{"id":9284,"date":"2019-05-22T16:17:02","date_gmt":"2019-05-22T16:17:02","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.lancaster.ac.uk\/fas\/psych\/glossary\/theory_of_the_child-s_mind_-tom\/"},"modified":"2019-05-22T16:17:02","modified_gmt":"2019-05-22T16:17:02","slug":"theory_of_the_child-s_mind_-tom","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.lancaster.ac.uk\/fas\/psych\/glossary\/theory_of_the_child-s_mind_-tom\/","title":{"rendered":"Theory of the child’s mind (ToM)"},"content":{"rendered":"

A set of interrelated principles and propositions that explains something of why children think and feel as they do, how they come to understand other people’s minds or mental (beliefs, desires, emotions, imagination, intentions) states, and why and how changes come about.  The theory seemingly started with the question “Do the chimpanzee have a theory of mind<\/a>?” proposed by David Premack<\/a> and Guy Woodruff in 1978.  Since then, it has become a major research enterprise in psychology and cognitive neuroscience, especially in the UK.  The original testing ground for ToM involved comparative studies between typically developing children and those with autism.  It was a team at University College London who originally took this step, resulting in an influential paper<\/a> by Simon Baron-Cohen<\/a>, Alan Leslie <\/a>and Uta Frith<\/a>. published in 1985, and entitled ‘Does the autistic child have a “theory of mind”?’  An important component of examining whether a child has a theory of mind is the Sally-Anne test (using dolls) of false beliefs (see figure below for an outline of the procedure).  The foundations for this test were due to work of Heinz Wimmer <\/a>and Josef Perner<\/a>, published in a seminal paper<\/a> in 1983.  Replacing dolls with human actors delivers the same result<\/a> (viz., autistic children do not display a fully developed ToM).  Other tasks have been devised to test for false beliefs such as the appearance-reality (pr ‘Smarties<\/a>‘) test, originating with the work of Alice Gopnik<\/a> and Janet Astington<\/a> in 1988<\/a>.  Irrespective of task, typically developing children appear to acquire a full-blown ToM (demonstrating empathy and no susceptibility to false beliefs) by the age of 3 to 4 years.  Precursors in the development of a ToM have variously been attributed to outcomes using the violation of expectation<\/a> technique with young infants, and to the acquisition of an understanding of joint attention<\/a> in 7 to 9 month-olds.  From the perspective of cognitive neuroscience, the functions attributed to mirror neurons<\/a> have been advanced as crucial cortical mechanisms in the expression of a ToM.  While there seems to be general agreement that ToM is a domain-specific ability, there is ongoing debate as to what constitutes ‘mind reading’ .  One the hand, it is hypothesized to depend on the deployment of a theory akin to naive physics<\/a> rooted in folk wisdom (and thus is sometimes referred to as ‘theory of theory of mind’ or ‘theory-theory’).  On the other, there is the theory of mental simulation<\/a>, which contends that mind reading involves a ‘simulator’ using a model of his or her mind as the basis of a model of the mind of the ‘simulated agent’.  Returning to the question posed by Premack and Woodruff, there is also an continuing debate about whether a full-blown ToM is a unique human ability, or one can be demonstrated in other primates.  One interpretation<\/a> of the available literature is that adult chimpanzees have most of the attributes of a ToM (e.g., understanding the goals and intentions of others), but there is a lack of evidence that they that understand false beliefs.                                <\/p>\n

\n

<\/div>\n<\/div>\n

The Sally-Anne test used to examine the absence or presence of false beliefs attributed to others. To begin with, the experimenter (E) introduces and names two dolls to the child (C): Sally with a basket in front of her and Anne facing a box, as well as a marble. To begin with, the child is asked to name the dolls (the Naming Question). Then the experimenter instigates the following four events:<\/p>\n

1. Sally transfers the marble to her basket <\/p>\n

2. Sally leaves the room to go for a walk<\/p>\n

3. While she is away, Anne removes the marble from Sally’s basket and puts in in her box<\/p>\n

4. Sally returns and the child is asked “Where will Sally look for the marble?” (the Belief Question)<\/p>\n

The correct response is to point or name Sally’s basket, thus indicating an understanding that Sally will believe the marble is in the place she left if. The incorrect response is to name or point to Anne’s box. A correct response indicates the ability to appreciate that Sally can have beliefs about the world that can differ from one’s own. An incorrect response is classified as a false belief, an inability to take an alternative perspective.  <\/p>\n

When these four steps are completed, the child is asked two control questions: “Where is the marble really?” (the Reality Question) and “Where was the marble at the beginning?” (the Memory Question).  <\/p>\n

The test is completed twice, and during the second time the marble has a new starting location (e.g., the experimenter’s pocket)<\/p>\n

The test, performed in vivo, can be found on a video demonstration<\/a>. <\/p>\n

See Animistic thinking, Appearance-reality distinction, Asperger’s syndrome, Autism. Closed-end interviewing, Cognitive neuroscience, Data-driven processes, Display rules, Domain (theory of mind), Emotional awareness, Empathizing\/empathy, Folk wisdom, Intuitive theory of something, Joint attention, Justice, Medial (pre-) frontal cortex, Mind reading, Mind-blindness theory, Mirror neurons, Moral development, Moral judgments, Morality, Other minds problem, Pretence, Sympathy, Theory of pictures, Violation of expectancy, Violation of expectancy technique<\/p>\n

<\/body><\/html><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

A set of interrelated principles and propositions that explains something of why children think and feel as they do, how they come to understand other people’s minds or mental (beliefs, desires, emotions, imagination, intentions) states, and why and how changes come about.  The theory seemingly started with the question “Do the chimpanzee have a theory … <\/p>\n

Continue reading “Theory of the child’s mind (ToM)”<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[2],"class_list":["post-9284","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-uncategorized","tag-glossary","entry"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.lancaster.ac.uk\/fas\/psych\/glossary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/9284","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.lancaster.ac.uk\/fas\/psych\/glossary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.lancaster.ac.uk\/fas\/psych\/glossary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.lancaster.ac.uk\/fas\/psych\/glossary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.lancaster.ac.uk\/fas\/psych\/glossary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=9284"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.lancaster.ac.uk\/fas\/psych\/glossary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/9284\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.lancaster.ac.uk\/fas\/psych\/glossary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=9284"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.lancaster.ac.uk\/fas\/psych\/glossary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=9284"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.lancaster.ac.uk\/fas\/psych\/glossary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=9284"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}