Social Cognition
Self-Referential Encoding Task
Also called: SRET, self-referent encoding task
Measure how people take in positive and negative information about themselves: participants decide whether trait words describe them, then recall the words in a test they were not told about.
7-9 minUntimed
Free to start: 10 free participants per account, then $0.99 per participant for academic research, or any yearly plan. Preview any test free after you sign up.
- Papers, 2021 to 2025
- 145
- Evidence grade
- C
- Registered clinical studies
- 6
What it measures
Measures how people take in positive and negative information about themselves. Participants decide whether each of 48 trait words describes them, then type the words they remember in a recall test they were not told about.
Constructs
- Self-schema
- Self-referential processing
- Incidental memory
- Negative self-view
Research uses
- Depression research at the group level
- Cognitive vulnerability and self-view studies
- Treatment and intervention studies that track self-views over time
How the paradigm works
The Self-Referential Encoding Task measures how people take in positive and negative information about themselves. Participants see trait words one at a time and decide whether each word describes them. A recall test they were not told about follows: they type every word they remember. Words a person endorses and later recalls are taken to fit their self-schema, the organized knowledge people hold about themselves, and the balance of negative and positive words is a cognitive marker studied in depression research (Derry and Kuiper, 1981).
More about the paradigm
The task follows the self-reference condition of Derry and Kuiper (1981) as the modern task uses it (Dainer-Best et al., 2018): 24 positive and 24 negative trait words written for this task, mild everyday words matched on length and frequency, each under the question "Does this word describe you?" and answered Yes or No with no time limit. Two buffer words open the list and two close it, so the scored words never take the first or last places. Three practice words come first, with the answer shown back. Nothing before the recall mentions memory. After 60 seconds of true-or-false arithmetic (0 to 300 in the settings), participants type the words they remember for 180 seconds (120 to 300), and one question asks whether they expected a memory test. The words are English for every participant; instructions follow the session language. Typing ignores case and accepts one wrong, missing, extra or swapped letter in words of 4 or more letters.
The main score, the negative processing score, is the number of negative words both endorsed and recalled over all words endorsed, the standard SRET processing score; the positive processing score is the same for positive words. The task also reports how many words of each valence were endorsed, which tracked depressive symptoms most closely across three large samples in Dainer-Best and colleagues (2018), the recall counts, the recall of endorsed and of rejected words (the self-reference effect of Rogers, Kuiper and Kirker, 1977), median decision times by valence and intrusions. The scores describe how a group of people take in information about themselves and say little about one person. Scores support research and do not diagnose.
Scores
- Negative Processing Score%
- Negative words both endorsed and recalled, over all scored words endorsed. Blank when no word was endorsed.
- Higher values mean more negative words were taken in as self-descriptive; not better or worse
- Positive Processing Score%
- Positive words both endorsed and recalled, over all scored words endorsed. Blank when no word was endorsed.
- Higher values mean more positive words were taken in as self-descriptive
- Negative Words Endorsedcount
- Negative words answered Yes, of 24. Answers under 100 ms are not counted.
- Informational
- Positive Words Endorsedcount
- Positive words answered Yes, of 24. Answers under 100 ms are not counted.
- Informational
- Negative Words Endorsed and Recalledcount
- Negative words answered Yes and later typed in the recall.
- Informational
- Positive Words Endorsed and Recalledcount
- Positive words answered Yes and later typed in the recall.
- Informational
- Negative Words Recalledcount
- Negative words typed in the recall, whatever the answer.
- Informational
- Positive Words Recalledcount
- Positive words typed in the recall, whatever the answer.
- Informational
- Recall of Endorsed Words%
- Share of the scored words answered Yes that were recalled.
- Usually higher than the recall of rejected words
- Recall of Rejected Words%
- Share of the scored words answered No that were recalled.
- Informational
- Median Decision Time, Negative Wordsms
- Median time to answer for negative words, from the word's appearance; answers under 100 ms left out.
- Informational
- Median Decision Time, Positive Wordsms
- Median time to answer for positive words, from the word's appearance; answers under 100 ms left out.
- Informational
- Words Recalledcount
- Scored words typed in the recall, of 48; buffer words are counted apart.
- Informational
- Intrusionscount
- Typed entries that name no word of the list or the practice.
- Quality check
- Expected a Memory Test0/1
- 1 if the participant said they expected a memory test before the recall, 0 if not.
- 1 means the words may have been learned on purpose
- Anticipationscount
- Answers under 100 ms, counted neither as endorsing nor as rejecting a word.
- Quality check
Use and evidence
145 papers from 2021 to 2025 name this task in their title or abstract, up 16% compared with 2016 to 2020. That ranks it 153 of 395 test families in our census. See the counts for every test.
