale-I. Item selection and cross-validation of the factor structure.

Journal of psychosomatic research, 38, 23-32.

Bailey, A., Le Couteur, A., Gottesman, I., Bolton, P., Simonoff, E., Yuzda, E., &

Rutter, M. (1995). Autism as a strongly genetic disorder: evidence from a British

twin study. Psychological Medicine, 25, 63-77.

Bal, E., Harden, E., Lamb, D., Van Hecke, A.V., Denver, J.W., & Porges, S.W. (2010).

Emotion recognition in children with autism spectrum disorders: Relations to eye

gaze and autonomic states. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 40,

358-370.

Baron-Cohen, S. (1991). Precursors to a theory of mind, Attention in others. In A

Whitten (Ed.), Natural theories of mind. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.

Baron-Cohen, S. (1995). Mindblindness: An essay on autism and theory of mind.

Boston: MIT Press/ Bradford Books.

Baron-Cohen, S. (2002). The extreme male brain theory of autism. Trends in cognitive

sciences, 6, 248-254.

36


Baron-Cohen, S., Spitz, A., & Cross, P. (1993). Do children with autism recognise

surprise? A research note. Cognition & Emotion, 7, 507-516.

Baron-Cohen, S., & Wheelwright, S. (2004). The empathy quotient: an investigation of

adults with Asperger’s syndrome or high functioning autism, and normal sex

differences. Journal of autism and developmental disorders, 34, 163-175.

Baron-Cohen, S., Wheelwright, S., Skinner, R., Martin, J., & Clubley, E. (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, 34. 163-175.

Baron, R. M., & Kenny, D. A. (1986). The moderator-mediator variable distinction in

social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical

considerations. Journal of personality and social psychology, 51, 1173.

Bertnoz, S., & Hill, E. L., (2005). The validity of using self-reports to assess emotion

regulation abilities in adults with autism spectrum disorder. European Psychiatry,

20, 291-298.

Berthoz, S., Lanlanne, C., Crane, L., & Hill, E.L. (2013). Investigating emotional

impairments in adults with autism spectrum disorders and the broader autism

phenotype. Psychiatry research, 208, 257-264.

37


Bird, G., & Cook, R. (2013). Mixed emotions: the contribution of alexithymia to the

emotional symptoms of autism. Translational psychiatry, 3, 285.

Bird, G., Press, C., & Richardson, D.C. (2011). The role of alexithymia in reduced eye-

fixation in autism spectrum conditions. Journal of autism and developmental

disorders, 41, 1556-1564.

Bird, G., Silani, G., Brindley, R., White, S., Frith, U., & Singer, T. (2010). Empathic

brain responses in insula are modulated by levels of alexithymia but not autism.

Brain, 133, 291-298.

Björkqvist, K., Österman, K., & Kaukiainen, A. (2000). Social intelligence- empathy=

aggression?. Aggression and violent behaviour, 5, 191-200.

Blair, R. J. R. (2005). Responding to the emotions of others: dissociating forms of

empathy through the study if atypical and psychiatric populations. Consciousness

and cognition, 14, 698-718.

Blair, R.J. (1995). A cognitive developmental approach to morality: Investigating the

psychopath. Cognition, 57, 1-29.

Bons, D., van den Broek, E., Scheeper, F., Herpers, P., Rommelse, N., & Buitelaaar,

J.K. (2013). Motor, emotional, and cognitive empathy in children and adolescents

with autism spectrum disorder and conduct disorder. Journal of abnormal child

psychology, 41, 425-443.

38


Capps, L., Yirmiya, N., & Sigman, M. (1992). Understanding of simple and complex

emotions in non-retarded children with autism. Journal of Child Psychology and

Psychiatry, 33, 1169-1182.

Castelli, F. (2005). Understanding emotions from standardized facial expressions in

autism and normal development. Autism, 9, 428-449.

Constantino, J.N., & Todd, R.D. (2003). Autistic Traits in the General Population: A

twin study. Arch Gen Psychiatry, 60, 524- 530.

Cook, R., Brewer, R., Shah, P., & Bird, G. (2013). Alexithymia, not autism, predicts

poor recognition of emotion facial expressions. Psychological science, 24, 723,

732.

de Vignemont, F., & Singer, T. (2006). The empathic brain: how, when and why?

Trends in cognitive sciences, 10, 435-441.

Decety, J., & Lamm, C. (2006). Human empathy through the lens of social

neuroscience. The Scientific World Journal, 6, 1146-1163.

Deschamps, P. K. H., Been, M., & Matthy, W. (2014). “Empathy and empathy induced

prosocial behaviour in 6-and 7-year olds with autism spectrum disorder”. Journal

of autism and developmental disorders, 44, 1749-1758.

39


Dziobek, I., Rogers, K., Fleck, S., Bahnemann, M., Heekeren, H. R., Wolf, O. T., &

Convit, A. (2008). Dissociation of cognitive and emotional empathy in adults

with Asperger syndrome using the Multifaceted Empathy Test (MET). Journal of

autism and development disorders, 38, 464-473.

Eisenberg, N. (2000). Emotion, regulation and moral development. Annual review of

psychology, 51. 665-697

Eisenberg, N., & Miller, P.A. (1987). The relation of empathy to prosocial and related

behaviours. Psychological bulletin, 10, 91.

Frith, U. (1989). Autism: Explaining the enigma. Oxford: Blackwell.

Geer, J.H., Estupinan, L.A., & Manguno-Mire, G.M. (2000). Empathy, social skills,

and other relevant cognitive processes in rapists and child molesters. Aggression

and Violent Behaviour, 5, 99-126.

Gleichgerrch, E., Torralva, T., Rattazzi, A., Marenco, V., Roca, M., & Manes, F.

(2013). Selective impairment of cognitive empathy for moral judgement in adults

with high functioning autism. Social cognitive and affective neuroscience, 8, 780-

788

Gökçen, E., Petrides, K.V., Hudry, K., Frederickson, N., & Smillie, L.D. (2014). Sub-

threshold autism traits: The role of trait emotional intelligence and cognitive

flexibility. British Journal of Psychology, 105, 187-199.

40


Golan, O., & Baron-Cohen, S. (2006). Systemizing empathy: Teaching adults with

Asperger Syndrome or high-functioning autism to recognize complex emotions

using interactive multimedia. Development and Psychopathology, 18, 591-617.

Hadjikhani, N., Zürcher, N. R., Rogier, O., Hippolyte, L., Lemonnier, E., Ruest, T., …

& Prkachin, K.M. (2014). Emotional contagion for pain is intact in autism

spectrum disorders. Translational psychiatry, 4, 343.

