Dataset Information

The ToMenovela - A Photograph-Based Stimulus Set for the Study of Social Cognition with High Ecological Validity.

ABSTRACT: We present the ToMenovela, a stimulus set that has been developed to provide a set of normatively rated socio-emotional stimuli showing varying amount of characters in emotionally laden interactions for experimental investigations of (i) cognitive and (ii) affective Theory of Mind (ToM), (iii) emotional reactivity, and (iv) complex emotion judgment with respect to Ekman's basic emotions (happiness, anger, disgust, fear, sadness, surprise, Ekman and Friesen, 1975). Stimuli were generated with focus on ecological validity and consist of 190 scenes depicting daily-life situations. Two or more of eight main characters with distinct biographies and personalities are depicted on each scene picture. To obtain an initial evaluation of the stimulus set and to pave the way for future studies in clinical populations, normative data on each stimulus of the set was obtained from a sample of 61 neurologically and psychiatrically healthy participants (31 female, 30 male; mean age 26.74 ± 5.84), including a visual analog scale rating of Ekman's basic emotions (happiness, anger, disgust, fear, sadness, surprise) and free-text descriptions of the content of each scene. The ToMenovela is being developed to provide standardized material of social scenes that are available to researchers in the study of social cognition. It should facilitate experimental control while keeping ecological validity high.

SUBMITTER: Herbort MC

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5133259 | biostudies-literature | 2016

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

The ToMenovela - A Photograph-Based Stimulus Set for the Study of Social Cognition with High Ecological Validity.

Herbort Maike C MC Iseev Jenny J Stolz Christopher C Roeser Benedict B Großkopf Nora N Wüstenberg Torsten T Hellweg Rainer R Walter Henrik H Dziobek Isabel I Schott Björn H BH

Frontiers in psychology 20161202

We present the ToMenovela, a stimulus set that has been developed to provide a set of normatively rated socio-emotional stimuli showing varying amount of characters in emotionally laden interactions for experimental investigations of (i) cognitive and (ii) affective Theory of Mind (ToM), (iii) emotional reactivity, and (iv) complex emotion judgment with respect to Ekman's basic emotions (happiness, anger, disgust, fear, sadness, surprise, Ekman and Friesen, 1975). Stimuli were generated with foc ...[more]

PMID: 27994562

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundThe current methods of evaluating cognitive functioning typically rely on a single time point to assess and characterize an individual's performance. However, cognitive functioning fluctuates within individuals over time in relation to environmental, psychological, and physiological contexts. This limits the generalizability and diagnostic utility of single time point assessments, particularly among individuals who may exhibit large variations in cognition depending on physiological or psychological context (eg, those with type 1 diabetes [T1D], who may have fluctuating glucose concentrations throughout the day).ObjectiveWe aimed to report the reliability and validity of cognitive ecological momentary assessment (EMA) as a method for understanding between-person differences and capturing within-person variation in cognition over time in a community sample and sample of adults with T1D.MethodsCognitive performance was measured 3 times a day for 15 days in the sample of adults with T1D (n=198, recruited through endocrinology clinics) and for 10 days in the community sample (n=128, recruited from TestMyBrain, a web-based citizen science platform) using ultrabrief cognitive tests developed for cognitive EMA. Our cognitive EMA platform allowed for remote, automated assessment in participants' natural environments, enabling the measurement of within-person cognitive variation without the burden of repeated laboratory or clinic visits. This allowed us to evaluate reliability and validity in samples that differed in their expected degree of cognitive variability as well as the method of recruitment.ResultsThe results demonstrate excellent between-person reliability (ranging from 0.95 to 0.99) and construct validity of cognitive EMA in both the sample of adults with T1D and community sample. Within-person reliability in both samples (ranging from 0.20 to 0.80) was comparable with that observed in previous studies in healthy older adults. As expected, the full-length baseline and EMA versions of TestMyBrain tests correlated highly with one another and loaded together on the expected cognitive domains when using exploratory factor analysis. Interruptions had higher negative impacts on accuracy-based outcomes (β=-.34 to -.26; all P values <.001) than on reaction time-based outcomes (β=-.07 to -.02; P<.001 to P=.40).ConclusionsWe demonstrated that ultrabrief mobile assessments are both reliable and valid across 2 very different clinic versus community samples, despite the conditions in which cognitive EMAs are administered, which are often associated with more noise and variability. The psychometric characteristics described here should be leveraged appropriately depending on the goals of the cognitive assessment (eg, diagnostic vs everyday functioning) and the population being studied.

