Women are better at ‘reading minds’ than men, finds a new study aimed at better understanding social interaction and the challenges faced by people with autism.
Sometimes known in the field of psychology as ‘mentalising‘, the process is when people try to ascertain what others are really thinking, for example when they are sarcastic or even lying. Mind-reading has some basis in neuroscience: for example, some research indicates that sensitivity to social interactions is associated with the posterior superior temporal sulcus, an area of the brain which is also known to process biological motion. Everybody has some proficiency with mind reading, and some are inherently better than others. However, some lack the ability to a point where it becomes difficult to function in society, for example in autism.
The study made use of a self-report questionnaire asking participants to rate how well, for example, they could relate to others. It used four questions, each with ratings from one to four, giving a maximum total score of 16. The researchers determined that women scored higher than men on the questionnaire, and also confirmed the challenges reported by those with autism.
Senior author Dr Punit Shah, at the University of Bath’s Department of Psychology explained: “We will all undoubtedly have had experiences where we have felt we have not connected with other people we are talking to, where we’ve perceived that they have failed to understand us, or where things we’ve said have been taken the wrong way. Much of how we communicate relies on our understanding of what others are thinking, yet this is a surprisingly complex process that not everyone can do.”
Dr Shah emphasised that there is a different between mind-reading and empathy, saying: “Mind-reading refers to understanding what other people are thinking, whereas empathy is all about understanding what others are feeling. The difference might seem subtle but is critically important and involves very different brain networks. By focussing carefully on measuring mind-reading, without confusing it with empathy, we are confident that we have just measured mind-reading. And, when doing this, we consistently find that females reported greater mind-reading abilities than their male counterparts.”
Lead researcher, Rachel Clutterbuck, emphasised the clinical importance of the questionnaire. She said: “This new test, which takes under a minute to complete, has important utility in clinical settings. It is not always obvious if someone is experiencing difficulties understanding and responding to others—and many people have learnt techniques which can reduce the appearance of social difficulties, even though these remain.
“This work has great potential to better understand the lived experience of people with mind-reading difficulties, such as those with autism, whilst producing a precise quantitative score that may be used by clinicians to identify individuals who may benefit from interventions.”
Dr Shah added that this study was about helping to understand mind-reading capabilities, and had created a freely available questionnaire for other efforts in this regard.
Source: Medical Xpress
Journal information: Rachel A. Clutterbuck et al, Development and validation of the Four-Item Mentalising Index., Psychological Assessment (2021). DOI: 10.1037/pas0001004