Harms, M.B., Martin, A., & Wallace, G.L. (2010). Facial emotion recognition in autism

spectrum disorders: a review of behavioural and neuroimaging studies.

Neuropsychology review, 20, 290-322.

Heaton, P., Reichenbacher, L., Sauter, D., Allen, R., Scott, S., & Hill, E. (2012).

Measuring the effects of alexithymia on perception of emotional vocalizations in

autistic spectrum disorder and typical development. Psychological medicine, 25,

63-77.

Heerey, E. A., Keltner, D., & Capps, L.M. (2003). Making sense of self-conscious

emotion: linking theory of mind and emotion in children with autism. Emotion, 3,

394.

Hill, E., Berthoz, S., & Frith, U. (2004). Brief report: Cognitive processing of own

emotions in individuals with autistic spectrum disorder and in their relatives.

Journal of autism and developmental disorders, 3, 229-235.

Hobson, R.P. (1986). The autistic child’s appraisal of expressions of emotion: A further

study. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 27, 671-680.

41


Hobson, R. P. (1993). Autism and the development of mind. Hillside: Erlbaum.

Hughes, J. R. (2009). Update on autism: A review of 1300 reports published in 2008.

Epilepsy & Behaviour, 16, 569-589.

Hurst, R. M., Mitchell, J.T., Kimbrel, N.A., Kwapil, T.K., & Nelson-Gray, R.O. (2007).

Examination of the reliability and factor structure of the Autism Spectrum

Quotient (AQ) in a non-clinical sample. Personality and Individual Differences,

43, 224-228.

Kanner, L. (1943). Autistic disturbances of affective contact. Nervous Child, 2, 217-

250.

Lambardo, M.V., Barnes, J.L., Wheelwright, S. J., & Baron-Cohen, S. (2007). Self-

referential cognition and empathy in autism. PLoS One, 2, 883.

Lane, R.D., Sechrest, L., Riedel, R., Weldon, V., Kaszniak, A., & Schwartz, G.E.

(1996). Impaired verbal and non-verbal emotion recognition in alexithymia.

Psychosomatic Medicine, 58, 203-210.

Lockwood, P.L., Bird, G., Bridge, M., & Viding, E. (2013). Dissecting empathy: high

levels of psychotic and autistic traits are characterized by difficulties in different

social information processing domains. Frontiers in human neuroscience, 7.

42


Loveland, K.A., Tunali-Kotoski, B.E.L.G.I.N., Chen, Y. R., Oretgon, J., Pearson, D.A.,

Brelsford, K.A., & Gibbs, M.C. (1997). Emotion recognition in autism: Verbal

and nonverbal information. Development and psychopathology, 9, 579-593.

Mazefsky, C.A., & Oswald, D.P. (2007). Emotion perception in Asperger’s syndrome

and high-functioning autism: The importance of diagnostic criteria and cue and

intensity. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 37, 1086-1095.

Minio-Paluello, I., Baron-Cohen, S., Avenanti, A., Walsh, V., & Aglioti, S.M. (2009).

Absence of embodied empathy during pain observation in Asperger Syndrome.

Biological Psychiatry, 65, 55-62.

Moriguchi, Y., Decety, J., Ohnishi, T., Maeda, M., Mori, T., Nemoto, K., … &

Komaki, G. (2007). Empathy and judging other’s pain: an fMRI study of

alexithymia. Cerebral Cortex, 17, 2223-2234.

Nemiah, J.C., Freyberger, H., & Sifneos, P.E. (1976). Alexithymia: a view of the

psychosomatic process. Modern trends in psychosomatic medicine, 3, 430-439.

Ogrodniczuk, J. S., Sochting, I., Piper, W. E., & Joyce, A. S. (2012). A naturalistic

study of alexithymia among psychiatric outpatients treated in an integrated group

therapy program. Psychology and Psychotherapy: Theory, Research and

Practice, 85, 278-291

43


Parker, J. D., Taylor, G. J., & Bagby, R. M. (2003). The 20-Item Toronto Alexithymia

Scale III. Reliability and factorial validity in a community population. Journal of

psychosomatic research, 55, 269-275.

Piven, J., Palmer, P., Landa, R., Santangelo, S., Jacobi, D., & Childress, D. (1997).

Personality and language characteristics in parents from multiple-incidence

autism families. American Journal of Medical Genetics, 74, 398-411.

Piven, J., Wzorek, M., Landa, R., Lainhart, J., Bolton, P., Chase, G.A., & Folstein, S.

(1994). Personality characteristics of the parents of the autistic individuals.

Psychological Medicine, 24, 783-795.

Preti, A., Vellante, M., Baron-Cohen, S., Zucca, G., Petretto, D. R., & Masala, C.

(2011). The Empathy Quotient: A cross- cultural comparison of the Italian

version. Cognitive Neuropsychiatry, 16, 50-70.

Robinson, E.B., Koenen, K.C., McCormick, M.C., Munir, K., Hallett, V., Happé, F., …

Ronald, A. (2011). Evidence that autistic traits show the same etiology in the

general population and at the quantitative extremes (5%, 2.5%, and 1%). Archives

of General Psychiatry, 68, 1113-1121.

Rogers, K., Dziobek, I., Hassenstab, J., Wolf, O. T., Convit, A. (2007). Who cares?

Revisiting empathy in Aspergers syndrome. Journal of autism and development

disorders, 37, 709-715.

44


Salminen, J. K., Saarijärvi, S., Äärelä, E., Toikka, T., & Kauhanen, J. (1999).

Prevalence of alexithymia and its association with sociodemographic variables in

the general population of Finland. Journal of psychosomatic research, 46, 75-82.

Schwenck, C., Mergenthaler, J., Keller, K., Zech, J., Salehi, S., Taurienes, R., … &

Freitag, C.M. (2012). Empathy in children with autism and conduct disorder:

group-specific profiles and developmental aspects. Journal of Child and

Psychology and Psychiatry, 53, 651-659.

Sigman, M., Mundy, P., Sherman, T., & Ungerer, J. (1986). Social interactions of

autistic, mentally retarded and normal children and their caregivers. Journal of

Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 27, 647-656.

Sigman, M.D., Kasari, C., Kwon, J.H., & Yirmiya, N. (1992). Responses to negative

emotions of others by autistic, mentally retarded, and normal children, Child

development, 63, 796-807.

Silani, G., Bird, G., Brindley, R., Singer, T., Frith, C., & Frith, U. (2008). Levels of

emotional awareness and autism: an fMRI study. Social neuroscience, 3, 97-112.

Singer, T., & Lamm, C. (2009). The social neuroscience of empathy. Annals of the New

York Academy of Sciences, 1156, 81-96.

