The social cognition and object relations scale is reliable, valid, and ethical in clinical practice and research:...

Narrative assessment procedures have a rich tradition in psychology and have been widely employed for clinical and research purposes. The Thematic Apperception Test (TAT; Murray, 1943) and the Social Cognition and Object Relations Scale-Global Rating Method (SCORS-G) have been widely used for eliciting and coding narratives for psychological assessment. Recently, a critical review by Sinclair et al. (2023) asserted that there is insufficient evidence for the use of the SCORS-G in clinical settings, calling for a moratorium on its use. However, their critical review was limited in scope, did not include evidence counter to their position, nor did it acknowledge counterarguments previously presented by TAT experts. We address their concerns around standardization practices, reliability, validity, and clinical utility. In this comment, several meta-analyses assessing the reliability of the Social Cognition and Object Relations Scale/TAT were conducted. There were no significant differences in reliability between single versus average intraclass correlation coefficients, between Pearson's r and intraclass correlation coefficients, or between earlier versions of this scale. Good to excellent ranges were consistently found using three different benchmarks. Administration practices and the validity of this rating system were substantiated. Finally, we highlighted how the Social Cognition and Object Relations Scale/TAT interpretative process mirrors Evidence-Based Practices in Psychology (American Psychological Association, 2021), Professional Practice Guidelines in Psychological Assessment (Krishnamurthy et al., 2022), and free response measures (Meyer et al., 2015). When examining all available data, there is sufficient evidence to support that the SCORS-G is best used clinically when integrated with other data. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2026 APA, all rights reserved).