Soyoung Lee1, Erin P Jacobsen1, Yichen Jia2, Beth E Snitz3, Chung-Chou H Chang4, Mary Ganguli5. 1. Department of Psychiatry, School of Medicine (SL, EPJ, MG), University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA. 2. Department of Biostatistics, Graduate School of Public Health (YJ, CCHC), University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA. 3. Department of Neurology, School of Medicine (BES, MG), University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA. 4. Department of Biostatistics, Graduate School of Public Health (YJ, CCHC), University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA; Department of Medicine, School of Medicine (CCHC), University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA. 5. Department of Psychiatry, School of Medicine (SL, EPJ, MG), University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA; Department of Neurology, School of Medicine (BES, MG), University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA; Department of Epidemiology, Graduate School of Public Health (MG), University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA. Electronic address: GanguliM@upmc.edu.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Social cognition indicates the cognitive processes involved in perceiving, interpreting, and processing social information. Although it is one of the six core DSM-5 cognitive domains for diagnosing neurocognitive disorders, it is not routinely assessed in older adults. The Reading the Mind in the Eyes Test assesses Theory of Mind, the social cognition mechanism which forms the root of empathy. OBJECTIVES: To describe the distribution of, and factors associated with, scores on a 10-item version of Reading the Mind in the Eyes Test (RMET-10) in older adults. DESIGN: Population-based cross-sectional study. SETTING: Small-town communities in Pennsylvania. PARTICIPANTS: Adults aged 66-105 years (N = 902, mean age = 76.6). MEASUREMENTS: The assessment included RMET-10, demographics, cognitive screening, literacy, depression symptoms, anxiety symptoms, cognitive composites derived from a neuropsychological test battery, Social Norms Questionnaire, and Clinical Dementia Rating (CDR). RESULTS: RMET-10 score was normally distributed in our overall study sample. Normative RMET-10 scores among those rated as CDR = 0 were calculated by age, sex, and education. RMET-10 score was significantly higher with younger age, higher education, white race, higher cognitive screening scores, literacy, social norms scores, higher scores in all five domains in cognitive composites, and lower CDR. RMET-10 score was also significantly higher with fewer depression and anxiety symptoms after adjusting for demographics. CONCLUSIONS: The RMET is a potentially useful measure of social cognition for use in the research assessment of older adults. With appropriate calibration it should also have utility in the clinical setting.
BACKGROUND: Social cognition indicates the cognitive processes involved in perceiving, interpreting, and processing social information. Although it is one of the six core DSM-5 cognitive domains for diagnosing neurocognitive disorders, it is not routinely assessed in older adults. The Reading the Mind in the Eyes Test assesses Theory of Mind, the social cognition mechanism which forms the root of empathy. OBJECTIVES: To describe the distribution of, and factors associated with, scores on a 10-item version of Reading the Mind in the Eyes Test (RMET-10) in older adults. DESIGN: Population-based cross-sectional study. SETTING: Small-town communities in Pennsylvania. PARTICIPANTS: Adults aged 66-105 years (N = 902, mean age = 76.6). MEASUREMENTS: The assessment included RMET-10, demographics, cognitive screening, literacy, depression symptoms, anxiety symptoms, cognitive composites derived from a neuropsychological test battery, Social Norms Questionnaire, and Clinical Dementia Rating (CDR). RESULTS: RMET-10 score was normally distributed in our overall study sample. Normative RMET-10 scores among those rated as CDR = 0 were calculated by age, sex, and education. RMET-10 score was significantly higher with younger age, higher education, white race, higher cognitive screening scores, literacy, social norms scores, higher scores in all five domains in cognitive composites, and lower CDR. RMET-10 score was also significantly higher with fewer depression and anxiety symptoms after adjusting for demographics. CONCLUSIONS: The RMET is a potentially useful measure of social cognition for use in the research assessment of older adults. With appropriate calibration it should also have utility in the clinical setting.
Authors: Mary Ganguli; Joni Vander Bilt; Ching-Wen Lee; Beth E Snitz; Chung-Chou H Chang; David A Loewenstein; Judith A Saxton Journal: J Int Neuropsychol Soc Date: 2010-07-08 Impact factor: 2.892
Authors: Joel H Kramer; Dan Mungas; Katherine L Possin; Katherine P Rankin; Adam L Boxer; Howard J Rosen; Alan Bostrom; Lena Sinha; Ashley Berhel; Mary Widmeyer Journal: J Int Neuropsychol Soc Date: 2013-10-08 Impact factor: 2.892
Authors: Simon Baron-Cohen; Daniel C Bowen; Rosemary J Holt; Carrie Allison; Bonnie Auyeung; Michael V Lombardo; Paula Smith; Meng-Chuan Lai Journal: PLoS One Date: 2015-08-27 Impact factor: 3.240