Social cognition psychometric evaluation: Results of the initial psychometric study

Amy E. Pinkham, David L. Penn, Michael F. Green, Philip D. Harvey

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

172 Scopus citations


Measurement of social cognition in treatment trials remains problematic due to poor and limited psychometric data for many tasks. As part of the Social Cognition Psychometric Evaluation (SCOPE) study, the psychometric properties of 8 tasks were assessed. One hundred and seventy-nine stable outpatients with schizophrenia and 104 healthy controls completed the battery at baseline and a 2-4-week retest period at 2 sites. Tasks included the Ambiguous Intentions Hostility Questionnaire (AIHQ), Bell Lysaker Emotion Recognition Task (BLERT), Penn Emotion Recognition Task (ER-40), Relationships Across Domains (RAD), Reading the Mind in the Eyes Task (Eyes), The Awareness of Social Inferences Test (TASIT), Hinting Task, and Trustworthiness Task. Tasks were evaluated on: (i) test-retest reliability, (ii) utility as a repeated measure, (iii) relationship to functional outcome, (iv) practicality and tolerability, (v) sensitivity to group differences, and (vi) internal consistency. The BLERT and Hinting task showed the strongest psychometric properties across all evaluation criteria and are recommended for use in clinical trials. The ER-40, Eyes Task, and TASIT showed somewhat weaker psychometric properties and require further study. The AIHQ, RAD, and Trustworthiness Task showed poorer psychometric properties that suggest caution for their use in clinical trials.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)494-504
Number of pages11
JournalSchizophrenia bulletin
Issue number2
StatePublished - Mar 2016


  • Emotion processing
  • Measurement
  • Mental state attribution
  • Reliability
  • Schizophrenia
  • Social perception
  • Validity

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Psychiatry and Mental health


Dive into the research topics of 'Social cognition psychometric evaluation: Results of the initial psychometric study'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this