6 159 Eyes on you: ensuring empathic accuracy or signaling empathy? For 13 perceivers eye gaze data were missing on one or more videos (42 videos in total, range: 1-8) and 11 perceivers had <70% valid gaze data on one or more videos (37 videos in total, range: 1-8). In addition, 17 perceivers of the final sample were missing continuous EA ratings on one or more videos (37 videos in total, range: 1-5) due to technical problems during the task or inadequate use of the dial. This resulted in a final sample of 107 perceivers with 981 videos in total for the analyses (out of 1070, 8.3% missing data), including 48 males (45%, Mage = 50 years, SD = 5.97) and 59 females (55%, Mage = 47 years, SD = 4.75). The final sample (n = 107) was representative for the total number of participants that performed the EA task (n = 150) as they did not significantly differ on age, gender, trait empathy, autism spectrum traits, and intellectual functioning. The study was approved by the medical ethical committee of the Leiden University Medical Centre (LUMC) (P17.241) and was performed in accordance with the declaration of Helsinki and the Dutch Medical Research Involving Human Subjects Act (WMO). All participants provided written informed consent at the start of all study visits and were blind to the hypotheses of the present study. Procedure Families were recruited via public places and social media. Parents and adolescents were briefed about the study and underwent a comprehensive telephone screening during which family circumstances and verbal informed consent were discussed. When found eligible for participation, families were invited for a lab visit to the Leiden University Treatment and Expertise Centre (LUBEC) in Leiden. Two weeks prior to the appointment participants were asked to fill out an online questionnaire battery that included questions about demographics and clinical and cognitive constructs (see Measures and materials). During the lab visit, families performed parent-adolescent interaction tasks and filled out additional questionnaires, parents were screened for psychopathology, and intellectual abilities were assessed. Furthermore, parents performed the EA task while eye tracking measures were taken, which is the focus of the present study.1 Measures and materials Empathic accuracy task Similar to the English task (Zaki et al., 2008), the Dutch version of the EA task developed by aan het Rot and Hogenelst (2014) includes dynamic stimuli of various target people who are narrating both positive/happy (e.g., celebrating a birthday with friends) and negative/sad (e.g., 1 After the lab visit, families were (a) asked to fill out ecological momentary assessments for 14 consecutive days on their smartphones, using a mobile app to assess affect and parent-adolescent interactions in daily life, and (b) invited for an MRI session on a separate day. Data derived from these parts of the RE-PAIR study were reported elsewhere.
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MjY0ODMw