Table 5.

Included studies social cognition domain and calculated effect sizes

Authors	N	Age	Comparison	Subdomain(s)	Instrument(s) + Type(s)	Results	Effect sizes
Ross et al, 2015	18 XYY	4‐14 years	Control group	Social cognition	SRS (P)	XYY > controls†	d = .68**
Cordeiro et al, 2012	102 XXY 40 XYY	4‐18 years	Normed scores	Social cognition	SRS (P)	XYY > XXY > controls†	d xxy = .93*** d xyy = 1.80***
Van Rijn et al, 2014a	60 XXX/XXY	9‐18 years	Control group	Social cognition	SRS (P)	XXX/XXY > controls†	d = 1.61***
Van Rijn et al, 2018	70 XXY	8‐60 years	Normed scores	Pattern recognition—reaction time % impaired	ANT (C)	17%	N/A
				Pattern recognition—accuracy % impaired		9%	N/A
				Face processing—reaction time % impaired		26%	N/A
				Face processing—accuracy % impaired		13%	N/A
				Facial emotion recognition—reaction time % impaired		33%	η2 = .40***
				Facial emotion recognition—accuracy % impaired		13%	η2 = .16**
Samango‐Sprouse et al, 2018	44 XXY (NL) 54 XXY (United States)	8‐18 years	Normed scores	Face processing—% impaired	ANT (C)	23%‐25%	N/A
				Facial emotion recognition—% impaired		16%‐44%	N/A
Van Rijn et al, 2014b	46 XXX/XXY	9‐18 years	Control group	Theory of Mind—egocentric role taking	SCST (C)	XXX/XXY < controls	d = .85***
				Theory of Mind—subjective role taking		XXX/XXY < controls	d = 1.03***
				Theory of Mind—self‐reflective role taking		XXX/XXY < controls	d = .69**
				Theory of Mind—mutual role taking		XXX/XXY < controls	d = .83***
				Facial affect identification—angry faces	KDEF (P)	XXX/XXY < controls	d = 3.30***

Note: *** High clinical significance; ** Moderate clinical significance; * Low clinical significance; N/A, not applicable; n.s., not significant; † higher scores denote more problems.

Abbreviations: ANT, Amsterdam Neuropsychological Tests; C, Performance Task Child; KDEF, Karolinska Directed Emotional Faces; P, Parent Report; SCST, Social Cognitive Skills Tests; SRS, Social Responsiveness Scale.