A Systematic Review of the Current Measures of Theory of Mind in Adults with Schizophrenia

Ya-Chin Yeh, Chung-Ying Lin, Ping-Chia Li, Chi-Fa Hung, Chun-Hua Cheng, Ming-Hui Kuo and Kuan-Lin Chen
Additional contact information
Ya-Chin Yeh: Institute of Allied Health Sciences, College of Medicine, National Cheng Kung University, Tainan 701401, Taiwan
Chung-Ying Lin: Institute of Allied Health Sciences, College of Medicine, National Cheng Kung University, Tainan 701401, Taiwan
Ping-Chia Li: Department of Occupational Therapy, I-Shou University, Kaohsiung 824005, Taiwan
Chi-Fa Hung: Department of Psychiatry, Kaohsiung Chang Gung Memorial Hospital and Chang Gung University College of Medicine, Kaohsiung 833401, Taiwan
Chun-Hua Cheng: Department of Occupational Therapy, Kaohsiung Municipal Kai-Syuan Psychiatric Hospital, Kaohsiung 802211, Taiwan
Ming-Hui Kuo: Department of Occupational Therapy, Kaohsiung Municipal Kai-Syuan Psychiatric Hospital, Kaohsiung 802211, Taiwan
Kuan-Lin Chen: Institute of Allied Health Sciences, College of Medicine, National Cheng Kung University, Tainan 701401, Taiwan

IJERPH, 2021, vol. 18, issue 13, 1-17

Abstract: Adults with schizophrenia usually have impairments in theory of mind (ToM), which subsequently cause them problems in social interaction. Therefore, it is important for healthcare providers to assess their ToM using adequate measures. This systematic review evaluated current ToM measures (or ToM tasks) for adults with schizophrenia and summarized their specific characteristics, including the concept and construct, administration, and psychometric properties. From a review of 117 articles, 13 types of ToM tasks were identified, and the findings from these articles were qualitatively synthesized. The results showed that ToM tasks are diverse in their presentation modalities, answer modes, strategies of controlling cognitive confounders, and scoring. Most tasks employ cognitive and affective dimensions and target a specific, single ToM concept. The present systematic review found that psychometric evidence supporting the ToM tasks, such as internal consistency, test–retest reliability, unidimensionality, and convergent, criterion, and ecological validities, is insufficient. Based on the results, we propose several principles for selecting appropriate ToM tasks in practice, e.g., selecting a task with multiple ToM concepts, or an exclusive ToM construct containing the cognitive and affective dimensions. Moreover, future studies are needed to provide more psychometric evidence on each type of ToM task applied in people with schizophrenia.

Keywords: COSMIN; measure; mentalization; schizophrenia; theory of mind (search for similar items in EconPapers)
JEL-codes: I I1 I3 Q Q5 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2021
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/18/13/7172/pdf (application/pdf)
https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/18/13/7172/ (text/html)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:18:y:2021:i:13:p:7172-:d:588441

Access Statistics for this article

IJERPH is currently edited by Ms. Jenna Liu

More articles in IJERPH from MDPI
Bibliographic data for series maintained by MDPI Indexing Manager ().