SPRING theory of mind

Question 1

what is theory of mind TOM

Answer 1

ability to understand what someone else is thinking even if it is different from yourself
understanding of mental states ie belief, desire, knowledge
enables to explain and predict others, assoc actions with internal feelings and recognise link between actions and motives

Question 2

how do we tend to recognise others thoughts/feelings

Answer 2

non verbal behaviour and facial expressions
relate to situation and develop expectancies of action
ie angry face and tense fist = punch

Question 3

TOM and empathy

Answer 3

tom important component of empathy but not empathy in itself

Question 4

TOM and species

premack and woodruff 1978

Answer 4

chimps and TOM
show vid of humans with problems ie out of reach food
give photos to possible solutions
if chose correct then recog goal/intent of their behvaiour and use as basis of prediction

Question 5

TOM and the brain

Answer 5

thought to be related to the medial PFC, posterior suprior temporal sulcus and reight temporal parietal junction

Question 6

development of TOM (9 months)

Answer 6

develop action understanding - how to observe others, recognise how produce yourself, the intentions//drives behind the action and understand that these individuals are likely to hold the same intents/drives

Question 7

development of TOM (9-14 months)

bates et al 1979

Answer 7

prodeclarative pointing
ability to express what thinking about - get someone to get obeject for you but not JA
bates - allows the infant to recog what talking about

Question 8

development of TOM (12 months)

Answer 8

recog significance of the eyes

sensitive to where another person may be looking

Question 9

development of TOM (14 months)

bc 1995

Answer 9

JA - seek communication and shared attention with another
bc - mindblindness theory - shareed attention mech of tom cause inability in autism to recog and understabd others beliefs/knowledge
concern/distress for others - recognise how feel and relate to own feelings

Question 10

false beliefs in TOM

Answer 10

the understanding that others representationmay be different/false from ones own and therefore not everyone else may know what you do specifically
recognise that others act on the basis of their own beliefs and do not expect to be same as oneself

Question 11

different false beleif tasks

Answer 11

1st:
maxi (choc) -wimmer and perner 1983
sally anne (marble) - bc, leslie and frith
smarties (pencil) - perner et al 1987
2nd:
ice cream (higher order) - perner and wimmer 1985

Question 12

what must be asked in false belief experiemnets

Answer 12

memory and false belief questions
ie where is it now? where was it before? (check understand story)
and where will…look for it?, where does…think it is? (ability to understand false belief)

Question 13

maxi and choc task (wimmer and perner 1983) results

Answer 13

50% 4-5 year olds say green box (chance)
92% 5-6 year olds say green box (Correct)
both control memory qs correct

Question 14

who passess the sally anne task (bc) and smarties task

Answer 14

4-5yrs - gopnik 1993 - important developmental shift to a representational model of the mind at around 4 yrs?
logic test? - not related to thoughts/feelings

Question 15

problems with false belief tasks

Answer 15

too easy? -logic and not full TOM
ASD pass (BC, 1989)
not looking at higher order belief understanding

Question 16

what does the ice cream story task look at (perner and wimmer (1985))

Answer 16

“where does john think mary will look”
must recognise that each individual knows but does not know that the other does
6-7 years - delay in first and second order TOM?

Question 17

limits of ice cream story

Answer 17

too complex for young?
90% 4-5 years correct when simplify the story (sullivan et al 1994)
requires better memory which younger dont have

Question 18

looking at TOM in early development

Answer 18

norm tom tasks require language comprehension and expression, understanding of compex situations, responses and memory
reasoning and logic late rin development
NEED NON VERBAL

Question 19

Onishi and baillargeon (2005) NV TOM

Answer 19

eye tracking in 15months when watch TOM situation
violation of expectation
look longer when actor knows where object really is - indicate suprise as expect to not know
ie actor put toy in yellow, toy moved to blue, actor reach in either yellow (expect) or blue (unexpect - suprise) - understand to some extent that people should act in accordance to their beliefs
15m/o look longer to blue suggestting recog should not hold belief about where truely is

Question 20

TOM, gaze following and word learning

Answer 20

children likely to follow gaze of other person with better language abilities - use to assoc names with correct source
gaze following at 10-11 m = better language at 18m (brookes and meltzoff 2005)

Question 21

what is listeners direction of gaze? (baldwin 1996)

Answer 21

LDG/follow in labelling

label toy/learn name for toy that already looking at

Question 22

what is speackers direction of gaze (baldwin 1996)

Answer 22

SDG/discrepant labelling

label tou that other person is looking at - recognise speaker intent

Question 23

what age can infants do LDG (baldwin 1996)

