Reading the Mind in the Eyes test

The Reading the Mind in the Eyes Test (RMET or Eyes Test for short) has been widely used to measure theory of mind—the ability to recognize and understand another person’s mental state—or social intelligence.

Take the test here:

This test is free, anonymous, and requires
no email sign-up for the results

Versions & translations

• The RMET has been translated into multiple languages.

Instructions

The Reading the Mind in the Eyes Test consists of 36 photographs, each giving you four choices.

For each set of eyes, choose which word best describes what the person in the picture is thinking or feeling. You may feel that more than one word is applicable, but please choose just one word, the word which you consider to be most suitable. Before making your choice, make sure that you have read all four.

1. 1. Once you have read the instructions, complete the practice item. Do not worry about what the answer is; the point of the practice item is for you to understand what to do.
   2. Now you are ready to begin the test.
   3. Please do not review the scoring until the test is complete, as it will affect your scores.

Scoring

The total score possible is 36.

Each item is scored as correct or incorrect. Total your correct items

• Autistic average & range: 24.9 ± 0.7 (23–30)^[1]Structural Correlates of Reading the Mind in the Eyes in Autism Spectrum Disorder (Sato et al., 2017)
• Neurotypical average & range: 27.3 ± 0.5 (18–29)^[2]Structural Correlates of Reading the Mind in the Eyes in Autism Spectrum Disorder (Sato et al., 2017)

These are group averages, not diagnostic cutoffs. Scores overlap considerably between autistic and non-autistic people.

What does my RMET score mean for autism?

The RMET measures a relatively narrow aspect of social perception. A high or low score cannot tell you whether you are autistic. Autism involves a much broader pattern of traits across social communication and interaction, repetitive behaviours, routines, focused interests, and sensory experiences.

If you’re exploring whether you may be autistic, the tests below can help you explore a much broader range of autistic traits.

Autistic Trait Profile — See your traits across 7 core areas

Not sure which autism test to take next? The Autistic Trait Profile looks at your experiences across 7 trait areas commonly considered when clinicians assess someone for autism, including social communication and interaction, repetitive behaviours, routines, focused interests, and sensory experiences.

Rather than giving you just one total score, it shows you where your autistic traits appear across your individual profile.

Take the Autistic Trait Profile →

AQ — Explore your overall pattern of autistic traits

The Autism Spectrum Quotient (AQ) looks across several areas, including social skills, communication, attention switching, attention to detail, and imagination.

Take the AQ →

RAADS–R — Explore autistic traits in adulthood

The RAADS–R explores social relatedness, sensory and motor experiences, language, and focused interests. It was developed specifically to identify autistic traits that may otherwise be missed in adults.

Take the RAADS–R →

CAT-Q — Explore masking and camouflaging

The CAT-Q looks at strategies you may use to compensate for, hide, or adapt autistic traits in social situations. It can be particularly useful if you have learned ways of navigating social situations that make your difficulties less visible to others.

Take the CAT-Q →

EQ — Explore how you experience empathy

The Empathy Quotient (EQ) explores cognitive empathy, emotional responsiveness, and social skills. Your profile can also help you explore the balance between understanding other people’s emotions and emotionally responding to them.

Take the EQ →

Want to explore further?

Visit our autism tests page to explore the full collection and find the tests that best match what you want to understand.

Explore all autism tests →

Validity

The RMET is one measure sometimes used in autism research and assessment contexts to explore emotion recognition and social perception. The Eyes test is reliable and stable over 1 year.^[3]The “Reading the Mind in the Eyes” test: Systematic review of psychometric properties and a validation study in Italy (Vellante et al., 2013)

2001 update

Note that the original RMET—though a valid measure—had some shortcomings in that the items had a forced binary choice which left too much up to chance, and it was deemed that a longer test (36 vs. 25 items) would yield more statistically significant results that can better differentiate between autistics, Broader Autism Phenotype (BAP), and non-autistics.^[4]The “Reading the Mind in the Eyes” Test Revised Version: A Study with Normal Adults, and Adults with Asperger Syndrome or High-functioning Autism (Baron-Cohen et al., 2003) The revised test from 2001 rectified these issues. Consequent reports on the validity of the RMET are based on the revised test.

Not a ToM measure?

However, it should be noted that while a meta-analytic investigation from 2023 found that the RMET has an acceptable internal consistency (α = .73), it’s more strongly related with emotion perception (r = .33, ρ = .48) compared to alternative theory of mind measures (r = .29, ρ = .39). Furthermore, the RMET was weakly to moderately related with:^[5]Sty in the Mind’s Eye: A Meta-Analytic Investigation of the Nomological Network and Internal Consistency of the “Reading the Mind in the Eyes” Test (Kittel, Olderbak, & Wilhelm, 2021)

• Vocabulary (r = .25, ρ = .32)
• Cognitive empathy (r = .14, ρ = .20)
• Affective empathy (r = .13, ρ = .19)

The authors conclude that the RMET is more of an emotion perception measure than a measure of theory of mind per se.

Discussion

Discussion

Ember:

I scored 35/36, which is above the average ranges reported in some studies. I tend to consciously analyze facial expressions by looking for specific cues around the eyes and eyebrows.

One limitation I notice is that the test uses only Caucasian faces. There also appear to be gendered patterns in how some of the emotions are represented.

Kendall:

When I first took the test, I scored 19/36. Eight months later, I scored 27/36.

I often used process of elimination or guessed when I wasn’t sure. I may also have remembered some of my previous mistakes, which could explain part of the improvement on my second attempt.

Without the word choices, many of the photographs would have been very difficult for me to interpret. For me, one useful aspect of the test was identifying emotions and mental states that I may need to take extra care interpreting.

Eva:

When I first took the test several years ago, I remember getting only a few items wrong. When I retook it in 2024, however, I got 6 items wrong, despite feeling confident in my answers.

What interested me most was the pattern of my mistakes. In the past, I tended to interpret ambiguous facial expressions more negatively. This time, I often interpreted expressions as more positive or innocuous than the intended answers.

My experience also highlights something important about the RMET: recognizing mental states from isolated photographs of the eyes may not reflect how we understand people in real-life social situations, where we usually have access to the whole face, body language, voice, and context.

Reading the Mind in the Eyes Test

Answers

The table below shows the correct answers in bold and denoted with a black star (★). For easy comparison, we suggest opening this post in another window, so you can compare the table with the images of the test.

RMET answers

If you are looking for an autism/AuDHD assessment,
our (autistic) assessment team can offer help!

You can find more information here:

Autism/AuDHD assessments