studies

Question 1

Perner and Woodruff 1978

Answer 1

ToM
the ability to attribute mental states, emotions, desires, intents belief and knowledge to others and understand these can be different from our own

Question 2

Tom requires social perceptual knowledfe

Answer 2

Tager-flusber and sullivan 2000

Question 3

Brethorton and beeghly 1982

Answer 3

appreciation for what a mental state is

Question 4

Tom requires working memory

Answer 4

Keenan olson and marini 1998

Question 5

Tom requires inhibitory control

Answer 5

carlson and moses 2001

Question 6

geocentricism

Answer 6

carlson claxon and moses 2004

Question 7

sabbiose et al 2006

Answer 7

3-4 FB global

Question 8

frith 2003

Answer 8

sally anne task 3-4

Question 9

perter leek man and simmer 1987

Answer 9

smarties test

Question 10

Riggs et al 2014

Answer 10

must suppress what they know to be true (smarties)

Question 11

mutter Alcom and welsh 2006

Answer 11

working memory is the best predictor of inhibitory control

Question 12

Hughes and Devine 2014

Answer 12

challenge the specific contribution of working memory on false belief understanding: and only 8% SHARED VARIANCE BETWEEn the broader faculty of executive function and theory of mind

Question 13

scott 2011

Answer 13

the ability to meta represent : representing both the situation itself and the way it is represented

Question 14

Carlson and moses 2001

Answer 14

development of the frontal lobe at age 4

Question 15

zaithchik 1990

Answer 15

false photograph task: like with false belief tasks shows difficulty with metarepresentation (false photograph taks removes the mental state)

children struggle to dual represent / metarepresent
also when mental state is removed

fundamental problem

Question 16

perner 1991

Answer 16

meta-representation
represent both the ‘sense’: the way the situation is representing and the ‘referent’ the situation itself
and the relation between these

Question 17

Butterfill and Apply 2013

Answer 17

minimal theory of mind
3 and 4 year olds can track pieces of information but not have a fully understanding of mental states or belief
rather than representing propositions with reasons and causes

Question 18

andrews et al 2003

Answer 18

reminding 3 year olds of their false belief does not improve their performance on FBT above chance
suggesting reducing the load of their mind doesn’t help- it’s the underltanding of what a belief is that is lacking

Question 19

Hadwin and Perner 1991

Answer 19

both 4 and 5 year olds could attribute a false belief to tommy that he think smarties are in the tube even though his mum has replaced them with jelly babies
but only 5 year olds could use false belief understanding understand there was a mismatch between expectation and reality: meta-representing the relation to things held in mind i.e. understanding how mental states will make someone feel (emotion)- this shows fuller understanding

Question 20

Roese 1997

Answer 20

counterfactual reasoning is the ability to think about how event would have been different based on past ones

Question 21

Byrne 1997 and 2005

Answer 21

CFR described as the holding in mind of dual possibilities

need to think about both actual and known to be false world when thinking counterfactually in order to compare them

Question 22

perner et al 2004; riggs et al 1998

Answer 22

evidence that 3 year olds engage in this type of thinking (i.e. conditional that is not counterfactual)

Question 23

Harris et al 1996

Answer 23

dirty shoes
73% 3 year olds
84% of 4 year olds

Question 24

Rafetseder, christi-vargas and perner 2010

Answer 24

discrepancy between intended measurement of CFR and what children employed.

Question 25

Robinson and beck 2000

Answer 25

toy car future hypothetical- what if next time he goes the other way counterfactual- what if he'd driven the other way 30% 3 year olds 60% of 4 year olds 95% 5 year olds

Question 26

beck et al 2006

Answer 26

mouse cotton wool put down on both sides of the slide: consideration of two possibilities comparable performance of 3-4 and 4-5 years in the single possibility question of what if he goes the other way 31% of trials 3-4 year olds could put cotton at both slides 68% of trails 5-6 could

Question 27

Rafetsteder et al 2010

Answer 27

reality error subsides around 3-5 but varies across studies

Question 28

drayton et al 2011

Answer 28

MORE DIRECT EVIDENCE OF HOLDING IN MIND underpinning CFR: default back to basic conditional thinking when working memory is over loaded: working memory underpins this ability and 5 year olds with better working memory did better on counterfactual reasoning

Question 29

Gerstadt et al 1994

Answer 29

well documented drastic advancement in IC between 3 and 6 years

Question 30

Piaget

Answer 30

preoperational (3-4) and concrete operational (5-7)

Question 31

anderson 1983 a and b

Answer 31

spreading activation theory

Question 32

Diamond kirkam and Also 2002

Answer 32

abstract manipulation of the day and night task

Question 33

Towse et al 2000; Zelazo and Frye 1998

Answer 33

3 year olds show knowledge of the rules but can't use them

Question 34

Zelazo Frye and Rapus 1996

Answer 34

abulic dissociation

Question 35

Diamond 2013

Answer 35

working memory involves both holding in mind and manipulation

Question 36

nearest possible world

Answer 36

Lewis 1973

Question 37

decoupling

Answer 37

Wimmer and perner 1983 can explain why sally thinks her marble is in the basket is is different to where it really is so two representations both of the assumptions of where the marble is and where the marble actually is

Question 38

Ruffman and Keenan 1996

Answer 38

surprise is a belief-based emotion that arises around 5 or 6 years old

Question 39

Robinson and Beck's future hypothetical question

Answer 39

toy car and garage 'what is next time he drives the other way'

Question 40

Robinson and Beck CF equivalent question

Answer 40

toy car and garage what if he'd driven the other way past subjunctive

Question 41

Beck et al 2006 single possibility

Answer 41

Mouse task 'what is he drove the other way' only requires thinking about one possibility as the current state of affairs (one of the possibilities has happened)

Question 42

perseverating old rules

Answer 42

zelazo 2006

Question 43

73%

Answer 43

harris et al 3 year olds dirty shoes

Question 44

84%

Answer 44

harries et al 4 year olds dirty shoes

Question 45

30 60 95%

Answer 45

3 4 5 robinson and beck counterfactual question | past subjunctive

Question 46

31%

Answer 46

of trials 3-4 year olds placed wool under both outlets

Question 47

68%

Answer 47

of trials 5-6 year olds placed wool under both outlets