Providing a taxonomy for social cognition: how to bridge the gap between expert opinion, empirical data, and theoretical models.

IF 4.1 2区 医学 Q2 NEUROSCIENCES
Journal of Psychiatry & Neuroscience Pub Date : 2025-05-08 Print Date: 2025-05-01 DOI:10.1503/jpn.240156
Willem S Eikelboom, Esther van den Berg, Miriam H Beauchamp, Katherine O Bray, Fiona Kumfor, Sarah E MacPherson, Skye McDonald, Jacoba M Spikman, Roy P C Kessels
{"title":"Providing a taxonomy for social cognition: how to bridge the gap between expert opinion, empirical data, and theoretical models.","authors":"Willem S Eikelboom, Esther van den Berg, Miriam H Beauchamp, Katherine O Bray, Fiona Kumfor, Sarah E MacPherson, Skye McDonald, Jacoba M Spikman, Roy P C Kessels","doi":"10.1503/jpn.240156","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The terminology used to describe components of social cognition lacks clarity and specificity. Recent studies have tried to reach consensus on definitions of social cognition based on expert opinion. These efforts resulted in semantically well-defined terms and distinct concepts, but it remains unclear whether these terms also align with empirical data and existing theoretical models of social cognition. In this commentary, we examine whether the proposed definitions for social cognition are supported by clinical observations and the extant knowledge base on the underlying neural substrates of these skills. In addition, we consider how the proposed definitions align with existing theoretical models of social cognition. We argue that consensus should not be based solely on expert opinion. Therefore, we propose an updated biopsychosocial model of social cognition that integrates proposed expert definitions with a theoretical model of social cognition based on empirical data: the Hierarchical Interdependent Taxonomy of Social cognition (HITS) model. The HITS model guides future research, helps to address the poor construct validity that has been revealed for several tests of social cognition, and provides a framework for the assessment of social cognition.</p>","PeriodicalId":50073,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Psychiatry & Neuroscience","volume":"50 3","pages":"E157-E161"},"PeriodicalIF":4.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12068893/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Psychiatry & Neuroscience","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1503/jpn.240156","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/5/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"Print","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"NEUROSCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The terminology used to describe components of social cognition lacks clarity and specificity. Recent studies have tried to reach consensus on definitions of social cognition based on expert opinion. These efforts resulted in semantically well-defined terms and distinct concepts, but it remains unclear whether these terms also align with empirical data and existing theoretical models of social cognition. In this commentary, we examine whether the proposed definitions for social cognition are supported by clinical observations and the extant knowledge base on the underlying neural substrates of these skills. In addition, we consider how the proposed definitions align with existing theoretical models of social cognition. We argue that consensus should not be based solely on expert opinion. Therefore, we propose an updated biopsychosocial model of social cognition that integrates proposed expert definitions with a theoretical model of social cognition based on empirical data: the Hierarchical Interdependent Taxonomy of Social cognition (HITS) model. The HITS model guides future research, helps to address the poor construct validity that has been revealed for several tests of social cognition, and provides a framework for the assessment of social cognition.

为社会认知提供分类:如何弥合专家意见、经验数据和理论模型之间的差距。
用于描述社会认知组成部分的术语缺乏清晰度和特异性。最近的研究试图在专家意见的基础上对社会认知的定义达成共识。这些努力产生了语义上定义良好的术语和不同的概念,但尚不清楚这些术语是否也与经验数据和现有的社会认知理论模型相一致。在这篇评论中,我们研究了社会认知的定义是否得到临床观察和现有知识基础的支持,这些知识基础是关于这些技能的潜在神经基质。此外,我们还考虑了拟议的定义如何与现有的社会认知理论模型相一致。我们认为,协商一致不应仅仅以专家意见为基础。因此,我们提出了一个更新的社会认知生物心理社会模型,该模型将专家提出的定义与基于经验数据的社会认知理论模型相结合:社会认知层次相互依存分类法(HITS)模型。HITS模型指导了未来的研究,有助于解决社会认知测试中发现的结构效度差的问题,并为社会认知的评估提供了一个框架。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
6.80
自引率
2.30%
发文量
51
审稿时长
2 months
期刊介绍: The Journal of Psychiatry & Neuroscience publishes papers at the intersection of psychiatry and neuroscience that advance our understanding of the neural mechanisms involved in the etiology and treatment of psychiatric disorders. This includes studies on patients with psychiatric disorders, healthy humans, and experimental animals as well as studies in vitro. Original research articles, including clinical trials with a mechanistic component, and review papers will be considered.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信