Empathy measures
For the QCAE, MANOVA for the five domains indicated a significant group effect (F = 7.425, p < 0.001), demonstrating that participants with ASD had significantly lower scores for perspective taking (p < 0.001), online simulation (p < 0.001) and peripheral responsivity (p = 0.005), but not for emotion contagion (p = 0.919) or proximal responsivity (p = 0.111) (Table 2). After controlling for the full-scale IQ and Beck values by ANCOVA, significant differences remained for perspective taking (p < 0.001), online simulation (p < 0.001) and peripheral responsivity (p = 0.001) (Table 2). When we combined the subcategory data into the two categories on the QCAE, t-tests showed that adults with ASD had significantly lower scores for cognitive empathy (p < 0.001), but not for affective empathy (p = 0.079) (Table 2). After adjustment for full-scale IQ and Beck scales by ANCOVA, the difference in cognitive empathy remained significant (p < 0.001), but not in affective empathy (p = 0.067) (Table 2).
For the IRI, MANOVA of data for the four domains indicated a significant group effect (F = 7.829, p < 0.001), showing that the adults with ASD had significantly lower scores for perspective taking (p < 0.001) and empathic concern (p = 0.010), but not for personal distress (p = 0.147) or fantasy (p = 0.067) (Table 2). After controlling for full-scale IQ and Beck scores by ANCOVA, significant differences remained only for perspective taking (p < 0.001) and empathic concern (p = 0.010) (Table 2).
The values of effect size and statistical power were shown in Table 2.
Table 2
Empathy data on the QCAE and IRI.
|
Healthy control
(n = 28)
|
ASD
(n = 24)
|
p-values
(uncorrected)
|
p-values
with cofactors
|
Effect size
(power)
|
QCAE
Perspective taking
|
35.0 ± 6.4
|
24.3 ± 7.7
|
< 0.001 ***
|
< 0.001 ***
|
1.511
(0.999)
|
QCAE
Online simulation
|
34.1 ± 5.1
|
26.5 ± 7.6
|
< 0.001 ***
|
< 0.001 ***
|
1.174
(0.994)
|
QCAE
Emotion contagion
|
13.1 ± 2.8
|
13.2 ± 4.3
|
0.919
|
0.950
|
0.027
(0.060)
|
QCAE
Proximal responsivity
|
12.0 ± 2.6
|
10.7 ± 3.3
|
0.111
|
0.185
|
0.437
(0.462)
|
QCAE
Peripheral responsivity
|
14.2 ± 2.4
|
11.9 ± 3.2
|
0.005 **
|
0.001 **
|
0.813
(0.892)
|
QCAE
Cognitive empathy
|
69.0 ± 10.8
|
50.6 ± 13.4
|
< 0.001 ***
|
< 0.001 ***
|
1.512
(0.999)
|
QCAE
Affective empathy
|
39.3 ± 6.2
|
35.7 ± 8.0
|
0.079
|
0.067
|
0.503
(0.555)
|
IRI
Perspective taking
|
21.2 ± 2.8
|
16.6 ± 3.6
|
< 0.001 ***
|
< 0.001 ***
|
1.426
(0.999)
|
IRI
Empathic concern
|
20.7 ± 3.2
|
18.7 ± 2.4
|
0.010 *
|
0.010 *
|
0.707
(0.805)
|
IRI
Personal distress
|
17.5 ± 4.0
|
19.3 ± 4.6
|
0.147
|
0.247
|
0.417
(0.434)
|
IRI
Fantasy
|
19.8 ± 3.7
|
17.7 ± 4.4
|
0.067
|
0.059
|
0.516
(0.573)
|
*p < 0.05, **p < 0.01, ***p < 0.001. Uncorrected p-values are determined by MANOVA followed by t-tests. Corrected p-values were obtained by a subsequent ANCOVA treating the BDI ad full-scale IQ scores as covariates. The number in the parenthesis is the value of the statistical power (α = 0.05). QCAE: Questionnaire of Cognitive and Affective Empathy. IRI: Interpersonal Reactivity Index.