Answer 23

16-17 months +

Question 24

what age can infants do SDG (baldwin 1996)

Answer 24

18-19 months +

no tendency to make mapping errors once acquired this

Question 25

empathising systemising theory of TOM (TOM DEFICIT - BC)

Answer 25

autism not ust TOM deficit byt problem in appropriate responses and empathy expression best explained with reference to empathy (below average) and systemizing (the drive to analyze or construct systems) which is either average or even above average. So it is the discrepancy between E and S that determines if you are likely to develop an autism spectrum condition

Question 26

assessment of TOM in autism

Answer 26

interpersonal reactivity scale empathy quotient eye tasks

Question 27

describe the interpersonal reactivity scale (davis, 1983)

Answer 27

self report 28 items on a 5 point likert scale (5 describes me well..) 4 subscales of: perspective taking - adopt others points of view fantasty (trnaspose themselves imaginately into the feelings and actions of fictitious characters) empathetic concern - ' other oriented' sympathy personal distress - self oriented distress/unease/anxiety

Question 28

describe the empathy quotient (BC)

Answer 28

60 item questionnaire filled out either by an adult about themselves or by a parent about their child, both cognitive and affective empathy are assessed. On this scale, people with autism spectrum conditions score lower than comparison group (under 30)

Question 29

describe results of social attribution tasks | abell happe and frith 2000

Answer 29

TD: use action descriptions for random animations, interaction descriptions for goal directed and mental for TOM sequences autistic 8y/os (high functioning): mentallising

Question 30

ASD attribution domain specific?

Answer 30

high functioning adut ASD impaired on social but not physical attribution impairment specific to social stimuli? (klin and jones 2006)

Question 31

castelli et al (2002) PET on attribution of social states

Answer 31

PET of 10 autistic/aspergers and TD adults brain activation during social attribution and random shape movement tasks autism fewer and less accurate descriptions of goal and interaction animations BUT equal on random increased activity in 'mentallising network': superior temporal sulcus, temporoparietal junction, mPFC and temp poles when social > random and TD>ASD

Question 32

schultz et al 2003 neuro on attribution of social states

Answer 32

fMRI on TD adults SATS activate mentalising network and FFA - processing of human faces during inanimate stimui FFA also involved in the processing of abstract semantic info assoc with faces predicted to be underactive in autistic

Question 33

TOM dev 19 m/o

Answer 33

present concern/distress for others avle to recog how others might be feeling and relae to it respond with EMPATHY

Question 34

diff between empathy and TOM

Answer 34

The attribution of mental states,such as desires, intentions and beliefs, to others has been referred to as Ftheory of mind (ToM)_ or Fmentalizing_ (Frith, 1999). Empathy, on the other hand, has been described as the ability to infer and share the emotional experiences of another (Gallese, 2003)

Question 35

prob with premack and woodruff TOM acrosss species

Answer 35

recognising what follows from a set of actions does not require insight into anothers beliefs just need to recognise what self would so in the same situation

Question 36

call and tomasello 2008 TOM across species

Answer 36

chimps have TOM - do not only perceive surface behaviours of others but understand both goals and intentions of others as well as the perception and knowledge of others BUT dont have TOM in terms of human belief-desire psych - fail to appreciate that others mental states may not correspond with realty (are false)

Question 37

what are first order false belief tasks

Answer 37

the protagonists in the stories and video clips have beliefs about situations that are different from the participants’ beliefs (first order)

Question 38

what are second order false belief tasks

Answer 38

the protagonists in the stories and video clips have beliefs about situations that are different from the participants’ beliefs (first order), as well as from the beliefs of others (second order)

Question 39

problem with first order belief tasks | Bloom and German 2000

Answer 39

more to false belief tasks than TOM - tasks test of logic opposed to full TOM? - difficult for younger ages as lack sufficient attentional and linguistic resources to cope - must be able to follow narrative, recall where object was and is, appreciate meaning of qs asked

Question 40

dennet 1978 problems with first order belief tasks | logic

Answer 40

A can predict the actons of B by simply observing the state of the world in that moment ie a knows choc in basket expect b to look in basket not by atributing belief but because choc actually in the basket

Question 41

german and leslie 2000 problem with first order belief tasks attentional and linguistic capacity in young

Answer 41

modified tasks can be passed by 3 y/os | do understand but do not currently hold the necessary develomental capacity to complete task

Question 42

problems with first order false belief tasks | o neill 1996

Answer 42

more to TOM than false belief tasks 2y/o observe toy on high shelf when parent present or absent later retrieve toy - increase in naming and gesturing to location when the parent is present than not suggests infants can modify their behaviours based on the knowledge states of others and recognise the circumstances under which beliefs are formed