45


Skuse, D. H., Mandy, W. P., & Scourfield, J. (2005). Measuring autistic traits:

heritability, reliability and validity of the Social and Communication Disorders

Checklist. The British Journal of Psychiatry, 187, 568-572.

Smith, A. (2009). Emotional empathy in autism spectrum conditions: weak, intact or

heightened?. Journal of autism and developmental disorders, 39, 1747-1748.

Stewart, M. E., & Austin, E. J. (2009). The structure of the Autism-Spectrum Quotient

(AQ): Evidence from a student sample in Scotland. Personality and Individual

Differences, 47, 224-228.

Swart, M., Kortekaas, R., & Aleman, A. (2009). Dealing with feelings : characterisation

of trait alexithymia on emotion regulation strategies and cognitive-emotional

processing. PLoS One, 4, 5751.

Szatmari, P., Geogiades, S., Duku, E., Zwaigenbaum, L., Goldberg, J., & Bennett, T.

(2008). Alexithymia in parents of children with autism spectrum disorder.

Journal of autism and developmental disorders, 38, 1859-1865.

Tani, P., Lindberg, N., Joukamaa, M., Nieminen- von Wendt, T, von Wendt, L.,

Appelberg, B. O. R., … & Porkaa-Heiskanen, T. (2003). Asperger syndrome,

alexithymia and perception of sleep. Neuropsychobiology, 49, 64-70.

Tantam, D. (1992). Characterizing the fundamental social handicap in autism. Acta

Paedopsychiatrica, 55, 88-91.

46


Taylor, G. J., Bagby, R.M., & Parker, J. D. A. (1997). Disorders of affect regulation:

Alexithymia in medical and psychiatric illness. Cambridge: Cambridge University

Press.

Taylor, G. J., Bagby, R.M., & Parker, J.D. (1999). Disorders of affect regulation:

Alexithymia in medical and psychiatric illness. Cambridge: Cambridge University

Press.

Vanheule, S., Desmetm M., Meganck, R., & Bogaerts, S. (2007). Alexithymia and

interpersonal problems. Journal of clinical psychology, 63, 109-117.

Weeks, S.J., & Hobson, R.P. (1987). The salience of facial expression for autistic

children. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 28, 137-152.

Weigelt, S., Koldewyn, K., & Kanwisher, N. (2012). Face identity recognition in

autism spectrum disorders: a review of behaviour studies. Neuroscience &

Biobehavioural Reviews, 36, 1060-1084.

Wispé, L. (1986). The distinction between sympathy and empathy: To call forth a

concept, a word is needed. Journal of personality and social psychology, 50, 314.

Wolff, S., Narayan, S., & Moyes, B. (1998). Personality characteristics of parent of

autistic children: A controlled study. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry,

29, 143-153.

47


Yirmiya, N., Sigman, M. D., Kasari, C., & Mundy, P. (1992). Empathy and cognition

in high-functioning children with autism. Child development, 63, 150-1

48


APPENDIX

APPENDIX A

APPROVED ETHICS FORM

Psychology Extended Research ProjectResearch Proposal and Application for Ethical Approval

The completion of this form should not be seen as an end in itself but is a vehicle to ensure that you have gone through a process of considering the ethical implications of your research in detail and that you are able to communicate this clearly.

STUDENT/SUPERVISOR DECLARATION FORM

APPLICANT DETAILS Family Name: Khan First name(s): Mehvish Noreen Student number: 12348108 Roehampton Email: [email protected] Supervisor name: Jennifer MayerSupervisor Email Address: [email protected]

49


If student proposes to work with children or other vulnerable groups then Disclosure and Barring Service (DBS) clearance must be applied for and granted before the study starts. To apply for DBS clearance please email Tom Cottington in Admissions [email protected], and copy in the Chair of Student Ethics, Dr Catherine Gilvarry [email protected]. Supervisor declaration DBS Checks are currently being processed by University of Roehampton Y N N/A DBS Checks have been carried out by University of Roehampton Y N N/A Signature _________________________________________ Date_______________________

For studies conducted Off CampusStudent declarationI understand I need to discuss a risk assessment with my supervisor and familiarise myself with and adhere to the University of Roehampton Lone Worker Policy.Furthermore, I understand that if I will conduct my research abroad, I will need to obtain overseas research and risk assessment forms from my supervisor and attach the forms to my final ethics submission.Signature _________________________________________ Date __________________

50


Emotion understanding in Social Recognition

Empathy is a key and important ability needed to get through your daily life. It is the ability to understand how other individuals are feeling and to what they might be thinking (Baron-Cohen and Wheelwright, 2004). Autism has been combined with several other disorders in the DSM-5, which is now known as autism spectrum disorder (ASD). In the current criteria, this has been defined and diagnosed as persistent deficits in social communication and social interactions marked alongside restricted, repetitive behaviours in interests in which the symptoms would be onset in early childhood and would cause impairment in social and other important areas of current functioning, (American Psychiatric Association, 2013).

Several research studies have stated that individuals who are at the high end of the ASD or have higher levels of social recognition have difficulty when it comes to empathy and appear as though they are uncaring, (Jones, 2010). From the findings of Baron-Cohen (1995), it is true that those with Autistic Spectrum condition to have difficulties in understanding emotion recognition. However research has also have found that individuals with ASD do understand the concept of empathy. A study carried out by Yirmiya, Sigman, Kasari and Mundy (1994) found that some degree of empathy was presented. Using high- functioning children with autism, who were tested against a control group who were unaffected, they were shown several clips on videotape of children showing various emotions. They were asked after each clip which emotion was being displayed. The children with ASD did score significantly lower than the control showing some difficulties with empathy.

Even though Theory of Mind has been used to understand the emotion autistic individuals face, this research wants to look at an area that has not had much research done. Alexithymia has been defined as a deficit in understanding and processing emotions (Taylor, Bagby & Parker, 1997), known as a personality construct. Research carried out on alexithymia has found that those with high levels of alexithymia have patterns of distant social functioning and detachment from other. (Vaheule, Desmet, Meganck & Bogaerts, 2007).

The aim of this study is to understand whether alexithymia, a sub-clinical construct, can be used to explain the difficulty with emotion understanding in high levels of social recognition. Empathy will also be a factor that will be researched in this study. The present study has a

51


few hypothesis (1) high levels of social recognition results will correlate to high levels of alexithymia scores and low levels of empathy scores (2) alexithymia will be a key construct in explaining why individuals with high level of social recognition have a difficulties in understanding emotion in others (3) individuals will show some degree of empathy regardless of their level of social recognition. Questionnaires will be used to measure each of the factors which will be presented online through Qualtrics.

References

American Psychiatric Association (2013). Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (Fifth ed.). Arlington, American Psychiatric Publishing.

Baron-Cohen, S. (1995). Mindblindness: An essay on autism and theory of mind. Boston: MIT Press, Bradford Books.

