Call to action on social cognition measures in clinical research

IF 2.4 Q2 PSYCHIATRY

Schizophrenia Research-Cognition Pub Date : 2026-03-01 Epub Date: 2025-11-18 DOI:10.1016/j.scog.2025.100400

T.B. Ziermans , M. Hajdúk , A.E. Pinkham , SIRS Social Cognition Research Harmonization Group

{"title":"Call to action on social cognition measures in clinical research","authors":"T.B. Ziermans , M. Hajdúk , A.E. Pinkham , SIRS Social Cognition Research Harmonization Group","doi":"10.1016/j.scog.2025.100400","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Objective</h3><div>To describe current practices and key barriers in social cognition (SC) assessment, given its central role in psychiatric and neurological disorders and the limitations of existing measures.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>Fifty-two SC experts from 20 countries completed an online survey regarding SC tests and questions about their usage frequency and perceived obstacles.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>Only facial emotion recognition tasks were used frequently, while the Hinting task and Reading the Mind in the Eyes Test (RMET) were used by over half of participants. However, 10 experts also urged discontinuation of RMET, mostly due to validity concerns. Major obstacles included lack of culture-appropriate norms and poor psychometric properties.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>SC assessment is limited by cultural bias and weak psychometrics. Developing and validating culturally sensitive tools, harmonizing protocols, and securing funding are essential to advance research, enable international trials, and improve clinical outcomes.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":38119,"journal":{"name":"Schizophrenia Research-Cognition","volume":"43 ","pages":"Article 100400"},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2026-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Schizophrenia Research-Cognition","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2215001325000587","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/11/18 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PSYCHIATRY","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective

To describe current practices and key barriers in social cognition (SC) assessment, given its central role in psychiatric and neurological disorders and the limitations of existing measures.

Methods

Fifty-two SC experts from 20 countries completed an online survey regarding SC tests and questions about their usage frequency and perceived obstacles.

Results

Only facial emotion recognition tasks were used frequently, while the Hinting task and Reading the Mind in the Eyes Test (RMET) were used by over half of participants. However, 10 experts also urged discontinuation of RMET, mostly due to validity concerns. Major obstacles included lack of culture-appropriate norms and poor psychometric properties.

Conclusions

SC assessment is limited by cultural bias and weak psychometrics. Developing and validating culturally sensitive tools, harmonizing protocols, and securing funding are essential to advance research, enable international trials, and improve clinical outcomes.

查看原文本刊更多论文

临床研究中社会认知测量的行动呼吁

目的考虑到社会认知（SC）评估在精神和神经疾病中的核心作用以及现有措施的局限性，描述其目前的做法和主要障碍。方法来自20个国家的52位SC专家完成了一项关于SC测试的在线调查，并询问了SC测试的使用频率和感知障碍。结果只有面部情绪识别任务被频繁使用，而超过一半的参与者使用了暗示任务和眼读心术测试。然而，10名专家也敦促停止使用RMET，主要是出于对有效性的担忧。主要障碍包括缺乏与文化相适应的规范和糟糕的心理测量特性。结论ssc评估存在文化偏见和心理测量学薄弱的局限性。开发和验证具有文化敏感性的工具、协调协议以及确保资金，对于推进研究、开展国际试验和改善临床结果至关重要。

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