Development and validation of the Four-Item Mentalising Index.

Clutterbuck, Rachel A; Callan, Mitchell J.; Taylor, Emily; Livingston, Lucy Anne; Shah, Punit

doi:10.1037/pas0001004

Cited by 23 publications

(64 citation statements)

References 34 publications

(63 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Second, although our autistic and neurotypical participants were matched on general mental ability using an online task, future research should aim to replicate our findings using more in‐depth measures of IQ. Finally, whilst the current research validated the web‐based version of the task in autistic and neurotypical participants, we were not able to test whether performance on the task predicts performance on other ToM tasks, self‐report measures of ToM (e.g., Clutterbuck et al, 2021), or everyday social abilities/differences. Future research should aim to investigate, for example, if autistic participants' ToM performance indexes performance on a range of other ToM tasks, as well as autistic behaviour (e.g., using the Autism Diagnostic Observation Schedule; Lord et al, 2000) and social difficulties in the real world.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 75%

Further developing the Frith–Happé animations: A quicker, more objective, and web‐based test of theory of mind for autistic and neurotypical adults

et al. 2021

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The Frith–Happé Animations Test, depicting interactions between triangles, is widely used to measure theory of mind (ToM) ability in autism spectrum disorder (ASD). This test began with recording, transcribing, and subjectively scoring participants' verbal descriptions, which consistently found ToM‐specific difficulties in ASD. More recently in 2011, White et al. created a more objective version of this ToM test using multiple‐choice questions. However, there has been surprisingly little uptake of this test, hence it is currently unclear if White et al.'s findings replicate. Further, the lack of an online version of the test may be hampering its use in large‐scale studies and outside of research settings. Addressing these issues, we report the development of a web‐based version of the Frith–Happé Animations Test for autistic and neurotypical adults. An online version of the test was developed in a large general population sample (study 1; N = 285) and online data were compared with those collected in a lab‐based setting (study 2; N = 339). The new online test was then administered to adults with a clinical diagnosis of ASD and matched neurotypical controls (study 3; N = 231). Results demonstrated that the test could successfully be administered online to autistic adults, who showed ToM difficulties compared to neurotypical adults, replicating White et al.'s findings. Overall, we have developed a quicker, more objective, and web‐based version of the Frith–Happé Animations Test that will be useful for social cognition research within and beyond the field of autism, with potential utility for clinical settings. Lay Summary Many autistic people find it hard to understand what other people are thinking. There are many tests for this ‘mentalising’ ability, but they often take a long time to complete and cannot be used outside of research settings. In 2011, scientists used short silent animations of moving shapes to create a fast way to measure mentalising ability. We developed this into an online test to use in research and clinics to measure mentalising ability in autism.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 75%

Further developing the Frith–Happé animations: A quicker, more objective, and web‐based test of theory of mind for autistic and neurotypical adults

et al. 2021

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Importantly, individuals who self-identified as autistic or those seeking a diagnosis were not eligible to participate. Many participants had also recently participated in our autism research (e.g., Clutterbuck et al, 2021; Note. Males = 1 and Females = 0 when coding sex.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Given these potential limitations of the REI, we suggest that the CRT offers a more accurate assessment of intuitive thinking. Nonetheless, further work is required to clarify the reasons for the discrepant findings, which may, for example, necessitate adapting the REI by ensuring that it measures the same construct in autistic and nonautistic people (e.g., testing measurement invariance; see Clutterbuck et al, 2021).…”

Section: Rethinking Fast and Slow Processing In Autismmentioning

confidence: 99%

Rethinking fast and slow processing in autism.

Taylor¹,

Farmer²,

Livingston³

et al. 2022

Journal of Psychopathology and Clinical Science

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Following the popularity of dual process models in social and cognitive psychology, there is major interest in the possibility that autism is associated with impaired “fast” intuitive thinking but enhanced “slow” or “rational” deliberative thinking. If correct, this has great potential to help understand various strengths and difficulties characteristic of autism. Previous empirical investigations of this phenomenon, however, are marred by concerns about the measurement of intuitive and deliberative processing, as well as broader problems in clinical psychological science (e.g., small underpowered studies, lack of replication). Making a step change, we conducted four large-scale studies to examine dual processing in autism, including a preregistered comparison of 200 autistic and nonautistic adults. Participants completed contemporary cognitive and self-report measures of intuitive and deliberative processing, as well as a psychometrically robust measure of general cognitive ability. Except for lower self-reported intuitive thinking, we found no unique contributions of autism to intuitive or deliberative thinking across all four studies, as evidenced by frequentist and Bayesian analyses. Overall, these studies indicate that intuitive and deliberative thinking is neither enhanced nor particularly impaired in relation to autism. We deliberate on the implications of these findings for theories of autism and future investigation of strengths and difficulties in autistic people.

show abstract

“…Public Significance StatementWe demonstrate critical conceptual flaws in a recently published social cognition assessment tool (Clutterbuck et al, 2021a). We use this flawed test development project as a case study, describing major challenges for test development in the domains of empathy and social cognition.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…As a focal case, we discuss a measure recently introduced in this journal, the Four-Item Mentalising Index (FIMI; Clutterbuck et al, 2021a), and we provide new data that demonstrate its construct invalidity and redundancy with existing measures. The conceptual flaws of the FIMI reflect all three of the general concerns mentioned above.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

It looks like construct validity, but look again: Comment on Clutterbuck et al. (2021) and recommendations for test developers in the broad “empathy” domain.

Murphy¹,

Hall²,

Duong³

2022

Psychological Assessment

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Conceptual flaws can undermine even rigorous test development efforts, especially in the broad empathy and social cognition domains, which are characterized by measure proliferation and inconsistently used construct terms. We discuss these issues, focusing on a new instrument of “mentalizing” as a case study. Across several studies, Clutterbuck et al. (2021a) developed the Four-Item Mentalising Index (FIMI). They described it as the first self-report measure of mentalizing ability and suggested that it offers substantial advances for research and assessment. As we demonstrate with conceptual arguments and empirical data, the FIMI embodies several major problems that are common in this area of research. Using the FIMI as a case study, we underline the importance for test developers of attending to the nonnegotiable necessity of discriminant validity analyses, the challenge of choosing appropriate convergent validity measures, and the difficulties of navigating the jingle-jangle jungle of empathy and social cognition construct terms.

show abstract

Development and validation of the Four-Item Mentalising Index.

Cited by 23 publications

References 34 publications

Further developing the Frith–Happé animations: A quicker, more objective, and web‐based test of theory of mind for autistic and neurotypical adults

Further developing the Frith–Happé animations: A quicker, more objective, and web‐based test of theory of mind for autistic and neurotypical adults

Rethinking fast and slow processing in autism.

It looks like construct validity, but look again: Comment on Clutterbuck et al. (2021) and recommendations for test developers in the broad “empathy” domain.

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About