Show the numbers
| Year | Papers |
|---|---|
| 2025 | 48 |
| 2024 | 26 |
| 2023 | 15 |
| 2022 | 24 |
| 2021 | 32 |
| 2020 | 20 |
| 2019 | 23 |
| 2018 | 29 |
| 2017 | 32 |
| 2016 | 21 |
| 2015 | 16 |
| 2014 | 25 |
| 2013 | 25 |
| 2012 | 25 |
| 2011 | 15 |
| 2010 | 17 |
| 2009 | 10 |
| 2008 | 11 |
| 2007 | 8 |
| 2006 | 3 |
| 2005 | 4 |
| 2004 | 5 |
| 2003 | 3 |
| 2002 | 5 |
| 2001 | 4 |
| 2000 | 1 |
Use grade C
100 to 299 papers from 2021 to 2025.
Evidence grade C
At least 2 test-retest papers, 30 reliability or validity papers or 3 registered clinical studies.
- Papers on test-retest reliability
- 2
- Papers on reliability or validity
- 11
- Registered clinical studies using it as an outcome
- 6
How the grades work
Use: A is 1,000 or more papers from 2021 to 2025, B 300 to 999, C 100 to 299, D 30 to 99 and E fewer than 30. Evidence: A means at least 25 papers report its test-retest reliability and at least 25 registered clinical studies use it as an outcome; B, at least 8 test-retest papers, and either 5 registered clinical studies or 150 reliability or validity papers; C, at least 2 test-retest papers, 30 reliability or validity papers or 3 registered clinical studies; D, little published measurement evidence found. The counts measure use. They include every paper that names the task in its title or abstract. Grades describe the published research on this task, not ConductCognition's version of it.
Source: ConductCognition test census 0.14.0, counted 31 October 2026 from OpenAlex and ClinicalTrials.gov.
Task design
The trial sequence as the test runs in ConductCognition.
- Words
- 24 positive and 24 negative English trait words written for this task, mild everyday words matched on length and word frequency, plus 2 buffer words at the start and 2 at the end that are not scored.
- Judgment
- Each word below the question "Does this word describe you?", answered Yes or No without a time limit, then 500 ms blank. No more than 4 words of one valence in a row, in an order drawn from the session's seed. The instructions never mention memory.
- Practice
- 3 neutral trait words, each answer shown back for 1,500 ms.
- Delay
- 60 seconds (standard; 0 to 300) of true-or-false arithmetic.
- Recall
- A surprise typed recall of 180 seconds (standard; 120 to 300) on a visible timer, one word per entry. Typing ignores case and accepts one wrong, missing, extra or swapped letter in words of 4 or more letters.
- Scoring
- Negative words both endorsed and recalled over all words endorsed, and the same for positive words. Answers under 100 ms count as neither Yes nor No.
- Last question
- Whether the participant expected a memory test. A yes is flagged for review.
The words were written for this task and chosen by stated rules; no published SRET word list is used. Derry and Kuiper (1981) also asked structural and semantic questions about other words; this task asks only the self-reference question, as the modern task does. The words are English; sessions run in other languages are flagged for review.
Quality checks
Each session is marked valid, needs review or invalid, with the reason, before you see its scores.
Scored rows: self_referential_encoding_study rows of the 48 scored words from the scored run, one Yes or No answer each with no correct answer, with the recall, delay arithmetic and expectation rows of the same run. The same answer on 95% of 12 or more words is flagged. Answers under 200 ms on at least half of 4 or more words invalidate, and any is flagged. A recall that names no list word, a recall part that was not saved and a participant who expected a memory test are flagged, and the first and last withhold the percentile. No arithmetic answered in the delay, or delay arithmetic at or below chance over at least 10 answers, is flagged. A session run in another language is flagged. A hidden tab withholds the percentile.
Why these rules
There is no correct option to compare with chance, so accuracy is not judged against chance. Answering Yes, or No, to nearly every word, positive and negative alike, means the answers may not reflect the words. An answer under 200 ms is faster than a simple visual reaction, so it cannot reflect the item. Following response-time effort screening for untimed tests (Wise and Kong 2005), the session is invalid only when at least half the answers are that fast. The processing scores count words endorsed and then recalled, so a recall with no list word gives scores of 0 that may only mean the recall was skipped. The recall is incidental: the participant is not told it will come (Derry and Kuiper 1981), so an expected test is flagged and its percentile withheld. Skipping the delay arithmetic means that part of the procedure may not have been followed. The word lists are English. A session run in another language shows English words to a participant who may not read English fluently, so it is flagged for review. A hidden tab lets the study, delay or response timers run without the participant, so a percentile is withheld after one.
