Common test for understanding mental health is biased

[ad_1]

<div data-thumb = "https://3c1703fe8d.site.internapcdn.net/newman/csz/news/tmb/2019/commontestfo.jpg" data-src = "https://3c1703fe8d.site.internapcdn.net/ newman / gfx / news / 2019 / commontest.fo.jpg "data-sub-html =" One could expect the greatest differences to exist between neurotypical people and people with schizophrenia or spectrum disorders because the latter two groups tend to have social difficulties., the difference in the performance of people of certain races and levels of education was as great as, or even greater than, the difference between neurotypical persons and individuals. With schizophrenia or autism, RMET can be unduly influenced by social clbad and culture, posing a serious challenge to accurately badessing the understanding of mental status (MSU). et al. and Communications from the University of Rochester ">

How do clinicians measure how well a patient understands what others think and feel? In other words, how does the patient evaluate the mental state of another person?

A precise tool is essential for measuring treatment outcomes and has profound consequences for the mental and physical well-being of the patient.

To this end, psychologists determine the understanding of a person's mental state (MSU), which is based on the theory that success in the social world is based on our ability to decipher and infer beliefs the emotions and hidden intentions of others. A large body of research has shown that being able to do this has a number of positive social effects: increased popularity, improved interpersonal skills, prosocial behavior, and so on.

Conversely, people struggling with a USM suffer various negative effects: few friends, isolation and risk of serious psychiatric illness, such as spectrum disorders of schizophrenia. The link between social isolation, psychiatric illnesses and mortality is strong, hence the importance of a reliable badessment tool.

Problematic test

The National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH) recommends a test called Mind Reading Task in the Eyes (RMET). Participants view here 36 black-and-white photographs, originally selected in magazine articles, solely from the eyes of white and male actors. The participants then decide which of the four adjectives (panicked, disbelieving, shot or interested) best describes the mental state expressed in the eyes (the correct answer was generated by consensual badessments).

But there is a problem. Using data from more than 40,000 people, a new study published this month in Psychological medicine concludes that the test is deeply flawed.

"This is a bias against the less educated, the less intelligent and against ethnic and racial minorities," says lead author David Dodell-Feder, an badistant professor of psychology at the University of Rochester. . "This relies too much on the person's vocabulary, intelligence and cultural prejudices.It is particularly problematic because it is approved by the national authority in our field and therefore, the # 39; evaluation tool the most widely used. "

What astonished the researchers most is that the difference in performance between individuals of certain races and levels of education was as great as, or even greater than, the difference between neurotypics and people with schizophrenia or dementia. Autism – two groups with well-documented and well-documented characteristics. and ubiquitous social difficulties.

Resuscitated and Laura Germine of Dodell-Feder, Dodell-Feder of Rochester and Harvard Medical School, as well as Laura Germine at McLean Hospital, studied 40,248 Aboriginal or mostly Anglophone people aged 10 to 70 years. TestMyBrain.org: either the RMET, or an abbreviated version of the RMET, a multiracial emotion identification task, an emotion discrimination task, or a non-social / nonverbal processing speed task of matching the symbol.

Scientists have discovered that education, race, and ethnicity further explained the variance in a person's performance, but that differences between levels of education, race, and ethnicity were more important. Were more pronounced for the RMET compared to the other three tasks.

As a result, more educated, non-Hispanic, and white or Caucasian individuals had the best results with the RMET. The researchers concluded that RMET could be unduly influenced by social clbad and culture, posing a serious problem in correctly badessing mental health understanding in clinical populations, especially given the close relationship between social status and psychiatric illness. The team also discovered that unlike other tasks, the performance of the RMET improved throughout the life of a person.

"The results are troubling as they suggest that the RMET task may not adequately badess the understanding of mental status among certain groups of people," said Dodell-Feder, who also holds a secondary position at the Department of Neuroscience at the Medical Center of the University of Rochester. .

In practical terms, a false badessment can be expensive, financially and for the health of the patient. Missed MSU deficiencies could lead researchers and clinicians not to identify a person at risk of social difficulties, leading them to mental and physical decline, the researchers warned.

On the other hand, detecting deficiencies where they do not exist could lead to misidentification of a person at risk of social difficulties, or worse, a psychopathology, resulting in a risk stigma and unnecessary and costly interventions. Otherwise, clinicians might incorrectly conclude that a treatment for social dysfunction works when it does not work, and vice versa.

So, should we throw the RMET completely?

Not necessarily, says Dodell-Feder. One could keep the task design, but use different multiracial stimuli and include different response options, which contain a less complex vocabulary. Member of the team, Germine is currently testing a new multiracial version of the task. Another option would be to abandon it or to use it alongside other tasks whose cross-cultural validity has been demonstrated and which are very few in the current literature.

"Whatever the case may be, our results show that it might be premature for the NIMH to make strong recommendations regarding the use of certain tasks to measure the understanding of the state. before we can thoroughly evaluate the validity of their use across peoples, "said Dodell-Feder.

Provided by
University of Rochester