lecture 8 - the development of theory of mind

Question 1

recap piaget
-three mountains task

Answer 1

-believed that children couldnt take on the perspective of another person until 6 years old.

-showed children (4-8) years old_ three models of mountains
-the child could explore the model from all angles
-child is asked what viewpoint can be seen by a viewer seated directly across from them

Question 2

three mountains task findings

Answer 2

ages 4-5 struggle to answer
age 7 can reliably answer correctly

-therefore , children are egocentric until age 7
-they view the world only from ones own perspective
-inability to look at a situation from someone else’s perspective

Question 3

criticisms of the three mountain task findings

Answer 3

• Children might lack the ability to imagine what the other viewpoint looks like
• Children might have perspective taking abilities before age 7

-they often used a doll and asked what it would look like from that perspective
-this may be a limitation and the child may not be able to take on the perspective of something thats not living

Question 4

what does theory theory say

Answer 4

there is a theory about theories

Theory theory posits that children are “little scientists”

• Children are born with a tendency to form theories which help them make sense of the world
• Theories are non-scientific
• Children update their theories as they test them

Question 5

theory theory - wellman and gelman 1998
the 4 blocks of theory theory

Answer 5

1. Children divide the world into fundamentally different categories

• e.g., physical objects have a separate theory from the human mind

2. Children understand that each domain involves different causes
   * e.g., an object moves because it was hit by a different object that was moving; human behaviours are caused by intentions
3. There are distinctive underlying constructs in their understandings
   * e.g., the mind consists of mental representations, but solid objects are composed of physical substances.
4. Concepts form a larger system
   .* e.g., the desire for candy
    intention to obtain candy  a trip to the store

Question 6

how do children test their theories

Answer 6

through play, instruction and observation
-just through experiencing life

Question 7

why do we care about theory theory

Answer 7

Theory theory has led researchers to want to study how theories about the mind (i.e., “Theory of Mind”) develop:

• How does theory of mind develop?
• Is theory of mind cultural?
• What interactions advance theory of mind?
• Can theory of mind predict social behaviours in children?
• Do children believe that humans are different from other entities?

Question 8

when do infants start to recognise that people are separate categories ?
- animate -inanimate distinction
-what is this, when do we see this in children
-is it uniform across cultures

Answer 8

The ability to detect whether an object is an animate or inanimate entity

• Demonstrates an ability to sort items in functional categories
• May serve an evolutionary purpose
• Manifests early in infancy (Rakison & Poulin-Dubois, 2001
  )* Has neurological correlates (Caramazza & Shelton, 1998)
• Uniform across cultures (Atran, 1999

Question 9

what did piaget believe about person-object distinction

Answer 9

Piaget (1952):
* Believed that the distinction doesn’t develop until 8 months

Question 10

when are children able to distinguish person-object
-conclusion and limitation

Answer 10

3-month-olds

• Show a looking-time preference for a person over:
• A musical mobile, toy monkey, manikin, toy doll
• 2-month-olds:
• Smile and coo for a person compared to a toy monkey

Infants might show the animate-inanimate distinction by 2 months!
* But these studies did not control for familiarity or activity of the human

Question 11

study on person-object distinction whilst controlling familiarity and activity (legerstee et al 1987)
-describe the study

Answer 11

Longitudinal study of infants from 3 to 25 weeks of age, very long study
-tracked whether they liked these dolls or humans
* Presented infant with a doll vs. human

Question 12

study on person-object distinction whilst controlling familiarity and activity (legerstee et al 1987)
-results of the study

Answer 12

• At 9 weeks – smiled more at human
• At 4 months – reached for doll more than human

When comparing persons vs objects, infants can detect a difference as young as 9 weeks when controlling for familiarity and activity!

Question 13

case study - are people more special than other animals
-wintrop and kellog 1933

Answer 13

Raised Donald (son, 10 months) and Gua (chimp, 7 months) together
* Initial purpose: to examine if Gua would imitate Donald’s behaviours

• Findings
  :* Donald imitated Gua’s crawling and food calls!
  means infants had a preference for living things , but we don’t know whether or not Donald has a preference for humans

-remember we cant rely on case studies alone

Question 14

study using a looking preference task
Heron-Delaney, Wirth & Pascalis (2011
-describe the study

Answer 14

-preferential looking task
-presented infants with a human face and a chimp face (which one do they prefer)
-another phase where the presented the human and full body and then chimp and full body

Question 15

study using a looking preference task
Heron-Delaney, Wirth & Pascalis (2011
-findings of study

