fbpx
Wikipedia

Theory of mind

January 16, 2023

Not to be confused with Philosophy of mind.

In psychology, theory of mind refers to the capacity to understand other people by ascribing mental states to them (that is, surmising what is happening in their mind). This includes the knowledge that others' mental states may be different from one's own states and include beliefs, desires, intentions, emotions, and thoughts.[1] Possessing a functional theory of mind is considered crucial for success in everyday human social interactions. People use such a theory when analyzing, judging, and inferring others' behaviors. The discovery and development of theory of mind primarily came from studies done with animals and infants.[2] Factors including drug and alcohol consumption, language development, cognitive delays, age, and culture can affect a person's capacity to display theory of mind.

It has been proposed that deficits in theory of mind can occur in people with autism (although this is contentious[4]), anorexia nervosa,[5] schizophrenia, dysphoria, attention deficit hyperactivity disorder,[6] cocaine addiction,[7] and brain damage caused by alcohol's neurotoxicity;[8] deficits associated with opiate addiction are reversed after prolonged abstinence.[9] Having a theory of mind is similar to but not identical with having the capacity for empathy[10] or for sympathy.

Theory of mind develops throughout childhood as the prefrontal cortex develops. The violation-of-expectation procedure uses infants' tendency to look longer at unexpected and surprising events. Most typically developing children are able to pass the False-belief task from around age four. Children from Iran and China in a culture of collectivism develop knowledge access earlier and understand diverse beliefs later than Western children in a culture of individualism.[11]

Neuroimaging shows brain regions engaged during theory of mind include the medial prefrontal cortex (mPFC), and area around posterior superior temporal sulcus (pSTS), and sometimes precuneus and amygdala/temporopolar cortex. Patients with frontal lobe or temporoparietal junction lesions find some theory of mind tasks difficult.

Many researchers focus on animals' understanding of intention, gaze, perspective, or knowledge. A study showed orangutans and chimpanzees understood the difference between accidental and intentional acts.  William Field and Sue Savage-Rumbaugh believe that bonobos have developed theory of mind.

Theory of mind is distinct from philosophy of mind, which is about the basic nature of the mind and how the brain enables it.

Definition

Theory of mind is a "theory" because the behavior of the other person, such as their statements and expressions, is the only thing being directly observed. Their mind and its contents cannot be observed directly, so the existence and nature of the mind must be inferred.[12] The presumption that others have a mind is termed a theory of mind because each human can only observe their own mind (via introspection); no one has direct access to the mind of another. It is typically assumed that others have minds analogous to one's own; this assumption is based on reciprocal social interaction, as observed in joint attention,[2] the functional use of language,[13] and the understanding of others' emotions and actions.[14] Theory of mind allows one to attribute thoughts, desires, and intentions to others, to predict or explain their actions, and to posit their intentions. It enables one to understand that mental states can be the cause of—and so can be used to explain and predict—the behavior of others.[12] Being able to attribute mental states to others and understanding them as causes of behavior implies, in part, that one must be able to conceive of the mind as a "generator of representations".[15] If a person does not have a mature theory of mind, it may be a sign of cognitive or developmental impairment.

Theory of mind appears to be an innate potential ability in humans that requires social and other experience over many years for its full development. Different people may develop more or less effective theories of mind. Neo-Piagetian theories of cognitive development maintain that theory of mind is a byproduct of a broader hypercognitive ability of the human mind to register, monitor, and represent its own functioning.[16]

Empathy—the recognition and understanding of the states of mind of others, including their beliefs, desires, and particularly emotions—is a related concept. Empathy is often characterized as the ability to "put oneself into another's shoes". Recent neuro-ethological studies of animal behaviour suggest that even rodents may exhibit empathetic abilities.[17] While empathy is known as emotional perspective-taking, theory of mind is defined as cognitive perspective-taking.[18]

Research on theory of mind, in humans and animals, adults and children, normally and atypically developing, has grown rapidly in the years since Premack and Guy Woodruff's 1978 paper, "Does the chimpanzee have a theory of mind?".[12] The field of social neuroscience has also begun to address this debate by imaging the brains of humans while they perform tasks that require the understanding of an intention, belief, or other mental state in others.

