File Download

There are no files associated with this item.

  Links for fulltext
     (May Require Subscription)
Supplementary

Article: Reliability of Theory of Mind Tasks in Schizophrenia, ASD, and Nonclinical Populations: A Systematic Review and Reliability Generalization Meta-analysis

TitleReliability of Theory of Mind Tasks in Schizophrenia, ASD, and Nonclinical Populations: A Systematic Review and Reliability Generalization Meta-analysis
Authors
KeywordsAutism spectrum disorders
Mentalising
Meta-analysis
Psychometric reliability
Schizophrenia
Systematic review
Theory of mind
Issue Date8-Oct-2024
PublisherSpringer
Citation
Neuropsychology Review, 2024 How to Cite?
AbstractThough theory of mind (ToM) is an important area of study for different disciplines, however, the psychometric evaluations of ToM tasks have yielded inconsistent results across studies and populations, raising the concerns about the accuracy, consistency, and generalizability of these tasks. This systematic review and meta-analysis examined the psychometric reliability of 27 distinct ToM tasks across 90 studies involving 2771 schizophrenia (SZ), 690 autism spectrum disorder (ASD), and 15,599 nonclinical populations (NC). Findings revealed that while all ToM tasks exhibited satisfactory internal consistency in ASD and SZ, about half of them were not satisfactory in NC, including the commonly used Reading the Mind in the Eye Test and Hinting Task. Other than that, Reading the Mind in the Eye Test showed acceptable reliability across populations, whereas Hinting Task had poor test–retest reliability. Notably, only Faux Pas Test and Movie for the Assessment of Social Cognition had satisfactory reliability across populations albeit limited numbers of studies. However, only ten studies examined the psychometric properties of ToM tasks in ASD adults, warranting additional evaluations. The study offered practical implications for selecting ToM tasks in research and clinical settings, and underscored the importance of having a robust psychometric reliability in ToM tasks across populations.
Persistent Identifierhttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/350635
ISSN
2023 Impact Factor: 5.4
2023 SCImago Journal Rankings: 1.908

 

DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorTsui, HKH-
dc.contributor.authorWong, TY-
dc.contributor.authorMa, CF-
dc.contributor.authorWong, TE-
dc.contributor.authorHsiao, J-
dc.contributor.authorChan, SKW-
dc.date.accessioned2024-10-31T00:30:32Z-
dc.date.available2024-10-31T00:30:32Z-
dc.date.issued2024-10-08-
dc.identifier.citationNeuropsychology Review, 2024-
dc.identifier.issn1040-7308-
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/350635-
dc.description.abstractThough theory of mind (ToM) is an important area of study for different disciplines, however, the psychometric evaluations of ToM tasks have yielded inconsistent results across studies and populations, raising the concerns about the accuracy, consistency, and generalizability of these tasks. This systematic review and meta-analysis examined the psychometric reliability of 27 distinct ToM tasks across 90 studies involving 2771 schizophrenia (SZ), 690 autism spectrum disorder (ASD), and 15,599 nonclinical populations (NC). Findings revealed that while all ToM tasks exhibited satisfactory internal consistency in ASD and SZ, about half of them were not satisfactory in NC, including the commonly used Reading the Mind in the Eye Test and Hinting Task. Other than that, Reading the Mind in the Eye Test showed acceptable reliability across populations, whereas Hinting Task had poor test–retest reliability. Notably, only Faux Pas Test and Movie for the Assessment of Social Cognition had satisfactory reliability across populations albeit limited numbers of studies. However, only ten studies examined the psychometric properties of ToM tasks in ASD adults, warranting additional evaluations. The study offered practical implications for selecting ToM tasks in research and clinical settings, and underscored the importance of having a robust psychometric reliability in ToM tasks across populations.-
dc.languageeng-
dc.publisherSpringer-
dc.relation.ispartofNeuropsychology Review-
dc.rightsThis work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.-
dc.subjectAutism spectrum disorders-
dc.subjectMentalising-
dc.subjectMeta-analysis-
dc.subjectPsychometric reliability-
dc.subjectSchizophrenia-
dc.subjectSystematic review-
dc.subjectTheory of mind-
dc.titleReliability of Theory of Mind Tasks in Schizophrenia, ASD, and Nonclinical Populations: A Systematic Review and Reliability Generalization Meta-analysis-
dc.typeArticle-
dc.identifier.doi10.1007/s11065-024-09652-4-
dc.identifier.scopuseid_2-s2.0-85205863191-
dc.identifier.eissn1573-6660-
dc.identifier.issnl1040-7308-

Export via OAI-PMH Interface in XML Formats


OR


Export to Other Non-XML Formats