The correlations of ASD traits with empathy scores on the QCAE and IRI
Total AQ scores correlated significantly with the perspective taking and cognitive empathy scores on the QCAE, within control group (r = -0.387, p = 0.042; r = -0.375, p = 0.049) and ASD group (r = -0.510, p = 0.011; r = -0.579, p = 0.003), respectively (Table 3). Additionally, total AQ scores correlated significantly with the online simulation scores on the QCAE (r = -0.499, p = 0.013) and the perspective taking scores on the IRI (r = -0.430, p = 0.036) only among ASD group (Table 3). The peripheral responsivity on the QCAE and the empathic concern on the IRI failed to show significant relationships with autistic traits on the AQ among each group in spite of significance of group comparison (Table 2, 3). The values of statistical power showed over 0.80 in half of data with asterisk (Table 3). When Bonferroni corrections were done for these results, the correlation between AQ scores and cognitive empathy on the QCAE within ASD group remains alive (p < 0.05/7 = 0.007). The correlation plots for key results (perspective taking, online simulation, and cognitive empathy on the QCAE and perspective taking on the IRI) were shown in Fig. 1.
Table 3
Relationships between empathy's components and autistic traits.
Control subjects
(n = 28)
|
AQ
|
IRI
Perspective taking
|
IRI
Empathic concern
|
IRI
Personal
distress
|
IRI
Fantasy
|
AQ
|
|
-0.315
|
0.056
|
0.301
|
-0.054
|
QCAE
Perspective taking
|
-0.387 *
(0.697)
|
0.597 **
(0.985)
|
0.136
|
-0.186
|
0.113
|
QCAE
Online simulation
|
-0.299
|
0.669 ***
(0.998)
|
0.214
|
-0.227
|
0.163
|
QCAE
Emotional contagion
|
-0.002
|
0.011
|
0.281
|
0.158
|
0.335
|
QCAE
Proximal responsivity
|
-0.068
|
-0.064
|
0.395 *
(0.715)
|
0.166
|
0.279
|
QCAE
Peripheral responsivity
|
-0.361
|
0.010
|
0.443 *
(0.816)
|
0.069
|
0.561 **
(0.967)
|
QCAE
Cognitive empathy
|
-0.375 *
(0.669)
|
0.670 ***
(0.998)
|
0.182
|
-0.215
|
0.148
|
QCAE
Affective empathy
|
-0.172
|
0.007
|
0.468 *
(0.860)
|
0.168
|
0.490 **
(0.894)
|
ASD patients
(n = 24)
|
AQ
|
IRI
Perspective taking
|
IRI
Empathic concern
|
IRI
Personal
distress
|
IRI
Fantasy
|
AQ
|
|
-0.430 *
(0.730)
|
-0.078
|
0.308
|
-0.064
|
QCAE
Perspective taking
|
-0.510 *
(0.878)
|
0.581 **
(0.959)
|
0.079
|
-0.327
|
-0.066
|
QCAE
Online simulation
|
-0.499 *
(0.871)
|
0.821 ***
(0.999)
|
-0.115
|
-0.292
|
-0.030
|
QCAE
Emotional contagion
|
0.098
|
0.095
|
0.528 **
(0.904)
|
0.576 **
(0.955)
|
0.223
|
QCAE
Proximal responsivity
|
0.010
|
0.290
|
0.294
|
0.555 **
(0.935)
|
0.074
|
QCAE
Peripheral responsivity
|
-0.085
|
0.007
|
-0.028
|
-0.170
|
0.541 **
(0.920)
|
QCAE
Cognitive empathy
|
-0.579 **
(0.957)
|
0.791 ***
(0.999)
|
-0.019
|
-0.355
|
-0.057
|
QCAE
Affective empathy
|
0.022
|
0.174
|
0.394
|
0.471 *
(0.813)
|
0.370
|
*p < 0.05, **p < 0.01, ***p < 0.001 in each group. The number in the parenthesis is the value of the statistical power. AQ: Autism-Spectrum Quotient. IRI: Interpersonal Reactivity Index. QCAE: Questionnaire of Cognitive and Affective Empathy.
The relationships among empathy scores on the QCAE and IRI
The purpose of the correlation analyses between subscales in the QCAE and subscales in the IRI was to examine the difference and relations between the items for empathic traits on the two questionnaires within healthy control and ASD patient groups.
As for empathy scores, we found strong correlations of the perspective taking scores on the IRI with the perspective taking, online simulation and cognitive empathy scores on the QCAE for controls (r = 0.597, p = 0.001; r = 0.669, p < 0.001; r = 0.670, p < 0.001) and for ASD group (r = 0.581, p = 0.003; r = 0.821, p < 0.001; r = 0.791, p < 0.001), respectively (Table 3). A previous study showed significant correlations between the perspective scale on the IRI and the perspective taking, online simulation and cognitive empathy scores on the QCAE replicated within control subjects [26]. Also we found significant correlations between peripheral responsivity on the QCAE and fantasy scores on the IRI for control group (r = 0.561, p = 0.002) and for ASD group (r = 0.541, p = 0.006) (Table 3).