Question 43

problems with first order false belief more to TOM than task leslie 1994

Answer 43

although 2y/os fails at tasks they can initiate pretend play and understand the pretense of others

Question 44

problems with first order false belief more to TOM than task baldwin 1991

Answer 44

use eye gaze as a cue to what someone is attending to when using a new word in order to learn for self (speaker directed gaze)

Question 45

problems with first order false beliefs | TD and autistic participants

Answer 45

TD 3y/o who fail are grouped with older autistic BUT not in the same group 3y/o have greater cog, linguistic and communicative skills, more pretend play, understand and manipulate the actions of others BUT autism DONT - full lack of TOM 3y/o likely to have some form - fail due to task demands

Question 46

first order and Autistic children

Answer 46

there ARE autistic children who can pass tom tasks at lower level BUT fail at complex second order autism developmental delay?

Question 47

what does the difference in success rates at diff ages between first and second order tom tasks suggest

Answer 47

that there is a developmental delay in TOM development | learn basic athen develop full by 6-7

Question 48

sullivan et al 1994 against 2nd order tasks completed by 6-7 y/os

Answer 48

when simplify second order, 90% 4-5/os pass 2nd order | reduce no characters, episodes and scenes and include a deception paradigm that highlights character ignorance

Question 49

problem with onishi and baillargeon

Answer 49

do not know true reasons behind infant looking may be looking longer at blue not because they are suprised and expected different but because they recognise the toy is about to be shown again so greater attention to desired object

Question 50

BC, baldwin and crowson 1997 SDG nad LDG in TD autistic and ID

Answer 50

29.4% 9 y/o autistic use SDG 70.6% ID use SDG 79% TD use SDG autism developmental delay?

Question 51

baldwin 1993 mapping errors

Answer 51

TD have no tendency to make mapping errors once acquire discrepant/SDG labelling and therefore understand that speakers NV cues are relevent to the reference of object labelling

Question 52

BC mindblindness theory 1995

Answer 52

``` have innate mechanisms that determine our ability to develop TOM in infancy 1 - Intentionality detector (ID) 2 - Eye Detection Detector (EDD) 3- shared attention mechanism (SAM) 4- Theory of Mind Mechanism (TOMM) ```

Question 53

describe ID mindblindness

Answer 53

interprets motion stimuli in terms of primitive volitional mental states ie goal and desires self propelled - identify agents with goals and desires

Question 54

Heider and Simmerl 1944 ID mindblindness

Answer 54

have a tendency to personify imanimate obects irrespective of form, based on their interactions/motions if appear goal directed narrative of geometric shapes ASD not relate movement to human behaviour atribution of mental states to inanimate thought to reflect higher order thinking

Question 55

golinkoff 1975 IS mindblindness

Answer 55

14-24m/o recog change in narrative order when habituated to a scene of apple being passed to another person - increase in dishabituation when change nattative > change background location

Question 56

describe EDD mindblindness

Answer 56

deteces the presence of eyes/eye like stimuli | compute direction towards or away from self

Question 57

maurer and barrerra 1981 EDD mindblindness

Answer 57

2m/os greater preference for natural > manipulated faces BUT 1m/o no preference - may not be innate - predisposition towards eye due to repetition of exposure

Question 58

Brookes and meltzoff 2002 EDD mindblindness

Answer 58

14-18m/o watch adult attend to obect with headband or blindfold 14m/o more direct gaze to object shared by individual with headband than blindfold recog sig of eyes in attention

Question 59

describe SAM mindblindness

Answer 59

build triadic representations allow to specify that agent and self attending to the same object EDD - monitor eye and ID - read in terms of goals

Question 60

describe TOMM mindblindness

Answer 60

able to infer full range of mental states even those that may not be in line with reality

Question 61

mindblindness and autistim BC 1995

Answer 61

autism is a problem of SAM use pointing to get what want but do not share attention can recognise goals and desires buut notin terms of mental states

Question 62

problem with mindblindness explanation

Answer 62

fails to account for the repetitive aspects of autism ie weak central coherence and ignores empathy (E-S)

Question 63

how would you expect autistic to socre on EQ and SQ? (E-S)

Answer 63

low on empathy quotient - fail to respond appropriately and express high on systemising quotient - tendency to focus on minore details but fail to take into account the whole picture

Question 64

klin and jones 2006 SATs and PATs

Answer 64

social attribution impairment in hihgh functioning autistic BUT not in pysical attribtion tasks - autism is domain specific to social stimuli opposed to borader reasoning problems