Skip to main content
. 2015 Apr 7;45(9):2779–2791. doi: 10.1007/s10803-015-2441-6

Table 2.

Demographics of the exploration and validation samples

Exploration sample Validation sample Statistics
N = 204 N = 304 F/χ2 (p value), effect size
Age 22.85 (1.7) 22.82 (1.73) F = 0.02 (0.88); η2 = 4.9E10−5
Sex 105 M (51 %) 155 M (51 %) χ 2 = 0.01 (0.92); Φ = 0.005 (0.92)
Education (N) χ 2 = 0.07 (0.97); Φ = 0.01 (0.97)
 Low 25 (12 %) 35 (12 %)
 Middle 87 (43 %) 131 (43 %)
 High 92 (45 %) 138 (45 %)
Handedness (N) χ 2 = 0.71 (0.40); Φ = 0.04 (0.40)
 Left 22 (11 %) 26 (9 %)
 Right 182 (89 %) 278 (91 %)
AQa (Mean, SD, range)
 Total 55.63 (8.96) [33–80] 57.05 (8.70) [32–91] F = 3.18 (0.08); η2 = 0.006
 Broad factor social behavior 45.69 (7.80) [27–70] 47.31 (7.60) [25–75] F = 5.43 (0.02); η2 = .01b
 Social skills 12.39 (3.65) [7–28] 13.02 (3.67) [7–24] F = 3.55 (0.06); η2 = 0.007
 Routine 8.39 (1.84) [4–13] 8.63 (1.73) [4–14] F = 2.16 (0.14); η2 = 0.004
 Switching 8.87 (1.85) [4–13] 9.08 (2.00) [4–15] F = 1.44 (0.23); η2 = 0.003
 Imagination 16.03 (3.38) [8–23] 16.58 (3.39) [8–31] F = 3.19 (0.08); η2 = 0.006
 Numbers/patterns 9.94 (3.10) [5–19] 9.74 (3.21) [5–20] F = 0.48 (0.49); η2 = 0.01

M males

a4-point scale

bA common side effect of working with large samples is the tendency that small between group differences become statistically significant, but may be unimportant. Here we report effect sizes to illustrate the magnitude of these effects. The difference in mean score on the broad factor social behavior subscale is significantly different between groups; however, the effect size shows that the magnitude is rather small (a value of η = 0.02 is considered small, here we report an even lower value: of η = 0.01). It should be noted that in all of our analyses we used the aggregated score of the AQ, i.e. we didn’t examine associations based on AQ subscales in any of our analyses