On the contrary, we found different patterns between the two groups. Among control group there existed correlations between the empathic concern scores on the IRI and the proximal responsivity, peripheral responsivity and affective empathy on the QCAE in addition to between fantasy scores on the IRI and affective scores on the QCAE (Table 3), whereas among ASD group there existed correlations between the empathic concern scores on the IRI and emotional contagion scores on the QCAE in addition to between the personal distress scores on the IRI and emotional contagion, proximal responsivity and affective empathy scores on the QCAE (Table 3).
The statistical powers showed over 0.80 in half of data with asterisk (Table 3). When Bonferroni corrections were done for these results of ASD patients, the correlations between online simulation and cognitive empathy on the QCAE and perspective taking on the IRI remain alive (p < 0.05/28 = 0.0014).
Personality Scores
For the NEO-PI-R, MANOVA indicated a significant group effect (F = 8.951, p < 0.001), demonstrating that compared with control subjects, the adults with ASD had significantly higher scores for neuroticism (p < 0.001) and lower scores for extraversion (p < 0.001), agreeableness (p = 0.028) and conscientiousness (p = 0.004), but no differences in openness (p = 0.271) on the NEO-PI-R, (Table 4). After controlling for the full scale IQ and Beck scales by ANCOVA, significant differences remained in neuroticism (p = 0.004) and extraversion (p < 0.001), but not in agreeableness (p = 0.098) or conscientiousness (p = 0.065) (Table 4). The values of effect size and statistical power were shown in Table 4.
Table 4
Personality data on the NEO-PI-R.
|
Healthy control
(n = 28)
|
ASD subjects
(n = 24)
|
p-values
(uncorrected)
|
p-values
with cofactors
|
Effect size
(power)
|
Neuroticism
|
55.2 ± 10.4
|
67.8 ± 10.7
|
< 0.001 ***
|
0.004 **
|
1.194
(0.995)
|
Extraversion
|
49.8 ± 11.9
|
34.7 ± 8.7
|
< 0.001 ***
|
< 0.001 ***
|
1.448
(0.999)
|
Openness
|
51.9 ± 7.1
|
49.4 ± 9.4
|
0.271
|
0.338
|
0.300
(0.280)
|
Agreeableness
|
48.1 ± 11.6
|
40.6 ± 12.4
|
0.028 *
|
0.098
|
0.619
(0.708)
|
Conscientiousness
|
45.6 ± 10.3
|
36.6 ± 11.4
|
0.004 **
|
0.065
|
0.828
(0.901)
|
*p < 0.05, **p < 0.01, ***p < 0.001. Uncorrected p-values are determined by MANOVA followed by t-tests. Corrected p values were done by subsequent ANCOVA, treating BDI ad full-scale IQ scores as covariates. The number in the parenthesis is the value of the statistical power. NEO-PI-R: NEO Personality Inventory-Revised.
Correlations Of AQ Scores With Neo Personality Scores
We found significant correlations between AQ scores and NEO personality scores: for neuroticism among healthy controls (r = 0.404, p = 0.033) and total participants (r = 0.514, p < 0.001), but not among ASD group (r = -0.015, p = 0.943; for extraversion among healthy controls (r = -0.668, p < 0.001) and total participants (r = -0.733, p < 0.001), but not among ASD group (r = -0.357, p = 0.086); for conscientiousness among healthy controls (r = -0.435, p = 0.021) and total participants (r = 0.4333, p = 0.001), but not among ASD group (r = -0.010, p = 0.964 (Table 5). The values of statistical power were shown in Table 5. The correlation plots for key results (neuroticism, extraversion and conscientiousness on the NEO-PI-R) were shown in Fig. 2.
Table 5
Correlations between AQ scores and NEO-PI-R categories.
