Observable Social Cognition – A Rating Scale: an interview-based assessment for schizophrenia

Abstract

Introduction. Individuals with schizophrenia consistently show impairments in social cognition (SC). SC has become a potential treatment target due to its association with functional outcomes. An alternative method of assessment is to administer an observer-based scale incorporating an informant's “first hand” impressions in ratings.

Methods. The present study used the Observable Social Cognition: A Rating Scale (OSCARS) in 62 outpatients and 50 non-psychiatric controls (NPCs) to assess performance in domains of SC (e.g. emotion perception, theory of mind).

Results. The OSCARS demonstrated sufficient internal consistency and test-retest reliability. Construct validity was assessed through an exploratory factor analysis. Patient OSCARS indices were not significantly correlated with measures of SC with the exception of aggressive attributional style. Individuals with less impairment in SC reacted more aggressively to ambiguous situations. NPC OSCARS were significantly correlated with measures of theory of mind and attributional style. In a combined sample of patients and controls, six of eight items were significantly correlated with the SC task assessing the same domain, providing modest evidence of convergent validity. In patients, the OSCARS was significantly correlated with measures of functional outcome and neurocognition. Last, the OSCARS was found to be significantly associated with functional outcome after the influence of objective measures of SC was statistically removed.

Conclusions. The present study provides preliminary evidence that the OSCARS may be useful for clinicians in collecting data about patients’ potential real-world SC deficits, in turn increasing the degree to which these impairments may be targeted in treatment.

Keywords:

• social cognition
• schizophrenia
• schizophrenia spectrum illness
• measurement
• functional outcome

Acknowledgements

The authors thank Chris Wiesen, Ph.D. for his assistance in data analysis. The authors also thank Drs Piper Meyer, Sarah Uzenoff Mintz and Katy Harper Romeo, as well as Betty Rupp for their help in conducting this research.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.

Additional information

Funding

This work was supported by the National Institute of Mental Health at the National Institutes of Health to David L. Penn [grant number 1-R34-MH080010-01].