Answer 15

At 3.5 months

• Preference for human faces
• No preference between humans and primates for faces+body
• Did not examine infants younger than 3.5 months

Question 16

theory of mind

Answer 16

Theory of Mind (ToM) :
the ability to imagine what other people are thinking, to predict their behaviour and intentions, to speculate about their beliefs and perceptions

Question 17

understanding intentions
can infants understand someone elses intentions based on their actions?
-20-24 months
-12-14 months
exeriments

Answer 17

20-24 months
Asked to show an item to someone else
* Baby orients object towards other person (eg show me the teddy bear and child turns it there)
* Indicates understanding of other person’s intention to see the object

12-14 months
Adult turns gaze towards an object
* Infant follows adult’s gaze and will even move if there is a barrier
* Indicates understanding that there is something to see (rather than action imitation)

Question 18

-do infants around 8-12 months understand intentions
intentions paradigm
-phases

Answer 18

1) habituation phase
infant habituated to adult reaching for a ball over a barrier (shown an adult reaching over a barrier to pick up something)

does infant understand the intention

2) test phase
-show infant two novel stimuli, one is the adult reaching for the object directly (A) (without the barrier) in the indirect reach without a barrier as well but picks up the ball going up and down (as if there is a barrier)(B)

Question 19

possible hypothesis’ of the intentions paradigm

Answer 19

if infant Looking longer at A > B (novel stimuli!)
* Infant is look at the novel stimuli (no understanding of intentions)

• Looking longer at B > A
• Infant recognized that there was no need for adult to reach over an empty space (violates expectation)
• Infant understands the intention of the action

Question 20

findings of the intentions paradigm experiment
-infants can / cannot detect purpose of action through the intentions paradigm ?

Answer 20

Looking at B > A
* Infant recognized that there was no need for adult to reach over an empty space (violates expectation)
* Infant understands the intention of the action
* Infant understood the goal, not simply the action
* As young as 8 months old!

Infants detect the purpose of actions through the intentions paradigm

Question 21

representational understanding
-what is this

Answer 21

Understanding intentions is representational understanding
* i.e., the infant understands that the action represented a goal

Question 22

false belief problems

Answer 22

Critical component: Understanding that others may hold beliefs that may be wrong
* Tests of false belief have been developed to assess this ability

Question 23

false belief test

Answer 23

Child is presented with problems, in which another person believes something to be true that the child knows is false

 Does the child think that the other person will act in accord with his/ her own false belief or with the child’s correct understanding of the situation?

 Studying such situations reveals whether children understand that other people’s actions are determined by the contents of their own minds, rather than the objective truth of the situation or the child’s understanding of it

Question 24

false beliefs - the unexpected transfer task
description
results

Answer 24

-in scene one child will see maxi put choc in the cupboard
-in scene 2 mum removes the choc and puts it in the fridge
“Where will Maxi look for the chocolate when he comes back?”

• 3-year-olds will answer “In the fridge” (child doesnt understand)
• Sharp increase in the number of children who answer correctly around the age of 4 years
• Finding is extremely robust:
• Review of 178 studies using different forms of the problem, different questions and societies(Wellman et al., 2001)

Question 25

false beliefs - sally anne task

Answer 25

-sally has a basket
-anne has a box
-sally has a marble and puts it in the basket
-sally leaves
-anne gets the marble from the basket and puts it inside the box
-anne leaves

-sally comes back and wants to play with the marble ,where will sally look for the marble
-3 year olds cant figure this out- they cant answer that sally does know where the marble is- even though the child knows the truth they cant recognise that sally wont know the truth

Question 26

false beliefs deceptive container tasks

Answer 26

-child is shown a smarties box and asked what’s inside
-then shown the contents , which are pencils and this violates their expectations because most children would say smarties

-the child is then asked if john will say is in the box,
- a 3 year old will say john will know there is pencils in the box
-4 year old will say smarties

Question 27

false beliefs - in preschool years
- looking across cultures

Answer 27

Preschool years:* Children go from below-chance to above-chance performance on false-beliefs tasks

• Across cultures:
• Similar developmental trajectory of understanding of false beliefs

Question 28

theory of mind - early development
- at what age to children understand that desires lead to actions

Answer 28

Children’s understanding that desires lead to actions is firmly established by age 2
* E.g. children predict that characters in stories will act in accord with their own desires, even when they differ from the child’s wishes

Question 29

at age 2 do children understand that beliefs are likewise very influential?