Baron-Cohen, S. & Wheelwright, S. (2004). The Empathy Quotient: An Investigation of Adults with Asperger Syndrome or High Functioning Autism, and Normal Sex Differences. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorder, 34, 163-175.

Jones, A. P., Happé, F. G., Gilbert, F., Burnett, S., & Viding, E. (2010). Feeling, caring, knowing: different types of empathy deficit in boys with psychopathic tendencies and autism spectrum disorder. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 51,1188-1197.

`

Taylor, G. J., Bagby, R. M., & Parker, J. D. A. (1997). Disorders of affect regulation: Alexithymia in medical and psychiatric illness. New York: Cambridge University Press.

Vanheule, S., Desmet, M., Meganck, R., & Bogaerts, S. (2007). Alexithymia and interpersonal problems. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 63, 109–117.

Yirmiya, N., Sigman, M. D., Kasari, C., & Mundy, P. (1992). Empathy and cognition in high-functioning children with autism. Child Development, 63, 150–160.

QuestionnairesThe Adult Autism Spectrum Quotient (AQ) - Baron-Cohen (2001)

The AQ is a fifty item questionnaire which covers the five main domains associated with autism spectrum: social skills, communication skills, imagination, attention to detail and attention to change.

The Empathy Quotient (EQ) - Baron-Cohen (2004)

The EQ is a self-assessment questionnaire which measures empathy. It consists of forty items looking at cognitive empathy, emotional reactivity and social skills.

Toronto Alexithymia Scale (TAS-20) – Bagby (1994).

The TAS-20 is a twenty item scale measuring levels of alexithymia. It measures the three key areas of alexithymia; difficulty in describing feelings, difficulty in identifying feelings and externally-orientated thinking.

References

52


S. Baron-Cohen, S. Wheelwright, R. Skinner, J. Martin and 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 31:5-17.

Baron-Cohen, S; Wheelwright, S (2004). "The Empathy Quotient: An Investigation Of Adults With Asperger Syndrome Or High Functioning Autism, And Normal Sex Differences". Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders 34 (2): 163–175.

Bagby R.M., Parker, J.D.A., & Taylor, G.J. (1994a). The Twenty-Item Toronto Alexithymia Scale -- I. Item selection and cross-validation of the factor structure. Journal of Psychosomatic Research, 38, 23-32.

Recruitment of Participants SONA, Online (Facebook, Twitter, email, etc.)Written or verbal information for my recruitment

SONAThis research project will look at the relationship between social recognition and emotion understanding. You will be required to fill out three questionnaires and demographics questionnaire. This is an online study and will take no longer than 30 minutes. For full completion, you will be awarded 0.5 SONA credits. If you are interested, please click the link below to begin the study.

OnlineFor my research project, I will be looking at the relationship between social recognition and emotion understanding. You will be required to fill out a demographics questionnaire before being presented with three questionnaires that will measure this. This is an online study presented via Qualtrics. The study should not take any longer than 30 minutes to complete. Participants must be over the age of 18 to complete this study. I would really appreciate if you could take part in this study. If you are interested, please click on the following link which will direct you straight to the study.

Project supervisor: Dr Jennifer MayerThank you

The study will be conductedOnline

Participant sampleFor this project, the aim is to test 100 participants between the ages of 18-50. The participants will involve both males and females from various backgrounds. Participants will be recruited through SONA and social media. This will be a voluntary sample.

Description of the key information participants will be given about my study in the informed consent form This research will be undertaken under the supervision of Dr Jennifer Mayer in the Department of Psychology in Roehampton University. It has been approved by the Ethics Committee.

This research aims to investigate the possible relationship between social recognition and

53


emotion understanding using questionnaires. In this study, you will be given three questionnaires and demographics questionnaire which will be presented online through Qualtrics. All the research information will be collected anonymously and used for research purposes only. The study will take no more than thirty minutes to complete and upon completion, you will be awarded 0.5 SONA credits (applicable to Roehampton University undergraduate students). Only members of the research team will have access to the data that is collected.

All participants will provide 6 digit code (a combination of letters and numbers) which will only be known by you and can be used to withdraw from the study. The 6 digit code should also be placed on the debrief form which should retain with you. All participants have the right to withdraw from the study at any given time without needing to justify their withdrawal and should be done so by contacting the investigator using the details provided below and providing them with their 6 digit code. Participants have the right to their data but to their scores that are collected. Completed questionnaires and consent form will be stored separately to maintain anonymity.

Protection of the confidentiality of the participantsParticipants confidentiality with be protected as they will be provided with a 6-digit code on the questionnaires and debrief form which will only be known by them. Collected data and consent forms will be stored separately on the computer and on a USB to avoid identification of the participants. The data collected will be kept and protected for 18 months with the researcher for possible publication of the research. All data collected will be kept on a password secured laptop and a secured USB which the research team will only have access to, protecting anonymity of the participants. Researchers part of the will be unable to link any data to the participants. Signed consent forms will be store separately to any data collected. No identity will be pass onto other researchers who are not involved with this research and no mention will be made in the publication.

Vulnerable group of participantsNo, I will not recruit participants who fall into any vulnerable groups

There might be minimal ethical implications when doing the questionnaires regarding the empathy and emotion they present. To deal with this, participants will be given a Debrief form which will state the true nature of the study, contact details of student support if needed and the researchers and supervisors contact details if they want further information on who to contact regarding support. It will be noted that the questionnaires are designed to look at the relationship between social recognition, alexithymia and empathy in a normal variation in the general population and is will not use for diagnosis.Deception in the study (Y/N):No

The project will be using Qualtrics to present the questionnaires online. It will ensure participants are over the age of 18.

I am conducting an online study. All data will be password protected and only accessible by myself, other members of the research team, and my supervisor. The raw data will be stored

54


on my computer for 18 months (and on my supervisor's computer for a period of 10 years in the case of publication).

Checklist for Third Year Project Ethics Application

After meeting your supervisor and agreeing the design and measures for your study, you will need to complete your Ethics application form. The following checklist must be included with EVERY research proposal/application for ethical approval and should be jointly completed by student and supervisor. An application will be deemed incomplete and returned if this form is not attached to the ethics submission or incomplete. This is a checklist to help you meet the basic requirements for doing this. You need to be able to say “Yes” or “NA” (not applicable) to each of the following:GENERAL

1 I have proof-read all documents to check for errors (and basic English). (Note: if appropriate, I have also got someone else to check my English)

2I will include all documents in the following order: application form, recruitment material/ letter of invitation/consent/debrief, all measures/ questionnaires etc. (Note: My supervisor has seen and agreed all measures)

55


3I have stated clearly in the research proposal section that if my study requires lab and/or technician support, the allocation of resources has been/will have to be agreed by the Subject Head via my supervisor

Yes

APPLICATION FORM

4

I have given a clear and full description of the design and procedure including what will be done, how it will be done, where it will be done, and how long the tasks/questionnaires/interview will realistically take etc.