An alternative account of theory of mind is given in operant psychology and provides empirical evidence for a functional account of both perspective-taking and empathy. The most developed operant approach is founded on research on derived relational responding[jargon] and is subsumed within relational frame theory. According to this view, empathy and perspective-taking comprise a complex set of derived relational abilities based on learning to discriminate and respond verbally to ever more complex relations between self, others, place, and time, and through established relations.[19][20][21]

Philosophical and psychological roots

Discussions of theory of mind have their roots in philosophical debate from the time of René Descartes' Second Meditation, which set the groundwork for considering the science of the mind.

Two contrasting approaches in the philosophical literature to theory of mind are theory-theory and simulation theory.[clarification needed] The theory-theorist posits a veritable theory—"folk psychology"—that people use to reason about others' minds. Such a theory is developed automatically and innately, though it is instantiated through social interactions.[22] It is also closely related to person perception and attribution theory from social psychology.

It is common and intuitive to assume that others are minded. People anthropomorphize non-human animals, inanimate objects, and even natural phenomena. Daniel Dennett referred to this tendency as taking an "intentional stance" toward things: we assume they have intentions, to help predict their future behavior.[23] However, there is an important distinction between taking an "intentional stance" toward something and entering a "shared world" with it. The intentional stance is a detached and functional[clarification needed] theory we resort to during interpersonal interactions. A shared world is directly perceived and its existence structures reality itself for the perceiver. It is not just automatically applied to perception; it in many ways constitutes perception.[clarification needed]

The philosophical roots of the relational frame theory (RFT) account of theory of mind arise from contextual psychology which refers to the study of organisms (both human and non-human) interacting in and with a historical and current situational context. It is an approach based on contextualism, a philosophy in which any event is interpreted as an ongoing act inseparable from its current and historical context and in which a radically functional approach to truth and meaning is adopted. As a variant of contextualism, RFT focuses on the construction of practical, scientific knowledge. This scientific form of contextual psychology is virtually synonymous with the philosophy of operant psychology.[24]

Development

The study of which animals are capable of attributing knowledge and mental states to others, as well as the development of this ability in human ontogeny and phylogeny, identifies several behavioral precursors to theory of mind. Understanding attention, understanding of others' intentions, and imitative experience with others are hallmarks of a theory of mind that may be observed early in the development of what later becomes a full-fledged theory.

Simon Baron-Cohen proposed that infants' understanding of attention in others acts as a "critical precursor" to the development of theory of mind.[2] Understanding attention involves understanding that seeing can be directed selectively as attention, that the looker assesses the seen object as "of interest", and that seeing can induce beliefs. A possible illustration of theory of mind in infants is joint attention. Joint attention refers to when two people look at and attend to the same thing. Parents often use the act of pointing to prompt infants to engage in joint attention; understanding this prompt requires that infants take into account another person's mental state, and understand that the person notices an object or finds it of interest. Baron-Cohen speculates that the inclination to spontaneously reference an object in the world as of interest, via pointing, ("protodeclarative pointing") and to likewise appreciate the directed attention of another, may be the underlying motive behind all human communication.[2]

Understanding of others' intentions is another critical precursor to understanding other minds because intentionality, or "aboutness", is a fundamental feature of mental states and events. The "intentional stance" was defined by Daniel Dennett[25] as an understanding that others' actions are goal-directed and arise from particular beliefs or desires. Both two- and three-year-old children could discriminate when an experimenter intentionally vs. accidentally marked a box with stickers as baited[clarification needed].[26] Even earlier in ontogeny, Andrew N. Meltzoff found that 18-month-old infants could perform target manipulations that adult experimenters attempted and failed, suggesting the infants could represent the object-manipulating behavior of adults as involving goals and intentions.[27] While attribution of intention (the box-marking) and knowledge (false-belief tasks) is investigated in young humans and nonhuman animals to detect precursors to a theory of mind, Gagliardi et al. have pointed out that even adult humans do not always act in a way consistent with an attributional perspective.[28] In their experiment, adult human subjects made choices about baited containers when guided by confederates who could not see (and so could not know) which container was baited.