No percentile. Scores and quality flags only.
Running this test
Settings you can change
| Setting | Standard | Allowed |
|---|---|---|
| Arithmetic before the recall (seconds) | 60 | 0 to 300 |
| Recall time (seconds) | 180 | 120 to 300 |
Yearly plans can change settings within these limits. Free and pay-as-you-go studies use the standard settings.
Need a setting this test does not have?
Devices and languages
- Untimed test: runs on desktops, laptops, tablets and phones. Participant devices
- Instructions and screens: English, Spanish, French, German, Italian, Portuguese (Brazil), Chinese (Simplified) and Japanese. Words and sentences: English.
- Available on: Every plan, including the free plan.
- No percentile. Scores and quality flags only. How norms work
- Recruiting online? See the setup guides for Prolific, Sona Systems, CloudResearch Connect and Qualtrics.
Cite and describe
Participants completed the Self-Referential Encoding Task in a web browser (ConductCognition task version 1.0.0, scoring version 1.0.0; Derry & Kuiper, 1981), with the standard settings (arithmetic before the recall (seconds): 60; recall time (seconds): 180). The main score was negative processing score (negative words both endorsed and recalled, over all scored words endorsed).
ConductCognition versions: task version 1.0.0, scoring version 1.0.0. Every export records the versions each session used, for a methods section.
- Derry, P. A., & Kuiper, N. A. (1981). Schematic processing and self-reference in clinical depression. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 90(4), 286-297. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-843X.90.4.286
- Dainer-Best, J., Lee, H. Y., Shumake, J. D., Yeager, D. S., & Beevers, C. G. (2018). Determining optimal parameters of the self-referent encoding task: A large-scale examination of self-referent cognition and depression. Psychological Assessment, 30(11), 1527-1540. https://doi.org/10.1037/pas0000602
- Rogers, T. B., Kuiper, N. A., & Kirker, W. S. (1977). Self-reference and the encoding of personal information. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 35(9), 677-688. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.35.9.677The self-reference effect: words judged in relation to the self are recalled better.
Source papers
- Dainer-Best J, Lee HY, Shumake JD, Yeager DS, Beevers CG (2018). Determining optimal parameters of the self-referent encoding task: A large-scale examination of self-referent cognition and depression. Psychological Assessment, 30(11):1527-1540.Paradigm source, Adolescents and adults
- No normative data for this task.Paradigm source, N/A
Questions
How long does the Self-Referential Encoding Task take?
About 7 to 9 minutes, as listed in the test library.
What device does a participant need?
Untimed test: runs on desktops, laptops, tablets and phones. The browser must be Chrome, Edge, Firefox or Safari.
What scores does it produce?
Negative Processing Score, Positive Processing Score, Negative Words Endorsed, Positive Words Endorsed, Negative Words Endorsed and Recalled, Positive Words Endorsed and Recalled, Negative Words Recalled, Positive Words Recalled, Recall of Endorsed Words, Recall of Rejected Words, Median Decision Time, Negative Words, Median Decision Time, Positive Words, Words Recalled, Intrusions, Expected a Memory Test and Anticipations. Each session is also marked valid, needs review or invalid, with the reason.
How widely is the Self-Referential Encoding Task used in research?
145 papers from 2021 to 2025 name it in their title or abstract, up 16% compared with 2016 to 2020. That ranks it 153 of 395 test families in the ConductCognition test census (use grade C). Source: ConductCognition test census 0.14.0, counted 31 October 2026 from OpenAlex and ClinicalTrials.gov.
How much reliability evidence does the Self-Referential Encoding Task have?
In the published research, 2 papers report its test-retest reliability and 6 registered clinical studies use it as an outcome (evidence grade C in the ConductCognition test census).
Does it report a percentile?
No. Scores and quality flags only.
Which settings can a researcher change?
Arithmetic before the recall (seconds) (0 to 300) and recall time (seconds) (120 to 300). Settings can be changed on yearly plans; free and pay-as-you-go studies use the standard settings.
Which languages can participants use?
The instructions and screens are in English, Spanish, French, German, Italian, Portuguese (Brazil), Chinese (Simplified) and Japanese. The words and sentences stay in English, so sessions in other languages are flagged for review. English is on every plan, and the other languages come with yearly plans. Have a native speaker read the machine-translated text before launch.
Is this a clinical test?
No. ConductCognition is for research use only. It runs, scores and exports the test; clinical interpretation is outside the platform.
Every test: the full test list.
Run this test in your next study
Start free with 10 free participants on any test, then use participant credits or a yearly plan.