Yes

5 I have set out clearly (e.g. in subheadings) a clear description, with reference(s), of each measure/interview protocol. Yes

6 I created an appendix (labelled clearly) with all actual tasks /measures/protocols. Yes

7I have included any recruitment poster (must include Roehampton logo in the top left corner, supervisor name, and with Roehampton email contact only) or letter/email of invitation.

Yes

8I have included information about the procedure about anonymity/confidentiality in the consent and debrief form (I.D. numbers etc.)

Yes

9

I have used the consent template and given a clear and fair description of what will happen in the study, using appropriate language (including how long it will take, right to withdraw, and any SONA credits associated with participation).

Yes

10I have included information in my application form about Disclosure and Barring Service clearance (DBS) through Roehampton University, (to be confirmed by my supervisor).

N/A

11I have used the debrief template and given a clear and fair description of what was done and why, using appropriate language. Yes

12I have agreed and included appropriate support contact details on my debrief for both student and non-student participants. Yes

13

By ticking yes, I confirm this application has met the criteria required by BPS Ethic’s guidelines for research with human participants. I understand that both myself and my supervisor will also have to sign the final ethical submission form.

Yes

Please note: this is just a basic guide. It is likely that you will need to include other information/ detail relevant to your design - this is to be agreed with your supervisor.

This form draws on University of Roehampton’s Research Degrees proforma and a form used by the University of Oregon shown in Heppner, P.P., Callaghan, D.M. & Walpole, B.E. (1992). Research Design in Counselling.

APPENDIX B

56


CONSENT FORM

RESEARCH PARTICIPANT CONSENT FORM

Emotion understanding in Social Recognition.

This project is researching the relationship between social recognition and emotion understanding. We invite adult volunteers to take part in the research study which is part of the Department of Psychology, Roehampton University.

This research will be undertaken under the supervision of Dr Jennifer Mayer in the Department of Psychology, Roehampton University. It has been approved under the University of Roehampton’s Ethics Procedures.

Purpose and Procedures

The aim of this study is to see if emotion understanding if affected depending on the levels of social recognition. In order to do this, you will be asked to complete three questionnaires online via Qualtrics which will ask you questions about social recognition and emotion understanding. You will be asked to fill out a 50-item questionnaire about social recognition and you will be asked to fill out two questionnaires about emotion understanding, one being 20-item questionnaire and the second being a 40-item questionnaire. A demographics questionnaire will also be given.

All this research information will be collected anonymously and will be used for research purposes only. The study will take no more than 30 minutes to complete and upon completion, you will be awarded 0.5 SONA credits (applicable to Roehampton University undergraduate students). Only members of the research team will have access to the data that is collected.

You will be asked to write a 6 digit code (you can create a combination of letters and numbers of your choice) on the questionnaire which you should note down for your record. A Debrief sheet will be presented at the end of the study. Please note that the questionnaires are designed to look at the relationship between social recognition and emotion understanding in a normal variation in the general population and are not used as a means for diagnosis. If you later wish to withdraw from the study you just need to contact the researcher on the email address below and give us your code so your data can be withdrawn from the study. You have the right to your data however you will not get access to your scores.

If you are student volunteering for course credits, there will be no adverse consequences in relation to your degree if you wish to withdraw. The data you provided may still be used in collated form in our report, but this will not be identifiable to you as an individual. Consent forms and questionnaires will be stored separately and securely to avoid identification of participants.

57


Name ………………………………….

Signature ………………………………

Date ……………………………………

If you require further information or have a concern about any other aspect of your participation, please raise this with the [principal] investigators. Alternatively you may raise them with my tutors, or the Head of Department of Psychology:

The researchers for this investigation are Mehvish Khan ([email protected] ) Please note: if you have a concern about any aspect of your participation or any other queries please raise this with the investigator. However if you would like to contact an independent party please contact the Project Supervisor or Head of Psychology:

Project Supervisor Contact Details: Head of Psychology:

Dr Jennifer Mayer Dr Diane BrayDepartment of Psychology Department of Psychology University of Roehampton University of Roehampton Whitelands College Whitelands CollegeHolybourne Avenue Holybourne AvenueLondon SW15 4JD London SW15 4JD

Email: [email protected] Email: [email protected]: 020 8392 3661 Tel: 020 8392 3627

APPENDIX C

58


DEBRIEF FORM

RESEARCH PARTICIPANT DEBRIEF

Research project: Emotion understanding in Social Recognition.Thank you for participating in this study. Please read carefully through this debrief form and save it for your own records. Please retain your 6-digit identification code for future reference.

The aims of this study: The aim of this study was to see if individuals who score highly on social recognition show a limited amount of emotion. Three questionnaires were used to measure each factor; social recognition, emotion understanding.

Your data will be held securely and anonymously. If you wish to withdraw from the study at any time during or after the study, contact us with your personal identification code (see above) and your data will be removed from our files. Participants will not be given their scores that were collected. Although you can withdraw from the study at any time, it is likely that the data you provided may still be used in collated form for the data analysis report. If you are student and wish to withdraw we assure you that that this will not adversely affect your studies in any way.

Please note: If you have a concern about any aspect of your participation, please raise this with the investigator: Mehvish Khan ([email protected]), their supervisor: Dr Jennifer Mayer ([email protected]) or the Head of Department: Dr. Diane Bray ([email protected]). You may contact any of the above by post at the Department of Psychology, Roehampton University, Whitelands College, Holybourne Avenue, London, SW15 4JD.

Project Supervisor Contact Details: Head of Psychology:Dr Jennifer Mayer Dr Diane BrayDepartment of Psychology Department of Psychology University of Roehampton University of Roehampton Whitelands College Whitelands CollegeHolybourne Avenue Holybourne AvenueLondon SW15 4JD London SW15 4JD

Email: [email protected] Email: [email protected]: 020 8392 3661 Tel: 020 8392 3627

If you are a student at the University of Roehampton and are troubled or worried about any aspect of the study, or issues it may have raised, you may find it helpful to contact one of the following who will be able to advise you on agencies that can deal with your particular concern:

59


Student Welfare Officer: Whitelands College Louise Walton (3502) [email protected]

If you feel your concerns are more serious or complex you may wish to contact the Student Medical Centre on Ext 3679.

