↓ Skip to main content

Individual and gender differences in Empathizing and Systemizing

Overview of attention for article published in Japanese Journal of Psychology, January 2006
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • One of the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#8 of 699)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (99th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
92 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
30 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
56 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Individual and gender differences in Empathizing and Systemizing
Published in
Japanese Journal of Psychology, January 2006
DOI 10.4992/jjpsy.77.271
Pubmed ID
Authors

Akio Wakabayashi, Simon Baron-Cohen, Sally Wheelwright

Abstract

Empathizing is a drive to identify another person's emotions and thoughts and respond to them appropriately. Systemizing is a drive to analyze systems or construct systems. The Empathizing-Systemizing (E-S) model suggests that these are major dimensions in which individuals differ from each other, and women being superior in empathizing and men in systemizing. In this study, we examined new questionnaires, the Empathy Quotient (EQ) and the Systemizing Quotient (SQ). Participants were 1 250 students, 616 men and 634 women, from eight universities, who completed both the EQ and SQ. Results showed that women scored higher than men on the EQ, and the result was reversed on the SQ. Results also showed that humanities majors scored higher than sciences majors on the EQ, and again the result was reversed on the SQ. The results were discussed in relation to the E-S theory of gender differences.

Timeline

Login to access the full chart related to this output.

If you don’t have an account, click here to discover Explorer

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 92 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 56 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Japan 1 2%
Faroe Islands 1 2%
Unknown 54 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 11 20%
Student > Master 8 14%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 9%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 7%
Student > Bachelor 4 7%
Other 14 25%
Unknown 10 18%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 23 41%
Social Sciences 4 7%
Neuroscience 3 5%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 5%
Computer Science 2 4%
Other 9 16%
Unknown 12 21%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 61. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 14 November 2018.
All research outputs
#754,161
of 26,626,316 outputs
Outputs from Japanese Journal of Psychology
#8
of 699 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#1,519
of 179,003 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Japanese Journal of Psychology
#1
of 4 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 26,626,316 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 97th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 699 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.2. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 179,003 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 4 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them