Your question is much too broad. There rae many attitude scales, aimed at specific objects.

How do you define "Social knowledge" and/or "social perception"? Different definitions of each would result in different answers.

Dear Koninika:

Your answer is related to measures of social knowledge.

As the previous answers reveal, your question needs some clarifications. Even so, according to social domain theory (see below), there are three types social knowledge, each related to a certain domain. Moral knowledge, which belongs to the moral domain and has to do with issues of justice, rights, duties and others' welfare (e.g., the golden rule). Social-conventional knowledge, which belongs to the conventional domain and has to do with social conventions such as ways of dressing and addressing.The issues related to decisions that are outside of the area of justifiable social regulation belong to the personal domain (and knowledge), and hence, personal (psychological) knowledge deals with issues that are a matter of individual choice and fall beyond social regulation or authority jurisdiction.  Are you acquainted with Turiel's (1983) book -- The development of social knowledge: Convention and morality. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press? You can learn a lot from reading it. The book, for example, speaks about several levels of both social-conventional  and personal knowledge and how to assess them, not through a psychometric scale, but a semi-structured interview. 

You certainly know that Lawrence Kohlberg's work [see, for example, Kohlberg, L. (1984). Essays on moral development. In The psychology of moral development: Moral stages, their nature and validation. San Francisco: Harper & Row] deals with the moral domain and knowledge. Eliot Turiel's work [see, for example, Turiel, E.(1993)] deals mainly with the conventional domain and knowledge. Larry Nucci's oeuvre [see, for example, Nucci, L. (1981). The development of personal concepts: a domain distinct from moral and social concepts. Child Development, 52, 114–121] deals mainly with the personal domain and knowledge. One's moral knowledge and development in Kohlberg's theory is also assessed through a highly complex semi-structured interview (See, for this respect, Colby, A., & Kohlberg, L. (1987). The measurement of moral judgment. Volumes 1 and 2. New York: Cambridge University Press. James Rest's defining issues  test (DIT1 or DIT 2), which is an objective questionnaire, is nowadays often used to assess one's moral development and knowledge [See, for this respect,  Rest, J., Narvaez, D., Bebeau, M., & Thoma, S. (1999). Post- conventional moral thinking: A neo-Kohlbergian approach. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Even though Turiel and his colleagues' social domain theory speaks about the three above mentioned types of social knowledge [See for a critical review of this theory my article on it in Research Gate), we can also say that interpersonal knowledge or understanding a la Robert Selman [see, Selman, R. (1980), The growth of interpersonal  understanding. New York: Academic Press) would constitute a four type of social knowledge. Selman also developed a semi-structured  interview to assess one's level of interpersonal understanding, knowledge and development. I can still think of a fifth type or social knowledge and reasoning: Pro-social knowledge or positive, not  negative, moral knowledge a la Nancy Eisenberg  [See, for this respect, Eisenberg, N. (Ed..) (1982). The development of pro-social  behavior. New York: Academic  Press. In this book, Nancy Eisenberg refers to several categories of pro-social reasoning or knowledge and how to assess them.

I think that a global picture of one's social knowledge should include, at least, these five types of social knowledge. I prefer to say social knowledge rather than social perception because the former, but not the latter, reminds me of an active individual whose social knowledge goes beyond a relatively passive  perception.

Best regards,  Orlando Lourenço

Thank you all for taking the time to answer.

Hello,

Your question is too wide. Social perception is a wide field of research; there are many scales for many samples and fields, for normal or psychopathic character ? For adults or children? For which item in the field? Social values, social support....etc. Anyway, I attached here some scales of social perception. I hope that you find them helpful. With best wishes!

Thank you so much Samah.