Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders

https://doi.org/10.1007/s10803-017-3424-6

BRIEF REPORT

Brief Report: Factor Analysis of the Brazilian Version of the Adult

Autism Spectrum Quotient
Julia Horta Tabosa do Egito1,2 · Gabrielle Martins Ribeiro Ferreira1 · Manoela Izidoro Gonçalves1 ·
Ana Alexandra Caldas Osório1,2,3

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2017

Abstract
This study examined the factor structure of the Brazilian version of the Autism-Spectrum Quotient. This is a self-report
questionnaire for continuous and quantitative assessment of autistic spectrum traits in adults. Confirmatory factor analysis
was performed on the five-factor model (social skill, attention switching, attention to detail, communication and imagination)
proposed by the original authors, support not being found for this model in our sample. An exploratory factor analysis was
then performed that resulted in an alternative three-factor model (social skills, details/patterns and imagination). Confirma-
tory factor analysis of the latter model revealed adequate psychometric indexes. The Brazilian version of the AQ was shown
to be an adequate instrument for the evaluation of signs compatible with the autism spectrum in adults.

Keywords  Autism · Autism Spectrum Quotient · Factor analysis · Validation

Introduction in the typical population (Constantino and Todd 2003; Rut-

According to the American Psychiatric Association (2013),
Autistic Spectrum Disorder (ASD) is characterized by
impairments in communication and social interaction, as
well as by restricted and repetitive patterns of behavior,
activities and interests. As the name implies, the signs and
symptoms of each individual with ASD are distributed along
a continuum of lesser or greater severity. This dimensional
approach, alongside the categorical (presence vs. absence),
thus allows the evaluation of the levels of function or dys-
function of individuals (Volkmar & MacPartland 2014).
This approach also supports the view that milder versions of
the characteristics observed in ASD are normally distributed
* Ana Alexandra Caldas Osório
ana.osorio@mackenzie.br
1
Social and Cognitive Neuroscience Laboratory, Mackenzie
Presbyterian University, São Paulo, Brazil
2
Developmental Disorders Graduate Program, Mackenzie
Presbyterian University, São Paulo, Brazil
3
Social and Cognitive Neuroscience Laboratory
and Developmental Disorders Program, Center for Health
and Biological Science, Mackenzie Presbyterian University,
Rua Piauí, 181, 10 floor, Consolação, São Paulo 01241‑001,
Brazil
ter 2011), the so-called “broader phenotype” (Bailey et al.
1995). People with autistic features may be able to adjust
to the environment in which they live, without presenting
symptoms with the necessary severity for a diagnosis of
ASD.
In order to quantify the autistic traits in typically-devel-
oping adults with preserved intelligence, Baron-Cohen et al.
(2001) developed the Autism Spectrum Quotient (AQ), a
self-report questionnaire with 50 statements that explores
five areas of the functioning of the individual: social skill,
attention to detail, attention switching, communication and
imagination. According to Baron-Cohen et al. (2001), it
is an instrument capable of quantifying where the person
is placed in the continuum that includes ASD and typical
development. The AQ is not intended to be a diagnostic tool,
and the cutoff score proposed by the authors (32 + points)
indicates that the individual has the potential for a diagnosis
if an in-depth investigation is carried out. Given the potential
demonstrated by the instrument for the screening of autistic
traits in an English sample, researchers around the world
began to focus on its validation for other cultural contexts.
For example, in Japan, by Wakabayashi et al. (2006); in
Scotland, by Stewart & Austin (2009); in a French–Cana-
dian sample by Lepage et al. (2009); and in Australia by
Broadbent et al. (2013).