If you are a non-student you may find it helpful to contact one of the following agencies who will be able to advise you on agencies that can deal with your particular concern:

SAMARITANS, Telephone: 01850 60 90 90

APPENDIX D

SUPERVISOR POST RESEARCH APPROVAL FORM

60


Supervisors Approval post research form

Student Name:

Mehvish Khan

Student number:

12348108

I am satisfied that the above student has carried out the work they were granted ethical approval for and that all the necessary raw data has been collected and is represented accurately in the final dissertation project submission.

Supervisor name:

Dr Jennifer Mayer

Supervisor signature:

Date:

20.04.15

APPENDIX E

DEMOGRAPHICS

61


Please generate your unique 7 digit participant ID code (your 1st initial, your mother's 1st initial, your father's 1st initial, your 2 digit day of birth, your 2 digit month of birth). Example: HGS1907

________________________

What is your gender?

Male Female

What is your age?

_______________

Is English your first language?

Yes No

Are you fluent in English?

Yes No

Are you currently a student?

Yes No

What year of study are you in?

1st 2nd 3rd 4th Other _________

What course are you studying?

__________________________Please select your ethnicity

62


White British Bangladeshi

White Irish Other Asian Background

White Other Background Caribbean

White and Black Caribbean African

White and Black African Other Black Background

Mixed White and Asian Chinese or Chinese British

Other Mixed Background Other Ethic Background

Indian Not Known

Pakistani Prefer not to say

APPENDIX F

THE ADULT AUTISM SPECTRUM QUOTIENT (AQ)

63


1. I prefer to do things with others rather than on my own.

definitely agree

slightly agree

slightly disagree

definitely disagree

2. I prefer to do things the same way over and over again.

definitely agree

slightly agree

slightly disagree

definitely disagree

3. If I try to imagine something, I find it very easy to create a picture in my mind.

definitely agree

slightly agree

slightly disagree

definitely disagree

4. I frequently get so strongly absorbed in one thing that I lose sight of other things.

definitely agree

slightly agree

slightly disagree

definitely disagree

5. I often notice small sounds when others do not. definitely agree

slightly agree

slightly disagree

definitely disagree

6. I usually notice car number plates or similar strings of information.

definitely agree

slightly agree

slightly disagree

definitely disagree

7. Other people frequently tell me that what I’ve said is impolite, even though I think it is polite.

definitely agree

slightly agree

slightly disagree

definitely disagree

8. When I’m reading a story, I can easily imagine what the characters might look like.

definitely agree

slightly agree

slightly disagree

definitely disagree

9. I am fascinated by dates. definitely agree

slightly agree

slightly disagree

definitelydisagree

10. In a social group, I can easily keep track of several different people’s conversations.

definitely agree

slightly agree

slightly disagree

definitely disagree

11. I find social situations easy. definitely agree

slightly agree

slightly disagree

definitely disagree

12. I tend to notice details that others do not. definitely agree

slightly agree

slightly disagree

definitelydisagree

13. I would rather go to a library than a party. definitely agree

slightly agree

slightly disagree

definitelydisagree

14. I find making up stories easy. definitely agree

slightly agree

slightly disagree

definitelydisagree

15. I find myself drawn more strongly to people than to things.

definitely agree

slightly agree

slightly disagree

definitely disagree

16. I tend to have very strong interests which I get upset about if I can’t pursue.

definitely agree

slightly agree

slightly disagree

definitely disagree

64


17. I enjoy social chit-chat. definitely agree

slightly agree

slightly disagree

definitelydisagree

18. When I talk, it isn’t always easy for others to get a word in edgeways.

definitely agree

slightly agree

slightly disagree

definitely disagree

19. I am fascinated by numbers. definitely agree

slightly agree

slightly disagree

definitelydisagree

20. When I’m reading a story, I find it difficult to work out the characters’ intentions.

definitely agree

slightly agree

slightly disagree

definitely disagree

21. I don’t particularly enjoy reading fiction. definitely agree

slightly agree

slightly disagree

definitelydisagree

22. I find it hard to make new friends. definitely agree

slightly agree

slightly disagree

definitelydisagree

23. I notice patterns in things all the time. definitely agree

slightly agree

slightly disagree

definitelydisagree

24. I would rather go to the theatre than a museum. definitely agree

slightly agree

slightly disagree

definitely disagree

25. It does not upset me if my daily routine is disturbed.

definitely agree

slightly agree

slightly disagree

definitely disagree

26. I frequently find that I don’t know how to keep a conversation going.

definitely agree

slightly agree

slightly disagree

definitely disagree

27. I find it easy to “read between the lines” when someone is talking to me.

definitely agree

slightly agree

slightly disagree

definitely disagree

28. I usually concentrate more on the whole picture, rather than the small details.

definitely agree

slightly agree

slightly disagree

definitely disagree

29. I am not very good at remembering phone numbers.

definitely agree

slightly agree

slightly disagree

definitely disagree

30. I don’t usually notice small changes in a situation, or a person’s appearance.

definitely agree

slightly agree

slightly disagree

definitely disagree

31. I know how to tell if someone listening to me is getting bored.

definitely agree

slightly agree

slightly disagree

definitely disagree

32. I find it easy to do more than one thing at once. definitely agree

slightly agree

slightly disagree

definitely disagree

33. When I talk on the phone, I’m not sure when definitely slightly slightly definitely

65


it’s my turn to speak. agree agree disagree disagree

34. I enjoy doing things spontaneously. definitely agree

slightly agree

slightly disagree

definitelydisagree

35. I am often the last to understand the point of a joke.

definitely agree

slightly agree

slightly disagree

definitely disagree

36. I find it easy to work out what someone is thinking or feeling just by looking at their face.

definitely agree

slightly agree

slightly disagree

definitely disagree

37. If there is an interruption, I can switch back to what I was doing very quickly.

definitely agree

slightly agree

slightly disagree

definitely disagree

38. I am good at social chit-chat. definitely agree

slightly agree

slightly disagree

definitelydisagree

39. People often tell me that I keep going on and on about the same thing.

definitely agree

slightly agree

slightly disagree

definitely disagree

40. When I was young, I used to enjoy playing games involving pretending with other children.

definitely agree

slightly agree

slightly disagree

definitely disagree

41. I like to collect information about categories of things (e.g. types of car, types of bird, types of train, types of plant, etc.).

