Social Cognition: Theory of mind

Question 1

Intentional reasoning in toddlers

Theory of mind

Answer 1

Meltzoff provided evidence to show that toddlers have understanding of adult intetions when carrying out simple actions
Toddlers observed adults place beads into a jar
In experimental condition, adults appeared to struggle & some beads fell outside jar
In control condition, adults placed beads into jar successfully
In both conditions, toddlers successfully placed beads in jar
Suggests they were imitating the intention rather than the action
This shows that very young children have simple TOM

Question 2

False belief tasks

Theory of mind

Answer 2

Wimmer & Perner told 3-4yos a story in which Maxi left his choco in a blue cupboard before going out to play
Later, Maxi’s mother used some choco when cooking and put it back in a green cupboard
Children asked where Maxi would look for his choco
Most 3yos incorrectly said the green cupboard because they assume Maxi knows what they know
However, most 4yos correctly indentified the blue cupboard
Suggests TOM undergoes a shift & becomes more advanced round 4 years

Question 3

Sally-Anne study

Theory of mind

Answer 3

Baron-Cohen et al told children story about two dolls (Sally & Anne)
Sally places marble in her basket
When Sally is not looking, Anne moves marble to her box
Task is to workout where Sally will look for her marble
Understanding that Sally doesn’t know that Anne moved marble requires an understanding of Sally’s false belief about where it is
Baron-Cohen et al explored links between TOM deficits & autism using false belief task

Sally-Anne task given to 20 autistic children, 27 non-autistic children & 14 children w/ down syndrom (CGs)
85% of children in CGs correctly identified where Sally would look for marble
Only 4 of the autistic children (20%) were able to answer correctly
Baron-Cohen et al argued this diff showed that autism involves a TOM deficit & this may in fact be a complete explanation for autism

Question 4

Testing older children & adults

Theory of mind

Answer 4

Many autistic people who don’t have learning disabilities have challenges w/ empathy, social comm & imagination but language development unaffected
Studies of older autisic children & adults w/o learning disability showed they could succeed at false belief tasks
Blow to idea that autism can be explained by TOM deficits

Question 5

The Eyes Task

Theory of mind

Answer 5

Baron-Cohen et al developed more challenging task to asses TOM in adolescents & adults
Eyes task involves reading complex emotions in pictures of faces just showing small area around the eyes
Found many autistic adults w/o learning disability struggled with Eyes task
Supports idea that TOM deficits may be cause of autism

Question 6

Evaluation: False belief tasks

Theory of mind

Answer 6

Limit: reliance on false belief tasks to test theory
Flase belief tasks have serious problems of validity (Bloom & German)
One reason for this is because they require other cog abilities such as visual memory
Failure on false belief tasks may be due to deficit in memory rather than TOM
Some children who engage successfully in pretend play, which requires some TOM ability, nonetheless find false belief tasks difficult
Therefore, false belief tasks may not really measure TOM & therefore TOM lacks key research evidence

Question 7

Evaluation: Theory of mind vs Perspective-taking

Theory of mind

Answer 7

Limit: failure to distingish TOM from perspective-taking
TOM & p-t are related but are diff cog abilities
Can be difficult to be sure we are measuring one & not the other
E.g. intentional reasoning tasks a child may be viusalising the beads task from adult pov rather than expressing conscious understanding of their intention
Therefore, with exepction of Eyes task, tasks designed to measure TOM may be measuring p-t

Question 8

Evaluation: Real-world application

Theory of mind

Answer 8

Strength: application to understanding autism
Tests used to asses TOM are challenging for some autistic people, possibly as they don’t fully understand what other people are thinking
This offers explanation for why some autistic people may find social interaction difficult - hard to interact w/ someone if you don’t get snes of what they’re feeling or thinking
Therefore, TOM research has real-world relevance

Question 9

Evaluation: Real-world application (Counterpoint)

Theory of mind

Answer 9

However, TOM doesn’t provide complete explanation for autism
Not every autistic person experiences TOM issues nor are TOM problems limited to autistic people (Tager-Flusberg)
Lack of TOM cannot explain cog strengths of autistic people
Therefore, other factors must be involved in autism, & association between autism & TOM is not as strong as first believed