Healthy controls (n = 28)
|
AQ
|
(power)
|
Neuroticism
|
0.404 *
|
(0.735)
|
Extraversion
|
-0.668 ***
|
(0.998)
|
Openness
|
0.185
|
|
Agreeableness
|
0.118
|
|
Conscientiousness
|
-0.435 *
|
(0.800)
|
ASD (n = 24)
|
AQ
|
(power)
|
Neuroticism
|
-0.015
|
|
Extraversion
|
-0.357
|
(0.567)
|
Openness
|
-0.160
|
|
Agreeableness
|
0.013
|
|
Conscientiousness
|
-0.010
|
|
Total subjects (n = 52)
|
AQ
|
(power)
|
Neuroticism
|
0.514 ***
|
(0.995)
|
Extraversion
|
-0.733 ***
|
(1.000)
|
Openness
|
-0.120
|
|
Agreeableness
|
-0.194
|
|
Conscientiousness
|
-0.433 **
|
(0.961)
|
*p < 0.05, **p < 0.01, ***p < 0.001, coefficient in each group. The number in the parenthesis is the value of the statistical power. AQ: Autism-Spectrum Quotient. NEO-PI-R: NEO Personality Inventory-Revised.
Relationships of personality factors on the NEO-PI-R with empathy scales on the QCAE and IRI scales
Within each control group and ASD group, we found significant correlations of neuroticism on the NEO-PI-R with emotion contagion on the QCAE (r = 0.522, p = 0.004; r = 0.446, p = 0.029, respectively), with affective empathy on the QCAE (r = 0.492, p = 0.008; r = 0.481, p = 0.017, respectively), and with fantasy on the IRI (r = 0.480, p = 0.010; r = 0.447, p = 0.029, respectively) (Table 6). Further, we found correlations of extraversion on the NEO-PI-R with peripheral responsivity on the QCAE (r = 0.499, p = 0.007; r = 0.490, p = 0.015, respectively), and of openness on the NEO-PI-R with peripheral responsivity on the QCAE (r = 0.531, p = 0.004; r = 0.501, p = 0.013, respectively) (Table 6).
Within only ASD group, we found significant correlations between neuroticism on the NEO-PI-R and personal distress on the IRI (r = 0.486, p = 0.016), extraversion on the NEO-PI-R and online simulation on the QCAE (r = 0.444, p = 0.030), extraversion on the NEO-PI-R and peripheral responsivity on the QCAE (r = 0.490, p = 0.015), openness on the NEO-PI-R and online simulation on the QCAE (r = 0.480, p = 0.018), and conscientiousness on the NEO-PI-R and perspective taking on the IRI (r = 0.511, p = 0.011) (Table 6).
The statistical powers showed over 0.80 in half of data with asterisk (Table 6). However, when Bonferroni corrections were done for these results, no positive results remain alive (p < 0.05/55 = 0.0009).
Table 6
Correlations between empathy and personality.
Control
(n = 28)
|
NEO
Neuroticism
|
NEO
Extraversion
|
NEO
Openness
|
NEO
Agreeableness
|
NEO
Conscientiousness
|
QCAE
Perspective taking
|
0.203
|
0.041
|
0.000
|
0.017
|
0.165
|
QCAE
Online simulation
|
0.095
|
0.188
|
0.228
|
0.133
|
0.342
|
QCAE
Emotion contagion
|
0.522 **
(0.934)
|
0.101
|
0.370
|
0.142
|
-0.247
|
QCAE
Proximal responsivity
|
0.427 *
(0.784)
|
0.236
|
0.389 *
(0.7020
|
0.221
|
0.058
|
QCAE
Peripheral responsivity
|
0.197
|
0.499 **
(0.906)
|
0.531 **
(0.943)
|
0.096
|
0.047
|
QCAE
Cognitive empathy
|
0.165
|
0.114
|
0.110
|
0.075
|
0.258
|
QCAE
Affective empathy
|
0.492 **
(0.897)
|
0.341
|
0.540 **
(0.953)
|
-0.008
|
-0.068
|
IRI
Perspective taking
|
0.030
|
0.001
|
-0.003
|
0.186
|
0.192
|
IRI
Empathic concern
|
0.387 *
(0.697)
|
-0.065
|
0.321
|
0.141
|
0.022
|
IRI
Personal distress
|
0.262
|
-0.320