definitely agree

slightly agree

slightly disagree

definitely disagree

42. I find it difficult to imagine what it would be like to be someone else.

definitely agree

slightly agree

slightly disagree

definitely disagree

43. I like to plan any activities I participate in carefully.

definitely agree

slightly agree

slightly disagree

definitely disagree

44. I enjoy social occasions. definitely agree

slightly agree

slightly disagree

definitelydisagree

45. I find it difficult to work out people’s intentions. definitely agree

slightly agree

slightly disagree

definitely disagree

46. New situations make me anxious. definitely agree

slightly agree

slightly disagree

definitelydisagree

47. I enjoy meeting new people. definitely agree

slightly agree

slightly disagree

definitelydisagree

48. I am a good diplomat. definitely agree

slightly agree

slightly disagree

definitelydisagree

49. I am not very good at remembering people’s definitely slightly slightly definitely

66


date of birth. agree agree disagree disagree

50. I find it very easy to play games with children that involve pretending.

definitely agree

slightly agree

slightly disagree

definitely disagree

APPENDIX G

THE EMPATHY QUOTIENT (EQ)

67


1. I can easily tell if someone else wants to enter a strongly conversation. agree

slightly agree

slightly disagree

stronglydisagree

2. I find it difficult to explain to others things that I strongly agree

understand easily, when they don't understand itfirst time.

slightly agree

slightly disagree

stronglydisagree

3. I really enjoy caring for other people. stronglyagree

slightly agree

slightly disagree

stronglydisagree

4. I find it hard to know what to do in a social strongly situation. agree

slightly agree

slightly disagree

stronglydisagree

5. People often tell me that I went too far in driving stronglymy point home in a discussion. agree

slightly agree

slightly disagree

strongly disagree

6. It doesn't bother me too much if I am late meeting strongly a friend. agree

slightly agree

slightly disagree

stronglydisagree

7. Friendships and relationships are just too difficult, strongly so I tend not to bother with them. agree

slightly agree

slightly disagree

stronglydisagree

8. I often find it difficult to judge if something is strongly rude or polite. agree

slightly agree

slightly disagree

stronglydisagree

9. In a conversation, I tend to focus on my own strongly thoughts rather than on what my listener might be agree thinking.

slightly agree

slightly disagree

stronglydisagree

10. When I was a child, I enjoyed cutting up worms to strongly see what would happen. agree

slightly agree

slightly disagree

stronglydisagree

11. I can pick up quickly if someone says one thing strongly but means another. agree

slightly agree

slightly disagree

stronglydisagree

12. It is hard for me to see why some things upset strongly people so much. agree

slightly agree

slightly disagree

stronglydisagree

13. I find it easy to put myself in somebody else's strongly slightly slightly strongly

68


shoes. agree agree disagree disagree

14. I am good at predicting how someone will feel. strongly agree

slightly agree

slightly disagree

strongly disagree

APPENDIX H

TORONTO ALEXITHYMIA SCALE- 20 (TAS-20)

69


Indicate how much you agree or disagree with each of the following statements. Just tick the appropriate box.Use the middle box ('I neither agree or disagree') only if you are really unable to assess your behaviour.

Istrongly disagree

Iquite

disagree

Ineither agree

nor disagree

Iquite agree

Istrongly agree

1- I am often confused about what emotion I am feeling

2- It is difficult for me to find the right words for my feelings

3- I have physical sensations that even doctors don’t understand

4- I am able to describe my feelings easily

5- I prefer to analyze problems rather than just describe them

6- When I am upset, I don’t know if I am sad, frightened, or angry

7- I am often puzzled by sensations in my body

8- I prefer to just let things happen rather than to understand why they turned out that way

9- I have feelings that I can’t quite identify

10- Being in touch with emotions is essential

11- I find it hard to describe how I feel about people

12- People tell me to describe my feelings more

13- I don’t know what’s going on inside me

14- I often don’t know why I am angry

15- I prefer talking to people about their daily activities rather then their feelings

16- I prefer to watch « light » entertainments shows rather than psychological dramas

17- It is difficult for me to reveal my innermost feelings, even to close friends

18- I can feel close to someone, even in moments of silence

70


19- I find examination of my feelings useful in solving personal problems

20- Looking for hidden meanings in movies or plays distracts from their enjoyment

APPENDIX I

SPSS OUTPUT- DESCRIPTIVES

GENDER

71


Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent

ValidMale 12 12.0 12.0 12.0Females 88 88.0 88.0 100.0Total 100 100.0 100.0

AGEN Minimum Maximum Mean Std. Deviation

Age 100 18.00 29.00 19.9200 1.52209Valid N (listwise) 100

APPENDIX J

SPSS OUTPUT- CRONBACH’S ALPHA FOR AQ, EQ AND TAS 20

72


AQ

Reliability StatisticsCronbach's Alpha Cronbach's Alpha

Based on Standardized

Items

N of Items

.585 .610 5

Item-Total StatisticsScale Mean if Item Deleted

Scale Variance if Item Deleted

Corrected Item-Total Correlation

Squared Multiple Correlation

Cronbach's Alpha if Item

DeletedAQ_SS 14.6500 24.654 .514 .383 .425AQ_AS 12.2800 27.759 .361 .216 .519AQ_AD 11.7900 35.683 -.025 .023 .733AQ_C 14.5400 25.180 .574 .497 .401AQ_I 14.9000 29.343 .430 .293 .494

Reliability StatisticsCronbac

h's Alpha

Cronbach's Alpha Based on Standardized Items

N of Items

.622 .646 3EQ




Squared Multiple

Correlation


DeletedEQ_CE 19.4300 32.106 .478 .228 .467

73


EQ_ER 18.7200 34.466 .489 .241 .435EQ_SS 26.9500 57.503 .412 .170 .606

TAS-20

Reliability StatisticsCronbach's Alpha Cronbach's Alpha

Based on Standardized

Items

N of Items

.584 .572 3




Squared Multiple Correlation


DeletedTAS_F1 31.6400 35.202 .533 .400 .260TAS_F2 35.3800 55.693 .584 .402 .222TAS_F3 30.2600 86.336 .161 .026 .743

74


APPENDIX K

SPPS OUTPUT- MEAN, STANDARD DEVIATION, RANGE, SKEWNESS AND KURTOSIS FOR AQ, EQ AND TAS- 20

N Minimum

Maximum

Mean Std. Deviation

Skewness Kurtosis

Statistic Statistic Statistic Statistic Statistic Statistic Std. Error

Statistic

AQ_Tot 100 3.00 32.00 17.0400 6.35470 .501 .241 -.424EQ_Tot 100 .00 70.00 44.7300 11.57833 -.814 .241 1.477TAS_Tot 100 27.00 80.00 48.6400 10.48955 .357 .241 -.051Valid N (listwise)

100

75


APPENDIX L

SPSS OUTPUT- MEAN AND STANDARD DEVIATION OF THE SUBSCALES

Descriptive StatisticsMean Std. Deviation N

AQ_SS 2.3900 2.16443 100AQ_AS 4.7600 2.12783 100AQ_AD 5.2500 2.32412 100AQ_C 2.5000 1.96690 100AQ_I 2.1400 1.72925 100TAS_F1 17.0000 6.04695 100TAS_F2 13.2600 4.20586 100TAS_F3 18.3800 3.59792 100EQ_CE 13.1200 4.60628 100EQ_ER 13.8300 4.34161 100EQ_SS 5.6000 2.39949 100

76


APPENDIX M

SPSS OUTPUT- AQ, EQ AND TAS-20 CORRELATIONS.

