. 2006 Oct;32(Suppl 1):S44–S63. doi: 10.1093/schbul/sbl029

Table 3.

Theory of Mind (ToM) or Attributional Style (AS) and Functional Outcome (FO) in Schizophrenia (S)

Study	Participants	SC Measures	FO Measures	Major Findings
Pollice et al⁷⁶	44 S or SA outpatients MA = 33 Male: 77.3% Yrs Ed: 11.6 Yrs Ill: 10.6 Clor eq: 289	First-order ToM from Sally and Anne and Cigarettes tasks; second-order ToM from Ice Cream Van and Burglar tasks; also combined measures for global ToM score	Community function—Disability Assessment Schedule: Self-care, social contact, work activity, global rating of community functioning made by interviewer	• Global community functioning correlated with combined ToM (r = .43, P < .01) and second-order ToM (r = .30, P < .05) but not first-order ToM (r = .276); effects remained or were strengthened after partialling out IQ; second-order ToM explained 15% of the variance in global community functioning in stepwise regression • Poor self-care and combined ToM significantly correlated after partialling out IQ (r = −.367, P < .05) but not before (r = −.002); not related to second-order (r = −.216) or first-order ToM (r = −.017) • ToM not related to poor social contact (first order, r = −.078; second order, r = −.148; combined, r = −.201) • ToM not associated with work ability (first order, r = −.026; second order, r = −.085; combined, r = −.020) • 41.7% of effects were minimal to large range, 33.3% were small to moderate range, and 25% were moderate to large range • Power for effect size of r = .3 is 0.501
Schenkel et al⁷⁷	42 S or SA inpatients MA = 41 Male: 60% Yrs Ed: 12.1 Yrs Ill: ? Clor eq: ?	Hinting Task	Premorbid social functioning coded from charts	• Group differences on ToM between poor and good premorbid social functioning groups (t(40) = 3.86, P < .0001) • This is equivalent to a large effect size (r = .52) • Power for effect size of r = .3 is 0.481
Lysaker et al⁵¹	40 S or SA outpatients MA = 46 Male: 97.5% Yrs Ed: 12.5 Yrs Ill: ∼21.4 Clor eq: ?	ASQ	Community function—QLS: interpersonal function, community participation	• Making a greater number of stable attributions predicted 8% of the variance in interpersonal function, 16% in community participation • When cognitive variables were covaried, the relationships with the ASQ were the same except for community participation (NS) • Effect sizes were small to moderate range and moderate to large range, respectively • Power for effect size of r = .3 is 0.461
Waldheter et al⁵²	29 S or SA inpatients MA = 33 Male: 86% Yrs Ed: 10.6 Yrs Ill: ? Clor eq: 698–895	AIAQ IPSAQ	Social behavior in milieu: Modified Overt Aggression Scale	• Frequency of violence correlated with AIAQ hostility bias in accidental situations (r = .407, P < .05) but not in intentional (r = −.010) or ambiguous (r = .053) situations • Severity of violence was not significantly correlated with any AIAQ hostility bias (accidental r = .368, intentional r = .129, ambiguous r = .106) • The IPSAQ personalizing bias was correlated with severity (r = .325, P < .05) but not history (r = .269) of violence • AIAQ hostility bias for ambiguous situations and the IPSAQ personalizing bias together predicted 4% of the variance in severity of violence • 25% of effect sizes were minimal to small range, 37.5% were small to moderate range, and 37.5% were moderate to large range • Power for effect size of r = .3 is 0.343

Note: SC = Social Cognition; NC = Neurocognition; SA = Schizoaffective; MA = Mean Age; NS = Not Significant; Yrs Ed = Years of Education; Yrs Ill = Number of Years Ill; Clor eq = Chlorpromazine equivalent (mg/d); AIAQ = Ambiguous Intentions Attributions Questionnaire (Combs et al, in preparation); ASQ = Attributional Style Questionnaire¹¹⁸; Burglar Task¹¹⁹; Cigarettes Task¹²⁰; Disability Assessment Schedule (WHO)¹²¹; Hinting Task⁵⁰; Ice Cream Van Task¹²²; IPSAQ = Internal, Personal, and Situational Attributions Questionnaire¹²³; Modified Overt Aggression Scale¹²⁴; Sally and Anne Task¹²⁵; QLS = Quality of Life Scale.⁵⁶