Department of Psychology, Florida International University, Miami, Florida, United States of America.
PLoS One. 2012;7(2):e31661. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0031661. Epub 2012 Feb 22.
A large number of people completed one of two versions of the empathizing quotient (EQ) and systemizing quotient (SQ). One version had the negatively phrased items all re-worded. These re-worded items were answered more rapidly than the original items, and for the SQ produced a more reliable scale. Subjects gave self-assessments of empathizing and systemizing, and these were moderately correlated, r ≈ .6, with their respective quotients. Females had on average higher empathizing scores and males had on average higher systemizing scores. If a female-male pair was chosen at random, the female would have the higher empathizing score about two-thirds of the time, and the males would have the higher systemizing score about two-thirds of the time.
大量的人完成了共情商(EQ)和系统商(SQ)的两个版本中的一个版本。其中一个版本将所有带有否定词的项目重新措辞。这些重新措辞的项目比原始项目回答得更快,并且对于 SQ 产生了更可靠的量表。被试者对共情和系统进行了自我评估,这些评估与各自的商中度相关,r ≈.6。女性的共情得分平均较高,而男性的系统得分平均较高。如果随机选择一对男女,大约三分之二的情况下女性的共情得分会更高,而大约三分之二的情况下男性的系统得分会更高。