Research in developmental psychology suggests that an infant's ability to imitate others lies at the origins of both theory of mind and other social-cognitive achievements like perspective-taking and empathy.[29] According to Meltzoff, the infant's innate understanding that others are "like me" allows it to recognize the equivalence between the physical and mental states apparent in others and those felt by the self. For example, the infant uses his own experiences, orienting his head/eyes toward an object of interest to understand the movements of others who turn toward an object, that is, that they will generally attend to objects of interest or significance. Some researchers in comparative disciplines have hesitated to put a too-ponderous weight on imitation as a critical precursor to advanced human social-cognitive skills like mentalizing and empathizing, especially if true imitation is no longer employed by adults. A test of imitation by Alexandra Horowitz[30] found that adult subjects imitated an experimenter demonstrating a novel task far less closely than children did. Horowitz points out that the precise psychological state underlying imitation is unclear and cannot, by itself, be used to draw conclusions about the mental states of humans.

While much research has been done on infants, theory of mind develops continuously throughout childhood and into late adolescence as the synapses (neuronal connections) in the prefrontal cortex develop. The prefrontal cortex is thought to be involved in planning and decision-making.[31] Children seem to develop theory of mind skills sequentially. The first skill to develop is the ability to recognize that others have diverse desires. Children are able to recognize that others have diverse beliefs soon after. The next skill to develop is recognizing that others have access to different knowledge bases. Finally, children are able to understand that others may have false beliefs and that others are capable of hiding emotions. While this sequence represents the general trend in skill acquisition, it seems that more emphasis is placed on some skills in certain cultures, leading to more valued skills to develop before those that are considered not as important. For example, in individualistic cultures such as the United States, a greater emphasis is placed on the ability to recognize that others have different opinions and beliefs. In a collectivistic culture, such as China, this skill may not be as important and therefore may not develop until later.[32]

Language

There is evidence that the development of theory of mind is closely intertwined with language development in humans. One meta-analysis showed a moderate to strong correlation (r = 0.43) between performance on theory of mind and language tasks.[33] Both language and theory of mind begin to develop around the same time in children (between ages two and five), but many other abilities develop during this same time period as well, and they do not produce such high correlations with one another nor with theory of mind.

Pragmatic theories of communication[34] assume that infants must possess an understanding of beliefs and mental states of others to infer the communicative content that proficient language users intend to convey. Since a verbal utterance is often underdetermined, and so it can have different meanings depending on the actual context, theory of mind can play a crucial role in understanding the communicative and informative intentions of others and inferring the meaning of words. Some empirical results[35] suggest that even 13-month-old infants have an early capacity for communicative mind-reading that enables them to infer what relevant information is transferred between communicative partners, which implies that human language relies at least partially on theory of mind skills.

Carol A. Miller posed further possible explanations for this relationship. Perhaps the extent of verbal communication and conversation involving children in a family could explain theory of mind development. Such language exposure could help introduce a child to the different mental states and perspectives of others.[36] Empirical findings indicate that participation in family discussion predicts scores on theory of mind tasks,[37] and that deaf children who have hearing parents and may not be able to communicate with their parents much during early years of development tend to score lower on theory of mind tasks.[38]

Another explanation of the relationship between language and theory of mind development has to do with a child's understanding of mental-state words such as "think" and "believe". Since a mental state is not something that one can observe from behavior, children must learn the meanings of words denoting mental states from verbal explanations alone, requiring knowledge of the syntactic rules, semantic systems, and pragmatics of a language.[36] Studies have shown that understanding of these mental state words predicts theory of mind in four-year-olds.[39]

