Harmonizing cross-cultural and transdiagnostic assessment of social cognition by expert panel consensus
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Social cognition, the perception and processing of social information, is adversely affected in multiple psychiatric, neurological, and neurodevelopmental disorders, and these impairments negatively impact quality of life for individuals across the globe. Despite the clear importance of social cognition, efforts to advance research via harmonization of data across cultures and diagnoses has been stymied by the lack of uniformly used and suitable assessments. To address this issue, the current study conducted an expert survey and consensus process to identify social cognitive assessments that are best suited for cross-cultural and transdiagnostic use among adults. A large group of experts in social cognition were surveyed to gather nominations for cross-culturally and transdiagnostically appropriate measures. These measures were then critically evaluated by a smaller group of experts using a Delphi consensus process to identify the best existing tasks for each use. Ninety-eight experts, representing 25 countries, responded to the initial survey and nominated a total of 81 tasks. Initial rounds of the Delphi process identified 50 tasks with adequate psychometric properties that were then subdivided into social cognition domains. For each domain, members ranked the five best tasks, once for cross-cultural use and once for transdiagnostic use, and rated the suitability of those tasks for the intended use. No tasks were identified as ideally suited for either use; however, within each domain, 4-5 tasks emerged as the most consistently selected, and all were ranked as having "good" or better suitability for use. While there is still a critical need for social cognitive assessments that are specifically designed for cross-cultural and transdiagnostic use, there does appear to be a handful of existing tasks that are currently available and likely informative. Caution is warranted however, as these still require comprehensive evaluation in cross-cultural and transdiagnostic studies.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it