TABLE 1 | Summary of correlation analysis between SAself /SAother and four questionnaires scores using Pearson’scorrelation and Pearson bend correlation. Measure EQ SQ Independent SC Dependent SC PDI (overall) (British only) 0.37 [0.02, 0.67] 0.44 [0.02, 0.76] 0.20 [-0.23, 0.65] 0.15 [-0.28, 0.59]SAself(Method) Pearson Pearson bend-0.11 [-0.36, 0.14] -0.07 [-0.35, 0.20] 0.01 [-0.27, 0.30] 0.07 [-0.22, 0.38]0.01 [-0.26, 0.25] 0 [-0.28, 0.28] 0 [-0.28, 0.23] -0.04 [-0.33, 0.23]0.17 [-0.07, 0.40] 0.17 [-0.12, 0.43] 0.44 [0.21, 0.64] 0.40 [0.14, 0.65]0 [-0.26, 0.30] 0 [-0.29, 0.28] -0.02 [-0.31, 0.31] 0.06 [-0.23, 0.33]SAotherPearson Pearson bendData shown are Pearson’s r values, and 95 confidence intervals are included in the brackets. Pearson skipped correlations gave similar results. Note that the p-value for the correlation between SAself and PDI Designed for the specific requirements of this study (Postmes et al. overall is just above.05, but the bootstrapped 95 confidence interval is above 0 and Pearson bend correlation was significant. SAself , sensory attenuation for self-generated stimuli; SAother , sensory attenuation for others generated stimuli; EQ, empathy quotient; SQ, systemizing quotient; SC, self-construal; PDI, Peters et al. (2004) delusion inventory. p = 0.06; p < 0.05.Frontiers in Psychology | http://www.frontiersin.orgDecember 2015 | Volume 6 | ArticleCao and GrossSelf and Sounds Generated by OthersFIGURE 3 | Correlation results. Scatter plot with SAother on x-axis and Independent self-construal on y-axis (A), and SAself on x-axis and PDI (overall) score on y-axis (B). Linear fit was shown with lines. Low SAself /SAother values correspond to a strong sensory attenuation effect. PDI, Peters et al. (2004) delusion inventory; SAself , sensory attenuation for self-generated stimuli; SAother , sensory attenuation for others generated stimuli.103). Peters et al. (2004) reported that in Western cultural context the mean scores for normal and deluded groups are 59 and 131, respectively. Since no norms are available for Chinese PDI scores, further studies are needed to clarify this question. For unknown reasons we failed to obtain a significant sensory attenuation for the self effect, which has been previously shown (Sato, 2008; Weiss et al., 2011). Like previous studies, the standard tone in the current study was a unisensory stimulus in all conditions. The difference among conditions was what happened before the presentation of the tone. The `computer' condition functioned to exclude the alternative explanation that the predictability of the stimulus onset explained the conditional differences. Similar manipulations for the control condition have been reported before (e.g., Ford et al., 2007). Sensory attenuation for the self renders a 74 dB tone to be perceived about 0.4 dB (Sato, 2008) or 0.2 dB (Weiss et al., 2011) softer, which is a very small perceptual effect and may be difficult to be detected. In our study, the 74 dB tone was perceived as 0.1 dB softer and 0.01 dB louder when it was self-generated for Chinese and British participants, respectively. Whereas the mean of SAself may shift due to unknown reasons, the variance of SAself across participants may not.