Answer 29

2-year-olds show little understanding that beliefs are likewise influential

• By 3 years, children show some understanding of the relation between beliefs and actions and know how beliefs originate, but understanding is still very limited

Question 30

theory of mind - age 4 and the conceptual shift

Answer 30

Age 4 – children negotiate a conceptual shift, a sudden understanding , new knowledge , the child now has a new ability

• Equips them with a representational ToM that allows them to acknowledge false belief
  ≠ Piaget: characterised children below about 7 years of age as egocentric

Question 31

are there specific brain mechanisms that are devoted to understanding other human beings?
Researchers (Baron-Cohen, 1995; Leslie, 2000)
-evidence

Answer 31

Researchers (Baron-Cohen, 1995; Leslie, 2000)hypothesized brain mechanism devoted to understanding other human beings
* Matures over the first years, producing increasingly sophisticated ToM

• Supported by brain imaging studies showing consistent activation in certain areas of the brain in representing beliefs across different tasks
• Differ from those involved in other complex cognitiveprocesses

Question 32

is there a role of general information processing skills and development in a child’s theory of mind development, rather than specific brain areas?

Answer 32

Other researchers (e.g. Perner) emphasize the growth of general information- processing skills and executive functions (EF) as essential to children’s ToM development

• Understanding false-belief problems correlates with ability to reason about complex counter factual statements and inhibition (e.g. Carlson et al., 2004; German & Nichols,2003)
• Studies suggest correlation between EF and ToM (e.g., Meta-Analysis Perner & Lang,1999)
• Longitudinal data suggests that EF at 3.3 years predicted False belief at 4.5 years(Hughes, 1998)

Question 33

in conclusion what factors contribute to TOM development

Answer 33

• Experience
• Brain maturation
• Improved cognitive capacity

Question 34

factors influencing development
-describe conceptual vs gradual change

Answer 34

Children seem to move onto a radically different level of understanding at about 4 years of age
* Suggests conceptual change
#
* However, evidence suggests that gradual changes occur with development and improve probability that the child will give a correct judgement depending on task demands

Question 35

can the false belief test detect degrees of performance

Answer 35

False-belief test is incapable of detecting degrees of performance (they only pass or fail)
* Makes development appear as occurring in stages
* Instead of focusing on whether child passes/ fails test, enquire probability of the child passing at any given time

Question 36

studies that look at how to detect small changes in children development of theory of mind across time

Answer 36

Evidence (e.g., Gopnik & Astington, 1988) that many children pass one test of false belief but fail another

• Giving correct judgement in one test does not guarantee future success (Mayes et al.,1996)
• Longitudinal studies indicate that number of false belief tests a child passes increases gradually with age (e.g., Flynn et al., 2004

Question 37

influencing factor
-test conditions in the smarties task

Answer 37

3-years-olds succeed in Smarties task if experimenter tells them that they are going to play a trick on another child by hiding pencils in a Smarties box and ask the child to help him infilling the box with pencils (Sullivan & Winner, 1993)

 Infants’ and children’s competence can often be underestimated by performance measures when they make too many demands on their abilities
 Performance factors may mask early signs of ToM competence

Question 38

influencing factors of TOM development - siblings

Answer 38

Siblings could be advantageous or disadvantageous for ToM development

• Child with many siblings would encounter the potentially beneficial experience of exposure to other points of view
• Potentially beneficial adult input would have to be divided

Question 39

evidence that having siblings can impact a childs tom development

Answer 39

Children aged 3 years who had siblings were more likely to pass false belief test ;those with several siblings outperformed those with just one or two (Perner et al.,1994)

• Beneficial effect of having siblings was confined to those with only older siblings(Jenkins & Astington, 1996)
• Stronger effects for siblings of the opposite sex
   Interacting with people whose interests, desires, and motives are different from their own broadens children’s understanding of the mind

Question 40

influencing factors of TOM development - adults

Answer 40

Evidence that toddlers gain great deal from verbal explanations in psychological terms by mind minded parents explaining behaviour (Dunn et al.,1991)

• Individual differences in how mothers interacted with 33-month-olds, when mother read a book to child
  -some mothers simply read the book
   Some provided narrative on the actions of people or on the characters in pretend scenarios that included references to psychological motives and motives
• Children tested for their ability to acknowledge false beliefs 6 months later
   Children who were successful tended to have parents who had given explanations of behaviour with reference to psychological states and motives

Question 41

influencing factors of tom development - child characteristics

Answer 41

Because social environment appears to influence ToM development, it does not follow that intrinsic characteristics of the child are unimportant
* Probably complex interaction between child and environmental factors