Abstract
Though theory of mind (ToM) is an important area of study for different disciplines, however, the psychometric evaluations of ToM tasks have yielded inconsistent results across studies and populations, raising the concerns about the accuracy, consistency, and generalizability of these tasks. This systematic review and meta-analysis examined the psychometric reliability of 27 distinct ToM tasks across 90 studies involving 2771 schizophrenia (SZ), 690 autism spectrum disorder (ASD), and 15,599 nonclinical populations (NC). Findings revealed that while all ToM tasks exhibited satisfactory internal consistency in ASD and SZ, about half of them were not satisfactory in NC, including the commonly used Reading the Mind in the Eye Test and Hinting Task. Other than that, Reading the Mind in the Eye Test showed acceptable reliability across populations, whereas Hinting Task had poor test-retest reliability. Notably, only Faux Pas Test and Movie for the Assessment of Social Cognition had satisfactory reliability across populations albeit limited numbers of studies. However, only ten studies examined the psychometric properties of ToM tasks in ASD adults, warranting additional evaluations. The study offered practical implications for selecting ToM tasks in research and clinical settings, and underscored the importance of having a robust psychometric reliability in ToM tasks across populations.