13
Vol.:(0123456789)

However, the five-factor structure proposed by its original
authors has not found consistent support in the various inter-
national validation studies. Austin (2005) proposed a three-
factor alternative solution, comprising 26 items. The three
domains produced were identified as: social skill, details/
patterns and communication/mindreading. Hurst, Mitchell
et al. (2007), following this alternative three-factor model,
applied the AQ in a sample of American college students,
also finding a better consistency for this structure than for
the original. In a study by Hoekstra et al. (2008) with Dutch
university students, the authors reported better psychometric
adequacy with a two-factor model, as they found that four of
the originally proposed domains presented high correlation
values among themselves, and when grouped improved the
model. Thus, this study proposed two factors: social interac-
tion (social interaction (composed of social skill, attention
switching, communication and imagination) and attention
to detail.
Given the usefulness and importance of a self-report
instrument for assessing autistic traits in adults in the gen-
eral population, the present study aimed to evaluate the fac-
tor structure of the Brazilian version of the AQ applied in
a non-clinical sample of university students. Since previ-
ous studies evaluating the psychometric properties of AQ
(Austin 2005; Hoekstra et al. 2008) have suggested alterna-
tive models to the original five-factor model proposed by
Baron-Cohen et al. (2001), factor analyses (confirmatory and
exploratory) were performed to evaluate the specificities of
the data distribution in the present sample.
Method
Participants
Two hundred and twenty five college students (M = 22.76
years, SD = 4.94, age range = 18–55) from the fields of natu-
ral sciences (31.6%), social sciences (45.3%) and humani-
ties (23.1%) participated. The classification criteria for the
different degrees were based on Hoekstra et al. 2008, in
which students from Social Sciences included degrees such
as psychology, education and marketing; Sciences included
mathematics, physics, computer science and engineering;
and Humanities included history and law. The sample was
male (47.1%) and female (52.9%), and of a non-probabilistic
type, since only those who volunteered to take part in the
study answered the questionnaire. Participants received
school credits for participation.
Materials
The translation of the AQ took place after receiving the per-
mission of the author, Professor Simon Baron-Cohen, and
13
Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders
was initially conducted by a researcher fluent in English,
and then back-translated into English by a second researcher
fluent in English. Both versions have been compared, and
any inconsistencies have been resolved (the AQ version in
Brazilian Portuguese is available at https://www.autismre-
searchcentre.com/arc_tests). The original version of the AQ
comprises 50 statements exploring five areas of functioning
of the individual assessed, each with ten items: social skill
(items 1, 11, 13, 15, 22, 36, 44, 45, 47 and 48), attention
switching (items 2, 4, 10, 16, 25, 32, 34, 37, 43 and 46),
attention to detail (items 5, 6, 9, 12, 19, 23, 28, 29, 30 and
49), communication (items 7, 17, 18, 26, 27, 31, 33, 35, 38
and 39) and Imagination (items 3, 8, 14, 20, 21, 24, 40, 41,
42 and 50). The total AQ score and those of its domains were
based on the original Likert scale of four scores (1 = “defi-
nitely agree”, 2 = “slightly agree”, 3 = “slightly disagree”,
4 = “definitely disagree”). Reverse statements were those in
which the “agree” option actually characterized the autism
phenotype, requiring recoding (“I definitely agree” = 4,
“definitely disagree” = 1). This procedure was required for
items: 2, 4, 5, 6, 7, 9, 12, 13, 16, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 26,
33, 35, 39, 41, 42, 43, 45, and 46. The total score had a pos-
sible range of 50–200 points obtained from the sum of the
items (recoded as necessary), the higher the score, the more
autistic traits the individual presented. The application of the
instrument took about 20 min.
Procedure
To obtain a sample as heterogeneous as possible, stu-
dents from various courses at a private university in São
Paulo, Brazil, were invited to participate in the research.
Data collection was done by three researchers who applied
the AQ individually to students recruited on campus. The
free and informed consent was obtained from all individ-
ual participants included in the study, and the study was
approved by the Institutional Ethics Committee (CAAE:
25874414.0.0000.0084).
Data Analyses
SPSS for Windows, version 21.0 was used for descriptive
and inferential data analyses. Gender differences were tested
using independent samples t-tests and differences between
students from different degrees were explored with a multi-
variate analysis of variance (MANOVA). We also reported
effect sizes for the t-tests (Cohen´s d: small, from 0.20;
medium from 0.50; and large from 0.80) and MANOVA (ƞ:
small, from 0.01; medium from 0.06; and large from 0.14).
The same software was used to conduct the exploratory fac-
tor analysis (EFA). In the principal component analysis,
varimax rotation was used, aiming to explain the correlation
between the data with the fewest possible factors.
Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders
The statistical package AMOS GRAPHICS 21.0 was
used to perform the confirmatory factor analyses (CFA) on
the original five-factor model (proposed by Baron-Cohen
et al. 2001) and our proposed three-factor model (Table 1).
The CFA allowed the evaluation of the fit of the proposed
models based on the following indicators: the ratio of Chi
square to degrees of freedom (χ2/gl), to assess the adequacy
of the fit (the lower the value, the better the fit, values up to
3 being acceptable Tolentino et al. (2015); the Comparative
Fit Index (CFI), to compare the model estimated to a null
value (satisfactory values are close to one) (Hair et al. 2005);
the Root-Mean-Square Error of Approximation (RMSEA),
which assesses the model fit (ideal values 0.05–0.08) (Hair
et al. 2005); the Tucker–Lewis Index (TLI), which may have
a different interpretation of the pattern applied to similar
indexes, in that the TLI may exceed the desired range (0–1,
with optimal value above 0.95) (Bentler 1990); and finally,
the Consistent Akaike Information Criterion (CAIC) and
Expected Cross-Validation Index (ECVI), indicators to
assess the adjustment of a model in comparison to others,
which lower values represent a better fit (Bilich et al. 2006).
Regarding analyses of factor structure, the following
steps were taken: Firstly, we conducted a CFA to explore
the structure of the original five-factor model (Baron-Cohen
et al. 2001). However, given the poor fit we conducted an
EFA which ultimately yielded a novel three-factor solution.
In turn, this solution was submitted to a CFA, which evi-
denced indices of good fit.
Results
All questionnaires collected were included in the analysis,
as no total AQ values higher than four standard deviations
above the mean were observed. The observed asymmetry
and kurtosis values for all factors and total score indicate
that the data from the final version of the AQ score has an
approximately normal distribution (Kline 1994).
Factor Structure of the AQ
The CFA conducted indicated that the Baron-Cohen five-
factor model (2001) presented statistical indicators that do
not corroborate the adequacy of the original structure of the
AQ scale for the Brazilian sample. Psychometric indicators
are not considered acceptable according to the literature,
with χ2/gl being high and TLI/CFI below ideal.
Because of the previous result, we performed an EFA. An
analysis of the inflexion point of the scree plot was sugges-
tive of three-factors (however, up to 17 factors had eigenval-
ues above 1). Therefore, we explored the intercorrelations
between the five factors originally proposed to investigate
possible overlaps. Attention Switching was significantly
correlated with the subscales social skill (r = .29), commu-
nication (r = .34), and imagination (r = .18). Additionally,
Communication was significantly correlated with social
skill (r = .54), attention to detail (r = .15), and imagination
(r = .22). This pattern of associations reinforced our decision
to retain the three-factor solution. Those items in the EFA
with loads above 0.30 were selected (Hurst et al. 2007), and
the resulting 30 items were grouped into the following theo-
retical categories: social skills (SS): 1, 11, 13, 15, 17, 22, 26,
34, 38, 44, 47; Details/patterns (DP): 6, 9, 16, 19, 23, 29, 39,
41, 46; imagination (I): 3, 8, 10, 14, 20, 21, 27, 31, 40, 50.
In the confirmatory factor analysis (CFA), it was found
that five additional items presented below acceptable loads
(SS: item 1 = 0.29, DP: item 46 = 0.13, I: item 27 = 0.30, item
31 = 0.24, item 10 = 0.21) and therefore were excluded in the
new test (see Fig. 1). We found that the Kaiser–Meyer–Olkin
(KMO) index of the 25 item three-factor solution showed
the best result (0.76, comparing with 0.65 of the 5-factor
solution), as well as an improvement in all other indicators.
Lower values for CAIC and ECVI demonstrated that this
model showed the best fit solution for our Brazilian sample.
Gender and Degree Comparisons
Independent samples t-tests revealed that men and women
differed significantly on all factors, except SS (p = .163).
Males reported higher interest in DP, more difficulties in I
and overall more autistic traits (Table 2).
Regarding the differences in AQ scores in students
studying different degrees, a MANOVA showed a sig-
nificant effect of degree on AQ scores, F(6, 442) = 11.26,
p < .001. Separate univariate ANOVAS revealed group
differences in DP, F(2, 222) = 25.58, p < .001, ƞ = 0.187,
I, F(2,222) = 10.03, p < .001, ƞ = 0.083, and overall score,
F(2,222) = 15.28, p < .001, ƞ = 0.121. No significant differ-
ences were found in SS, F(2,222) = 0.46, p = .63, ƞ = 0.004.
Overall, the Sciences students attained the highest scores
(more ASD-like traits), followed by the Humanities students
and the Social Sciences students (Table 3).
Discussion
Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD) is characterized by a set
of behavioral and socio-emotional changes that arise early in
development, with consequences and costs for the affected
individuals, their families and society as a whole. The cur-
rent view considers ASD to be a spectrum with varying
levels of symptom severity, and it is increasingly accepted
that the milder end of this spectrum will encompass a non-
clinical population (Bailey et al. 1995; Constantino and
Todd 2003; Rutter 2011). It is therefore possible that adults
with preserved intelligence and considered to have typical
13