|
0.169
|
0.292
|
-0.472 *
(0.867)
|
IRI
Fantasy
|
0.480 **
(0.879)
|
0.168
|
0.343
|
0.015
|
-0.191
|
ASD patients
(n = 24)
|
NEO
Neuroticism
|
NEO
Extraversion
|
NEO
Openness
|
NEO
Agreeableness
|
NEO
Conscientiousness
|
QCAE
Perspective taking
|
-0.081
|
-0.097
|
0.209
|
0.082
|
0.233
|
QCAE
Online simulation
|
-0.159
|
0.444 *
(0.760)
|
0.480 *
(0.829)
|
0.087
|
0.354
|
QCAE
Emotion contagion
|
0.446 *
(0.764)
|
0.185
|
-0.198
|
0.142
|
-0.232
|
QCAE
Proximal responsivity
|
0.327
|
0.324
|
0.074
|
0.229
|
0.200
|
QCAE
Peripheral responsivity
|
0.262
|
0.490 *
(0.846)
|
0.501 *
(0.864)
|
-0.403
|
-0.268
|
QCAE
Cognitive empathy
|
-0.127
|
0.194
|
0.388
|
0.090
|
0.330
|
QCAE
Affective empathy
|
0.481 *
(0.831)
|
0.432 *
(0.735)
|
0.127
|
0.008
|
-0.151
|
IRI
Perspective taking
|
-0.349
|
0.156
|
0.388
|
0.185
|
0.511 *
(0.880)
|
IRI
Empathic concern
|
0.328
|
0.299
|
-0.144
|
0.234
|
-0.252
|
IRI
Personal distress
|
0.486 *
(0.839)
|
-0.118
|
0.216
|
0.328
|
-0.245
|
IRI
Fantasy
|
0.447 *
(0.766)
|
0.248
|
0.159
|
-0.378
|
-0.253
|
*p < 0.05, **p < 0.01, coefficient in all subjects. The number in the parenthesis is the value of the statistical power. IRI: Interpersonal Reactivity Index. NEO-PI-R: NEO Personality Inventory-Revised. QCAE: Questionnaire of Cognitive and Affective Empathy.
Contributory factors of empathy and personality to autistic traits by multiple regression analysis
Multiple regression analysis showed goodness-of-fit statistics (R = 0.915, adjusted R2 = 0.769, F(15,36) = 12.304, p < 0.001). Results indicated that two factors, perspective taking on the QCAE and extraversion on the NEO-PI-R, were good predictor variables to autistic traits on the AQ scores (p < 0.005; p < 0.001, respectively) (Table 7).
Table 7
Contributory factors to AQ scores by multiple regression analysis.
|
Unstandardized
coefficients B
|
Standardized
coefficients Beta
|
t values
|
p-values
|
(Constant)
|
43.167 (9.413)
|
|
4.586
|
0.000 ***
|
Disease
|
-4.005 (2.401)
|
− .201
|
-1.668
|
0.104
|
QCAE
Perspective taking
|
− .422 (.140)
|
− .372
|
-3.008
|
0.005 **
|
QCAE
Online simulation
|
.011 (.207)
|
.008
|
0.052
|
0.959
|
QCAE
Emotion contagion
|
.181 (.328)
|
.064
|
0.551
|
0.558
|
QCAE
Proximal responsivity
|
.076 (.426)
|
.023
|
0.180
|
0.858
|
QCAE
Peripheral responsivity
|
− .169 (.406)
|
− .051
|
-0.417
|
0.679
|
IRI
Perspective taking
|
− .238 (.375)
|
− .093
|
-0.635
|
0.529
|
IRI
Empathic concern
|
− .010 (.312)
|
− .003
|
-0.031
|
0.975
|
IRI
Personal distress
|
− .069 (.234)
|
− .030
|
-0.296
|
0.769
|
IRI
Fantasy
|
− .017 (.236)
|
− .007
|
-0.072
|
0.943
|
NEO
Neuroticism
|
.077 (.099)
|
.093
|
0.772
|
0.445
|
NEO
Extraversion
|
− .374 (.086)
|
− .483
|
-4.345
|
0.000 ***
|
NEO
Openness
|
.196 (.110)
|
.162
|
1.789
|
0.082
|
NEO
Agreeableness
|
.004 (.070)
|
.005
|
0.053
|
0.958
|
NEO
Conscientiousness
|
.055 (.090)
|
.064
|
0.613
|
0.544
|
**p < 0.01, ***p < 0.001 by multiple regression analysis in all subjects.
B: multiple correlation coefficients. The number in the parenthesis is standard errors.
IRI: Interpersonal Reactivity Index. NEO-PI-R: NEO Personality Inventory-Revised. QCAE: Questionnaire of Cognitive and Affective Empathy.