Social and nonsocial cognition: Are they linked? A study on patients with moderate-to-severe traumatic brain injury

Abstract

Objectives

The first aim was to study the relationship between Social Cognition (SC) and nonsocial Cognition (n-SC) measures in a group of patients with moderate or severe traumatic brain injury (TBI) to assess the dependence or independence of both types of cognition. The second aim was to explore the relationships between SC measures and generate a model based on the results of these relationships.

Methods and procedures

Forty-three subacute patients with TBI were included in the study. They were administered a SC battery and n-SC battery. SC battery included the following measures: International Affective Picture System (IAPS); Facial Expressions of Emotion-Stimuli Test (FEEST); Moving Shapes Paradigm (MSP); Reading the Mind in the Eyes Test- Revised Version (RMET); Social Decision Making Task (SDMT). n-SC battery included Digit Span Forwards and Backwards; Trail Making Test (Part A); Rey’s Auditory Verbal Learning Test; Letter-Number Sequencing; and verbal fluency test (PMR).

Results

FEEST, MSP and RMET were related to n-SC measures. The exploratory factor analysis shows a two-factor SC structure: Factor 1: Emotional recognition and mentalization (FEEST, MSP and RMET) and Factor 2: Acquisition and contextualization (IAPS and SDMT).

Conclusion

The performance of subjects with moderate-to-severe TBI in the SC measures is related, at least partially, by the performance in the n-SC measures. Our SC model shows a two-factor structure characterized by a first factor that brings together SC measures that are highly related to n-SC domains and a second factor that brings together measures whose performance is not influenced by n-SC domains.

Keywords:

• Executive functions
• non social cognition
• social cognition
• theory of mind
• traumatic brain injury

Acknowledgements

We want to thank Dr. Stefan Drews for his editorial contributions to this paper. We also appreciate the anonymous reviewers for their careful reading of our manuscript and their comments and suggestions.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).