A third hypothesis is that the ability to distinguish a whole sentence ("Jimmy thinks the world is flat") from its embedded complement ("the world is flat") and understand that one can be true while the other can be false is related to theory of mind development. Recognizing these sentential complements[jargon] as being independent of one another is a relatively complex syntactic skill and correlates with increased scores on theory of mind tasks in children.[40]

There is also evidence that the areas of the brain responsible for language and theory of mind are closely connected. The temporoparietal junction (TPJ) is involved in the ability to acquire new vocabulary, as well as to perceive and reproduce words. The TPJ also contains areas that specialize in recognizing faces, voices, and biological motion, and in theory of mind. Since all of these areas are located so closely together, it is reasonable to suspect that they work together. Studies have reported an increase in activity in the TPJ when patients are absorbing information through reading or images regarding other peoples' beliefs but not while observing information about physical control stimuli.[41]

Theory of mind in adults

Neurotypical adults have theory of mind concepts that they developed as children (concepts such as belief, desire, knowledge, and intention). How do they use these concepts to meet the diverse demands of social life, ranging from snap decisions about how to trick an opponent in a competitive game, to keeping up with who knows what in a fast-moving conversation, to judging the guilt or innocence of the accused in a court of law?[42]

Boaz Keysar, Dale Barr, and colleagues found that adults often failed to use their theory of mind abilities to interpret a speaker's message, even though they were perfectly well aware that the speaker lacked critical knowledge.[43] Other studies show that adults are prone to "egocentric biases", with which they are influenced by their own beliefs, knowledge, or preferences when judging those of other people, or else they neglect other people's perspectives entirely.[44] There is also evidence that adults with greater memory and inhibitory capacity and greater motivation are more likely to use their theory of mind abilities.[45]

In contrast, evidence about indirect effects of thinking about other people's mental states suggests that adults may sometimes use their theory of mind automatically. Agnes Kovacs and colleagues measured the time it took adults to detect the presence of a ball as it was revealed from behind an occluder. They found that adults' speed of response was influenced by whether or not an avatar in the scene thought there was a ball behind the occluder, even though adults were not asked to pay attention to what the avatar thought.[46] Dana Samson and colleagues measured the time it took adults to judge the number of dots on the wall of a room. They found that adults responded more slowly when an avatar standing in the room happened to see fewer dots than they did, even when they had never been asked to pay attention to what the avatar could see.[47] It has been questioned whether these "altercentric biases" truly reflect automatic processing of what another person is thinking or seeing, or whether they instead reflect attention and memory effects cued by the avatar, but not involving any representation of what they think or see.[48]

Different theories seek to explain such results. If theory of mind is automatic, this would help explain how people keep up with the theory of mind demands of competitive games and fast-moving conversations. It might also explain evidence that human infants and some non-human species sometimes appear capable of theory of mind, despite their limited resources for memory and cognitive control.[49] If theory of mind is effortful and not automatic, on the other hand, this explains why it feels effortful to decide whether a defendant is guilty or innocent, or whether a negotiator is bluffing, and economy of effort would help explain why people sometimes neglect to use their theory of mind.

Ian Apperly and Stephen Butterfill suggested that people have "two systems" for theory of mind,[50] in common with "two systems" accounts in many other areas of psychology.[51] In this account, "system 1" is cognitively efficient and enables theory of mind for a limited but useful set of circumstances. "System 2" is cognitively effortful, but enables much more flexible theory of mind abilities. Philosopher Peter Carruthers disagrees, arguing that the same core theory of mind abilities can be used in both simple and complex ways.[52] The account has been criticised by Celia Heyes who suggests that "system 1" theory of mind abilities do not require representation of mental states of other people, and so are better thought of as "sub-mentalising".[48]