AQ AND EQ

CorrelationsAQ_Tot EQ_Tot

AQ_TotPearson Correlation 1 -.464**

Sig. (2-tailed) .000N 100 100

EQ_TotPearson Correlation -.464** 1Sig. (2-tailed) .000N 100 100

AQ AND TAS-20

CorrelationsAQ_Tot TAS_Tot

AQ_TotPearson Correlation 1 .352**

Sig. (2-tailed) .000N 100 100

TAS_TotPearson Correlation .352** 1Sig. (2-tailed) .000N 100 100

EQ AND TAS-20

CorrelationsEQ_Tot TAS_Tot

EQ_TotPearson Correlation 1 -.386**

Sig. (2-tailed) .000N 100 100

TAS_Tot Pearson Correlation -.386** 1Sig. (2-tailed) .000

77


N 100 100

APPENDIX N

SPSS OUTPUT- CORRELATION GRAPHS

AQ AND EQ

AQ AND TAS- 20

78


EQ AND TAS-20

79


APPENDIX O

SPSS OUTPUT- SUBSCALE CORRELATIONS FOR AQ, EQ AND TAS-20

CorrelationsAQ_SS AQ_AS AQ_AD AQ_C AQ_I TAS_F1 TAS_F2 TAS_F3

AQ_SSPearson Correlation 1 .424** -.008 .580** .304** .207* .277** .052

Sig. (2-tailed) .000 .941 .000 .002 .039 .005 .607N 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100

AQ_ASPearson Correlation .424** 1 -.069 .393** .215* .371** .329** -.210*

Sig. (2-tailed) .000 .492 .000 .032 .000 .001 .036N 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100

AQ_ADPearson Correlation -.008 -.069 1 -.056 .072 -.049 .020 -.177

Sig. (2-tailed) .941 .492 .578 .479 .629 .842 .078N 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100

AQ_CPearson Correlation .580** .393** -.056 1 .532** .228* .364** .131

Sig. (2-tailed) .000 .000 .578 .000 .023 .000 .193N 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100

AQ_IPearson Correlation .304** .215* .072 .532** 1 .249* .384** .262**

Sig. (2-tailed) .002 .032 .479 .000 .012 .000 .008N 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100

TAS_F1

Pearson Correlation .207* .371** -.049 .228* .249* 1 .631** .142Sig. (2-tailed) .039 .000 .629 .023 .012 .000 .159

N 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100TAS_F Pearson Correlation .277** .329** .020 .364** .384** .631** 1 .151

80


2Sig. (2-tailed) .005 .001 .842 .000 .000 .000 .134

N 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100

TAS_F3

Pearson Correlation .052 -.210* -.177 .131 .262** .142 .151 1Sig. (2-tailed) .607 .036 .078 .193 .008 .159 .134

N 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100

EQ_CEPearson Correlation -.220* -.101 .118 -.431** -.386** -.181 -.149 -.236*

Sig. (2-tailed) .028 .317 .243 .000 .000 .072 .139 .018N 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100

EQ_ERPearson Correlation -.228* -.100 -.059 -.398** -.453** -.202* -.232* -.304**

Sig. (2-tailed) .022 .324 .561 .000 .000 .044 .020 .002N 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100

EQ_SSPearson Correlation -.471** -.371** .053 -.409** -.230* -.377** -.261** -.134

Sig. (2-tailed) .000 .000 .604 .000 .021 .000 .009 .183N 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100

81


CorrelationsEQ_CE EQ_ER EQ_SS

AQ_SSPearson Correlation -.220 -.228** -.471Sig. (2-tailed) .028 .022 .000N 100 100 100

AQ_ASPearson Correlation -.101** -.100 -.371Sig. (2-tailed) .317 .324 .000N 100 100 100

AQ_ADPearson Correlation .118 -.059 .053Sig. (2-tailed) .243 .561 .604N 100 100 100

AQ_CPearson Correlation -.431** -.398** -.409Sig. (2-tailed) .000 .000 .000N 100 100 100

AQ_IPearson Correlation -.386** -.453* -.230Sig. (2-tailed) .000 .000 .021N 100 100 100

TAS_F1Pearson Correlation -.181* -.202** -.377Sig. (2-tailed) .072 .044 .000N 100 100 100

TAS_F2Pearson Correlation -.149** -.232** -.261Sig. (2-tailed) .139 .020 .009N 100 100 100

TAS_F3Pearson Correlation -.236 -.304* -.134Sig. (2-tailed) .018 .002 .183N 100 100 100

82


EQ_CEPearson Correlation 1* .436 .339Sig. (2-tailed) .000 .001N 100 100 100

EQ_ERPearson Correlation .436* 1 .360Sig. (2-tailed) .000 .000N 100 100 100

EQ_SSPearson Correlation .339** .360** 1Sig. (2-tailed) .001 .000N 100 100 100

83


APPENDIX P

SPSS OUTPUT- MULTIPLE REGRESSION ANALYSIS

AQ (DEPENDENT ON EQ)

Model SummaryModel R R Square Adjusted R

SquareStd. Error of the

Estimate1 .464a .216 .208 10.30693

Coefficientsa

Model Unstandardized Coefficients Standardized Coefficients

t Sig.

B Std. Error Beta

1(Constant) 59.145 2.963 19.963 .000AQ_Tot -.846 .163 -.464 -5.189 .000

AQ (DEPENDENT ON TAS-20)



Estimate1 .352a .124 .115 9.86906

Coefficientsa


t Sig.

B Std. Error Beta

1(Constant) 38.745 2.837 13.658 .000AQ_Tot .581 .156 .352 3.720 .000

84


TAS-20 (DEPENDENT ON EQ)



Estimate1 .386a .149 .140 10.73512

Coefficientsa


t Sig.

B Std. Error Beta

1(Constant) 65.456 5.117 12.792 .000TAS_Tot -.426 .103 -.386 -4.143 .000

MEDIATION



Estimate1 .522a .272 .257 9.97911

Coefficientsa


t Sig.

B Std. Error Beta

1(Constant) 70.015 4.888 14.325 .000AQ_Tot -.683 .169 -.375 -4.051 .000TAS_Tot -.281 .102 -.254 -2.747 .007

85

EMOTION RECOGNITION IN SOCIAL UNDERSTANDING 86

Emotion Recognition in Social Understanding

Documents

Transcript of Emotion Recognition in Social Understanding