Project description:IntroductionPractice effects associated with the repeated administration of cognitive tests often confound true therapeutic or experimental effects. Alternate test forms help reduce practice effects, but generating stimulus sets with identical properties can be difficult. The main objective of this study was to disentangle practice and stimulus set effects for Cognition, a battery of 10 brief cognitive tests specifically designed for high-performing populations with 15 unique versions for repeated testing. A secondary objective was to investigate the effects of test-retest interval on practice effects.MethodsThe 15 versions of Cognition were administered in three groups of 15-16 subjects (total N = 46, mean±SD age 32.5 ± 7.2 years, range 25-54 years, 23 male) in a randomized but balanced fashion with administration intervals of ≥10 days, ≤5 days, or 4 times per day. Mixed effect models were used to investigate linear and logarithmic trends across repeated administrations in key speed and accuracy outcomes, whether these trends differed significantly between administration interval groups, and whether stimulus sets differed significantly in difficulty.ResultsProtracted, non-linear practice effects well beyond the second administration were observed for most of the 10 Cognition tests both in accuracy and speed, but test-retest administration interval significantly affected practice effects only for 3 out of the 10 tests and only in the speed domain. Stimulus set effects were observed for the 6 Cognition tests that use unique sets of stimuli. Factors were established that allow for correcting for both practice and stimulus set effects.ConclusionsPractice effects are pronounced and probably under-appreciated in cognitive testing. The correction factors established in this study are a unique feature of the Cognition battery that can help avoid masking practice effects, address noise generated by differences in stimulus set difficulty, and facilitate interpretation of results from studies with repeated assessments.

Project description:The ongoing Social Cognition Psychometric Evaluation (SCOPE) study is in the process of forming a gold-standard battery of social cognition tests for use in clinical trials. Previous SCOPE phases have not acknowledged key differences between social cognition skills and biases, and psychometric validity analyses might provide important information if tailored to bias-related outcomes. This study aims to validate these measures with such bias-related outcomes.Two measures of social cognitive bias - the Ambiguous Intention Hostility Questionnaire (AIHQ; hostile attribution bias) and Trustworthiness Task (distrust bias) - were reviewed according to their relationships to (1) current and prospective symptom levels, (2) questionnaires of trait paranoia and hostility and informant-rated hostility, (3) interpersonal conflict, as well as (4) relationships to measures of trait paranoia, hostility, and interpersonal conflict above and beyond the influence of clinically rated symptoms.Results supported hypotheses that social cognitive bias provides information about cognition, symptoms, and functioning related to interpersonal conflict. Each bias demonstrated relationships to trait paranoia questionnaires, hostility, or interpersonal conflict outcomes, and these persisted above and beyond the influence of clinically rated symptoms. Hostile attribution bias also predicted change in symptom levels over a brief interval.Overall, the current bias-specific psychometric analysis provides support for continued study of social cognitive biases.Hostile attribution bias may play a role in important outcome variables given relationships to emotional discomfort and suspiciousness symptoms, trait paranoia and hostility, interpersonal conflict, as well as prospective hostility symptoms. Distrust bias may also impact real-world functioning, as it is related to hostility, suspiciousness, and positive symptoms, trait paranoia, and hostility. Relationships of social cognitive biases to interpersonal conflict outcomes exist independently of interview-rated symptoms and persist above and beyond the influence of social cognitive skills, which appear to demonstrate weaker relationships to these outcomes. Understanding and assessing the individual's biases towards distrust or blame might help practioners predict interpersonal conflict and future increases in symptoms.

Project description:The current study evaluated three social cognition (SC) tests for their clinical utility in aiding autism diagnosis. To do so, we compared the performance of 86 children with autism spectrum disorder (ASD) and 68 typically developing (TD) children, all aged from 4 to 10 years old, on three SC tasks [the Social Information Processing Interview (SIPI), the Comic Strip Task (CST), and the children's version of the Eyes Task] and calculated threshold scores that best differentiated the two groups. While difficulties in these abilities appear to represent the "central core" of ASD, services have largely ignored SC tests when supporting autism diagnoses. Therefore, this study attempted to validate and evaluate the diagnostic potential of these three tasks for children with ASD. To investigate the accuracy of these SC tests, we used the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve. As expected, the ASD group performed worse than the TD group on the SIPI and CST, but contrary to our prediction, the groups did not significantly differ on the Eyes Task. Specifically, the overall area under the curve (AUC) for the SIPI was 0.87, with a sensitivity of 73.5% and a specificity of 83.9% at the best cutoff point (score range 0-36; best cutoff = 31). The overall AUC for the CST was 0.75, with a sensitivity of 71.1% and a specificity of 77.0% at the best cutoff point (score range 0-15; best cutoff = 11). The overall AUC for the Eyes Task was 0.51, with a sensitivity of 50.3% and a specificity of 40.2% at the best cutoff point (score range 0-54; best cutoff = 45). In conclusion, the results showed that the SIPI test has good predictive power for classifying children with ASD. It should provide substantial supplementary clinical information and help to consolidate diagnostic procedures based on standard tools. Moreover, the results of the study have substantial implications for clinical practice: the better the knowledge of SC functioning in children with ASD, the more effective the intervention program for rehabilitation.

Dataset Information

The ToMenovela - A Photograph-Based Stimulus Set for the Study of Social Cognition with High Ecological Validity.

Publications

The ToMenovela - A Photograph-Based Stimulus Set for the Study of Social Cognition with High Ecological Validity.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets