| Literature DB >> 23864984 |
Jason K Johannesen1, Jessica B Lurie, Joanna M Fiszdon, Morris D Bell.
Abstract
The Social Attribution Task-Multiple Choice (SAT-MC) uses a 64-second video of geometric shapes set in motion to portray themes of social relatedness and intentions. Considered a test of "Theory of Mind," the SAT-MC assesses implicit social attribution formation while reducing verbal and basic cognitive demands required of other common measures. We present a comparability analysis of the SAT-MC and the new SAT-MC-II, an alternate form created for repeat testing, in a university sample (n = 92). Score distributions and patterns of association with external validation measures were nearly identical between the two forms, with convergent and discriminant validity supported by association with affect recognition ability and lack of association with basic visual reasoning. Internal consistency of the SAT-MC-II was superior (alpha = .81) to the SAT-MC (alpha = .56). Results support the use of SAT-MC and new SAT-MC-II as equivalent test forms. Demonstrating relatively higher association to social cognitive than basic cognitive abilities, the SAT-MC may provide enhanced sensitivity as an outcome measure of social cognitive intervention trials.Entities:
Year: 2013 PMID: 23864984 PMCID: PMC3706019 DOI: 10.1155/2013/830825
Source DB: PubMed Journal: ISRN Psychiatry ISSN: 2090-7966
Sample demographics.
| SAT-MC ( | SAT-MC-II ( | Test | Significance | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Age1 | 19.27 (1.41) | 19.03 (1.42) |
|
|
| SAT score2 | ||||
| 1200–1440 | 5.9% | 7.7% | ||
| 1440–1680 | 19.6% | 30.8% | ||
| 1680–1920 | 51% | 30.8% |
|
|
| 1920–2160 | 21.5% | 23% | ||
| 2160–2400 | 2% | 7.7% | ||
| Gender | ||||
| Male | 39.2% | 31.7% |
|
|
| Female | 60.8% | 68.3% | ||
| Academic year | ||||
| Freshman | 41.2% | 63.4% |
|
|
| Sophomore | 43.1% | 26.8% | ||
| Junior | 13.7% | 7.3% | ||
| Senior | 2% | 2.5% | ||
| Ethnicity | ||||
| Caucasian | 68.6% | 63.4% | ||
| African-American | 9.8% | 7.3% | ||
| Hispanic | 9.8% | 9.8% |
|
|
| Asian | 5.9% | 12.2% | ||
| Other | 5.9% | 7.3% | ||
|
| ||||
| Parent education (M/F)3 | Mother/father | Mother/father | Mother/father | Mother/father |
|
| ||||
| Less than high school | 1/2 | 1/0 |
|
|
| Some high school | 9/13 | 9/8 | ||
| Some college | 8/6 | 3/6 | ||
| 2 yr college degree | 9/6 | 6/2 | ||
| 4 yr college degree | 14/15 | 12/12 | ||
| Master's | 8/5 | 8/8 | ||
| Professional | 0/3 | 1/4 | ||
| Doctorate | 2/0 | 1/1 | ||
1Age reported by n = 40 SAT-MC and n = 39 SAT-MC-II.
2Scholastic Aptitude test score, reported by n = 51 SAT-MC and n = 39 SAT-MC-II.
3Father's education reported by n = 50 SAT-MC.
Figure 1SAT-MC and SAT-MC-II sample items. Following presentation of the complete video, questions with multiple-choice response options are presented along with an image of the video section referred to by the question. Four response options are presented with each question with one describing the correct emotional intent, two describing action with incorrect emotional intent, and one describing object motion without emotional intent.
SAT-MC/-II and combined sample score distributions.
| Statistic | SAT-MC
| SAT-MC-II
| SAT-MC + SAT-MC-II Combined sample |
|---|---|---|---|
| Range | 11 | 15 | 15 |
| Minimum | 8 | 4 | 4 |
| Maximum | 19 | 19 | 19 |
| Mean | 16.53 | 16.24 | 16.40 |
| Standard deviation | 2.23 | 3.07 | 2.63 |
| Skew | −1.55 | −2.32 | −2.15 |
| Kurtosis | 3.00 | 6.22 | 6.04 |
| Skew after transform1 | −.19 | −.02 | −.21 |
| Kurtosis after transform1 | −.28 | −.39 | −.31 |
1Blom-transformed values.
Figure 2SAT-MC and SAT-MC-II raw score distributions. Score distributions are presented based on the frequency of each score in proportion to sample size.
SAT-MC and demographics correlations.
| SAT-MC ( | SAT-MC-II ( | Fischer's | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Age2 | −.05 | .05 |
|
| SAT score3 | .09 | .09 |
|
| Gender | −.03 | .20 |
|
| Mother Education | −.18 | .13 |
|
| Father Education4 | −.24+ | .12 |
|
Values reflect Pearson r correlation coefficients with two-tailed tests.
Statistical significance: + P < .10.
1Difference in the strength of correlations between SAT-MC versions with each demographic variable was tested using Fisher's r to z transform with a criteria for significance of z = ±1.96 at P < .05 (two-tailed).
2Age reported by n = 40 SAT-MC and n = 39 SAT-MC-II.
3Scholastic Aptitude test score, reported by n = 51 SAT-MC and n = 39 SAT-MC-II.
4Father's education reported by n = 50 SAT-MC.
SAT-MC and external validation measures correlations.
| SAT-MC ( | SAT-MC-II ( | Fisher's | |
|---|---|---|---|
| SAS | −.06 | −.12 |
|
| SPQ | −.11 | −.15 |
|
| BRIA Ego2 | −.24+ | .04 |
|
| Social activities | −.03 | −.08 |
|
| BLERT | .28* | .40** |
|
| Picture comp | .12 | −.10 |
|
Values reflect Pearson r correlation coefficients with two-tailed tests.
Statistical significance: + P < .10, *P < .05, **P < .01.
1Difference in the strength of correlations between SAT-MC versions with each validation measure was tested using Fisher's r to z transform with a criteria for significance of z = ±1.96 at P < .05 (two-tailed).
2BRIA data was incomplete for 2 participants in the SAT-MC-II sample, and useable data was collected for n = 39 in this group.
SAT-MC and BLERT correlation comparison.
| SAT-MC + SAT-MC-II Combined sample | BLERT | William's T21 | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Gender | .07 | .00 |
|
| Age2 | −.01 | .03 |
|
| SAT3 | .08 | .16 |
|
| SAS | −.07 | .15 |
|
| SPQ | −.12 | −.09 |
|
| BRIA Ego4 | −.10 | .01 |
|
| Social activities | −.06 | −.06 |
|
| Picture comp | .02 | .28** |
|
Values reflect Pearson r correlation coefficients with two-tailed tests.
Statistical significance: *P < .05, **P < .01.
1Differences in the strength of correlations between SAT-MC, collapsed across versions (N = 92), and the BLERT were tested across demographic and validation measures by Williams's T2 statistic using a two-tailed t distribution, df = 89 unless otherwise indicated.
2Age reported by N = 79, df = 76.
3Scholastic Aptitude test score, reported by N = 90, df = 87.
4BRIA data was incomplete for 2 participants, and useable data was collected for N = 90, df = 87.