Fig. 1  CFA of alternative three-factor model (25 items) for the total
sample. Values and weights of the standard regression per item in the
AQ; SS Social Skills, DP Details/Patterns, I Imagination
development (including being well-adapted to diverse social
and professional situations), present characteristics compat-
ible with an ASD. In order to quantify autistic traits in these
individuals, Baron-Cohen et al. (2001) developed the AQ,
which in the present study was validated for the Brazilian
context in a non-clinical sample of university students.
In the process of analyzing the factor structure of the AQ,
the CFA performed showed that the five-factor model (with
50 items) proposed by Baron-Cohen et al. (2001) did not
13
Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders
Table 1  Factor structure of the original five-factor model and our
three-factor model of the AQ
5-Factor model (50 items) 3-Factor model (25 items)
χ2/gl 2.13 1.74
TLI 0.36 0.79
CFI 0.38 0.81
RMSEA 0.07 0.06
CAIC 3146.13 799.13
ECVI 12.07 (11.45–12.73) 2.58 (2.33–2.87)
Best fit model in bold
present adequate indicators. Therefore an EFA, followed by
a new CFA were carried out, which indicated support for a
three-factor model with 25 items, grouped into three sub-
scales named: social skill (SS), details/patterns (DP) and
imagination (I). The titles were given based on the names
initially proposed by Baron-Cohen and collaborators, as well
as by other authors who carried out international validation
studies. In what concerns the items belonging to each of
the three factors of the proposed Brazilian version, several
aspects are noteworthy. Firstly, the factor SS was the first to
emerge and shared a majority of items (6 out of 10—items
11, 13, 15, 22, 44 and 47) with the original factor by Baron-
Cohen and colleagues. Indeed, several previous studies
conducted in both Western and Eastern cultures found that
a social factor accounted for a large proportion of the vari-
ance (e.g., Austin 2005 UK; Hoekstra et al. 2008 The Neth-
erlands; Freeth et al. 2013 UK, Malaysia and India). Fur-
thermore, our SS factor also incorporated three items from
Baron-Cohen’s communication scale (items 17, 26 and 38)
and one from attention to detail (item 34). The fact that our
social factor congregated mostly items concerning SS and
communication is in line with the most recent diagnostic cri-
teria for ASD proposed on the latest version of the diagnos-
tic and statistical manual of mental disorders (DSM). While
in the DSM-IV-TR, persistent deficits in social interaction
and social communication constituted separate criteria, the
DSM-5 combined them into a single criterion, reflecting an
understanding that the social deficits evidenced by people
with ASD involve atypical interaction and communication.
As for our DP factor, again most of the items are shared
with the original scale’s attention to detail (5 out of 8—
items 6, 9, 19, 23 and 29). The remaining three items belong
to attention switching (item 16 —“I tend to have very strong
interests, which I get upset about if I can’t pursue”), commu-
nication (item 39—“People often tell me that I keep going
on and on about the same thing”) and imagination (item
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.)”). These three specific items do seem to have some
affinity to the DSM-5 diagnostic criterion of restricted and
Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders

Table 2  Means and standard Male (n = 106) Female (n = 119) t (223) p Cohen’s d

deviations of the AQ total score mean (SD) mean (SD)
and subscales comparing gender
SS 19.43 (5.05) 18.47 (5.25) 1.40 0.163 0.186
DP 19.85 (4.29) 18.46 (4.29) 2.44 0.016 0.303
I 14.24 (3.38) 13.07 (3.54) 2.55 0.012 0.338
Total score (min.: 53.54 (7.60) 50.00 (7.03) 3.63 < 0.001 0.483
25-max.: 96)

Bold values indicate p < 0.05

Table 3  Means and standard deviations of the AQ total score and subscales comparing the different degrees
Total sample (N = 225) Sciences—S (n = 71) Humanities—H Social sciences—SS Significant between-
mean (SD) mean (SD) (n = 52) mean (SD) (n = 102) mean (SD) group differences
(p-value)

SS 18.92 (5.17) 18.69 (5.10) 18.54 (4.61) 19.28 (5.50) S = H = SS (p = n.s.)
DP 19.12 (4.33) 21.58 (4.34) 19.42 (3.19) 17.25 (3.96) S > H (p = .003)
H > SS (p = .001)
S > SS (p < .001)
I 13.62(3.51) 14.87 (3.71) 13.96 (3.29) 12.58 (3.17) S > SS (p < .001)
H > SS (p = .017)
Total score 51.67 (7.50) 55.14 (6.82) 51.92 (6.06) 49.12 (7.66) S > H (p = .013)
H > SS (p = .021)
S > SS (p < .001)

repetitive patterns of behavior, interests or activities (hence
the name DP ). Finally, in what concerns our I factor, all of
the items are shared with the original scale (7 out of 7—
items 3, 8, 14, 20, 21, 40, 50).
Overall, comparing the obtained factor structure with the
original structure, I is the most similar factor, followed by SS
(integrating social skill and communication) and DP (inte-
grating mostly details). It is noteworthy that only two items
from the original version’s attention switching were retained
(item 16 belongs to our DP factor and item 34 to our SS fac-
tor). Therefore, difficulties in switching one’s focus of atten-
tion do not seem to characterize ASD-like traits in our Bra-
zilian sample. Cultural differences in ASD symptom profiles
have been widely reported in the literature (e.g., Freeth et al.
2013; Ashley et al. 2017; Matson et al. 2017). In this specific
case, we can see that many items from attention switching
regard attentional difficulties such as problems in perform-
ing several tasks simultaneously (item 32) or in resuming
an activity when interrupted (item 37), which also occur in
psychological conditions other than ASD, such as depression
or anxiety. Interestingly, cross-cultural data on the Big Five
traits indicate that South American countries (these analyses
included data from Brazil) were among the cultures with
the highest levels of Neuroticism—a tendency for feeling
anxious, depressed or irritable (Schmitt et al. 2007). Nev-
ertheless, it is important to note that other studies have also
failed to include attention switching in their AQ structure,
suggesting that this factor may be particularly susceptible to
contextual influences (e.g., Austin 2005; Stewart and Austin
2009).
Gender differences were consistent with previous reports
(e.g., Austin 2005; Baron-Cohen et al. 2001; Hoekstra et al.
2008) as males scored higher than females on the overall
AQ as well as in the DP and I factors. Interestingly, no
significant gender differences were found in the SS factor.
Furthermore, we also replicated previous reports of sig-
nificant differences depending on the field of study, as the
Sciences students attained significantly higher scores that
the Humanities and Social Sciences students (Austin 2005;
Baron-Cohen et al. 2001; Hoekstra et al. 2008). Similar to
Hoekstra et al. (2008), our Social Sciences group scored sig-
nificantly lower than the Humanities group on some factors
(DP, I) and in total AQ. As reported in the Dutch study, our
Social Sciences group was mainly composed of Psychology
students, who may be more prone to engage in and enjoy
social interactions.
Some limitations of this study should be highlighted
in relation to the other studies in the area. One of these
concerns the fact that the data were not collected from
individuals with ASD, therefore, whether the Brazil-
ian version of this instrument was able to discriminate
between individuals with clinical levels of autistic traits

13

and individuals with typical development was not tested.
Given this, it is possible that if the data had been collected
from people with ASD, we may have found higher psy-
chometric indicators, as found by Broadbent et al. (2013),
and Baron-Cohen et al. (2001). However, it is important to
consider that the AQ aims at the rapid quantitative assess-
ment of autistic spectrum traits in typical samples, not the
diagnosis of ASD. Another limitation concerns the size
and characteristics of the study sample. Although using
university samples for validation studies is very common,
the absence of data from the general (non-university) pop-
ulation may raise some doubts regarding the generalization
of the factor structure for this wider group. Furthermore,
future studies may study the psychometric properties of
this scale in larger and more representative samples.
It is worth emphasizing that AQ is not an instrument
for the diagnosis of ASD, and for the purposes of detailed
clinical analysis the methods considered as gold standard
should be used. However, in several research situations
(e.g. large-scale epidemiological studies) and clinical stud-
ies (e.g. broad-spectrum baseline assessments) where there
are time and availability limitations for participants or
patients, this screening instrument may be of great utility.
Our results suggest that the Brazilian version of the
three-factor AQ with 25 items has adequate psychometric
properties. Therefore, the possibility of using the AQ in
the Brazilian context should generate relevant contribu-
tions to research and clinical areas, allowing quick and
easy tracking of autistic traits in large samples.
Acknowledgments  Julia Horta Egito is supported by a PhD grant
(Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de São Paulo, FAPESP
-2016/17242-5). Ana Alexandra Caldas Osório is supported by research
Grant No. 161001 (Fundo Mackenzie de Pesquisa—MackPesquisa).
The authors wish to thank Beatriz Marques Sanchez for her assistance
in the translation process, Gabriel Gaudêncio do Rêgo for his assistance
with graphic edition and Ana Karla Silva Soares with her assistance
in data analysis.
Authors Contributions  JHE participated in study design, data collec-
tion, statistical analyses and manuscript preparation; GMRF and MIG
participated in study design, data collection and data analyses; AACO
conceived and designed the study, coordinated the statistical data analy-
ses, and participated in manuscript preparation and review. All authors
read and approved the final manuscript.
Compliance with Ethical Standards  Behavioural Science, 41(4), 272.
Conflict of interest  The authors declare that they have no conflict of
interest.
Ethical Approval  All procedures performed in studies involving human
participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the insti-
tutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki
declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.
13
Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders
References
American Psychiatric Association (2013). Diagnostic and statistical
manual of mental disorders; (DSM-V). Washington, DC: APA.
Ashley, J., Harrison, A. J., Long, K. A., Tommet, D. C., & Jones,
R. N. (2017). Examining the role of race, ethnicity, and gender
on social and behavioral ratings within the Autism Diagnostic
Observation Schedule. Journal of Autism and Developmental
Disorders, 47(9), 2770–2782.
Austin, E. J. (2005). Personality correlates of the broader autism
phenotype as assessed by the Autism Spectrum Quotient (AQ).
Personality and Individual Differences, 38(2), 451–460.
Bailey, A., Le Couteur, A., Gottesman, I., Bolton, P., Simonoff, E.,
Yuzda, E., et al. (1995). Autism as a strongly genetic disorder:
Evidence from a British twin study. Psychological Medicine,
25(1), 63–77.
Baron-Cohen, S., Wheelwright, S., Skinner, R., Martin, J., & Club-
ley, 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, 31(1), 5–17.
Bentler, P. M. (1990). Comparative fit indexes in structural models.
Psychological Bulletin, 107(2), 238.
Bilich, F., Silva, R., & Ramos, P. (2006). Análise de flaxibilidade em
economia da informação: modelagem de equações estruturais.
Revista de Gestão da Tecnologia e Sistemas de Informação,
3(2), 93–122.
Broadbent, J., Galic, I., & Stokes, M. A. (2013). Validation of autism
spectrum quotient adult version in an Australian sample. Autism
research and treatment, pp. 1–7.
Constantino, J. N., & Todd, R. D. (2003). Autistic traits in the gen-
eral population: A twin study. Archives of General Psychiatry,
60(5), 524–530.
Freeth, M., Sheppard, E., & Ramachandran, R. (2013). A cross-
cultural comparison of autistic traits in the UK, India and
Malaysia. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders,
43, 2569–2583.
Hair, J. F., Anderson, R. E., Tatham, R. L., & Black, W. (2005).
Análise Multivariada de Dados. Porto Alegre: Bookman.
Hoekstra, R. A., Bartels, M., Cath, D. C., & Boomsma, D. I. (2008).
Factor structure, reliability and criterion validity of the Autism-
Spectrum Quotient (AQ): A study in Dutch population and
patient groups. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disor-
ders, 38(8), 1555–1566.
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(7), 1938–1949.
Kline, P. (1994). An easy guide to factor analysis. New York, NY:
Routledge.
Lepage, J. F., Lortie, M., Taschereau-Dumouchel, V., & Théoret, H.
(2009). Validation of French–Canadian versions of the Empathy
Quotient and Autism Spectrum Quotient. Canadian Journal of
Matson, J. L., Matheis, M., Burns, C. O., Esposito, G., Venuti, P.,
Pisula, E., et al. (2017). Examining cross-cultural differences
in autism spectrum disorder: A multinational comparison from
Greece, Italy, Japan, Poland, and the United States. European
Psychiatry, 42, 70–76.
Rutter, M. (2011). Research review: Child psychiatric diagnosis and
classification: Concepts, findings, challenges and potential.
Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 52(6), 647–660.
Schmitt, D. P., Allik, J., McCrae, R. R., Benet-Martínez, V., Alca-
lay, L., Ault, L., et al. (2007). The geographic distribution of
Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders
Big Five personality traits: Patterns and profiles of human self
description across 56 nations. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psy-
chology, 38, 173–212.
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(3), 224–228.
Tolentino, T. M., Maia, M. D. F. D. M., Formiga, N. S., Sousa, B. V.
D. O., & Melo, G. F. (2015). Modelagem estrutural fatorial e
consistência interna da escala de autoestima de Rosenberg em
adolescentes brasileiros. Revista de Psicologia, 6(2), 40–49.
Volkmar, F. R., & McPartland, J. C. (2014). From Kanner to DSM-
5: Autism as an evolving diagnostic concept. Annual Review of
Clinical Psychology, 10, 193–212.
Wakabayashi, A., Baron-Cohen, S., Wheelwright, S., & Tojo, Y.
(2006). The Autism-Spectrum Quotient (AQ) in Japan: A cross-
cultural comparison. Journal of Autism and Developmental Dis-
orders, 36(2), 263–270.
13