Psychometric Properties of the Spanish Version of the Broad Autism Phenotype Questionnaire: Strengths, Weaknesses, and Future Improvements.

Godoy-Giménez et al. (2018) checked if the Spanish Broad Autism Phenotype Questionnaire works as well as the English one. They gave the 36-item survey to Spanish-speaking adults. The team looked at three parts: Aloof, Rigid, and Pragmatic Language.

Only the Aloof and Rigid sub-scales held up. They showed good reliability and validity. The Pragmatic Language sub-scale failed. It did not hang together or match outside criteria.

Ingersoll et al. (2011) had already shown the English BAPQ is solid across all three sub-scales. The Spanish version copied that success for Aloof and Rigid, but not for Pragmatic Language.

Godoy-Giménez et al. (2024) later fixed the problem. Their new 20-item BAP-IT drops Pragmatic Language and keeps only two domains. This update supersedes the 2018 Spanish BAPQ by design.

Stewart et al. (2018) ran a parallel Spanish validation of the Repetitive Behavior Scale. Like Marta et al., they found most sub-scales worked, but one needed tweaks. The pattern shows translating autism tools often uncovers weak spots.

If you screen Spanish-speaking parents or adults for broad autism traits, use only the Aloof and Rigid scores from the Spanish BAPQ. Skip the Pragmatic Language items. For a faster, cleaner tool, switch to the 2024 BAP-IT. Either way, note scores in your report so future teams know which parts you trusted.