I plan to write more about this later, but one thing that I can do now after reading the full text of the Austrian study that was published in 2006 that involved the RMET is that the mean score in the RMET for 206 normal male controls was 22.35 and the mean score for 217 normal female controls was 23.31 in that test, both being rather lower scores for normal controls than have been found in many other studies of the RMET. I believe this is because this study is superior, as I will explain later.
So, the figures quoted by Cordelia Fine in her interesting book Delusions of Gender were true, and the claim by Prof. Simon Baron-Cohen in his 2003 book The Essential Difference that a score of 30 in this test is a typical average score looks most questionable in light of the 2006 Austrian study. This discrepancy is especially important when one considers that scores by autistics on this test of around 20 to 22 have been cited as evidence of a deficit in reading emotions or "empathizing" in autistic people. No score on any test can be judged to be superior or normal or subnormal without first having an understanding of what a normal score is, based on solid scientific research studies. So do autistic people really have a deficit in reading human emotions in facial expressions in the eyes in photographs of eyes?
Martin Voracek and Stefan G. Dressler (2006) Lack of correlation between digit ratio (2D:4D) and Baron-Cohen’s “Reading the Mind in the Eyes” test, empathy, systemising, and autism-spectrum quotients in a general population sample. Personality and Individual Differences. Volume 41, Issue 8, December 2006. P. 1481-1491.