4.5 Article

Exploring Cultural Differences in Autistic Traits: A Factor Analytic Study of Children with Autism in China and the Netherlands

期刊

JOURNAL OF AUTISM AND DEVELOPMENTAL DISORDERS
卷 52, 期 11, 页码 4750-4762

出版社

SPRINGER/PLENUM PUBLISHERS
DOI: 10.1007/s10803-021-05342-9

关键词

Culture; Autistic traits; Children; Autism spectrum disorder; Autism spectrum quotient

资金

  1. China Scholarship Council
  2. Netherlands Organization for Scientific Research (NWO) [Aut.17.006]
  3. National Institute of Health Research from the UK Government [NIHR200842]
  4. Humanities and Social Sciences Youth Foundation of the Ministry of Education of China [13YJCZH167]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The study evaluated the factor structure of the parent-reported Autism Spectrum Quotient Short Form in autistic children from China and the Netherlands, revealing culturally variant factor structures that may hinder cross-cultural comparisons. Substantial variation in parent-reported autistic traits between China and the Netherlands was observed, indicating potential challenges in cross-cultural assessments.
Autism spectrum disorders are diagnosed globally, but recognition, interpretation and reporting may vary across cultures. To compare autism across cultures it is important to investigate whether the tools used are conceptually equivalent across cultures. This study evaluated the factor structure of the parent-reported Autism Spectrum Quotient Short Form in autistic children from China (n = 327; 3 to 17 years) and the Netherlands (n = 694; 6 to 16 years). Confirmatory factor analysis did not support the two-factor hierarchical model previously identified. Exploratory factor analysis indicated culturally variant factor structures between China and the Netherlands, which may hamper cross-cultural comparisons. Several items loaded onto different factors in the two samples, indicating substantial variation in parent-reported autistic traits between China and the Netherlands.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据