Ageing

In older age, theory of mind capacities decline, irrespective of how exactly they are tested (e.g. stories, eyes, videos, false belief-video, false belief-other, and faux pas).[53] However, the decline in other cognitive functions is even stronger, suggesting that social cognition is better preserved. In contrast to theory of mind, empathy shows no impairments in aging.[54][55]

There are two kinds of theory of mind representations: cognitive (concerning the mental states, beliefs, thoughts, and intentions of others) and affective (concerning the emotions of others). Cognitive theory of mind is further separated into first order (e.g., I think she thinks that) and second order (e.g. he thinks that she thinks that). There is evidence that cognitive and affective theory of mind processes are functionally independent from one another.[56] In studies of Alzheimer's disease, which typically occurs in older adults, patients display impairment with second order cognitive theory of mind, but usually not with first order cognitive or affective theory of mind. However, it is difficult to discern a clear pattern of theory of mind variation due to age. There have been many discrepancies in the data collected thus far, likely due to small sample sizes and the use of different tasks that only explore one aspect of theory of mind. Many researchers suggest that theory of mind impairment is simply due to the normal decline in cognitive function.[57]

Cultural variations

Researchers propose that five key aspects of theory of mind develop sequentially for all children between the ages of three and five:[58] diverse desires (DD), diverse beliefs (DB), knowledge access (KA), false beliefs (FB), and hidden emotions (HE).[58] Australian, American, and European children acquire theory of mind in this exact order,[11] and studies with children in Canada, India, Peru, Samoa, and Thailand indicate that they all pass the false belief task at around the same time, suggesting that children develop theory of mind consistently around the world.[59]

However, children from Iran and China develop theory of mind in a slightly different order. Although they begin the development of theory of mind around the same time, toddlers from these countries understand knowledge access (KA) before Western children but take longer to understand diverse beliefs (DB).[11][60] Researchers believe this swap in the developmental order is related to the culture of collectivism in Iran and China, which emphasizes interdependence and shared knowledge as opposed to the culture of individualism in Western countries, which promotes individuality and accepts differing opinions. Because of these different cultural values, Iranian and Chinese children might take longer to understand that other people have different beliefs and opinions. This suggests that the development of theory of mind is not universal and solely determined by innate brain processes but also influenced by social and cultural factors.[11]

Historiography

Theory of mind can help historians to more properly understand historical figures' characters, for example Thomas Jefferson. Emancipationists like Douglas L. Wilson and scholars at the Thomas Jefferson Foundation view Jefferson as an opponent of slavery all his life, noting Jefferson's attempts within the limited range of options available to him to undermine slavery, his many attempts at abolition legislation, the manner in which he provided for slaves, and his advocacy of their more humane treatment. This view contrasts with that of revisionists like Paul Finkelman, who criticizes Jefferson for racism, slavery, and hypocrisy. Emancipationist views on this hypocrisy recognize that if he tried to be true to his word, it would have alienated his fellow Virginians. In another example, Franklin D. Roosevelt did not join NAACP leaders in pushing for federal anti-lynching legislation, as he believed that such legislation was unlikely to pass and that his support for it would alienate Southern congressmen, including many of Roosevelt's fellow Democrats.

Empirical investigation

Whether children younger than three or four years old have a theory of mind is a topic of debate among researchers. It is a challenging question, due to the difficulty of assessing what pre-linguistic children understand about others and the world. Tasks used in research into the development of theory of mind must take into account the umwelt[61] of the pre-verbal child.[clarification needed]

False-belief task

One of the most important milestones in theory of mind development is the ability to attribute false belief: in other words, to understand that other people can believe things which are not true. To do this, it is suggested, one must understand how knowledge is formed, that people's beliefs are based on their knowledge, that mental states can differ from reality, and that people's behavior can be predicted by their mental states. Numerous versions of false-belief task have been developed, based on the initial task created by Wimmer and Perner (1983).[62]

In the most common version of the false-belief task (often called the "'Sally-Anne' test" or "'Sally-Anne' task"), children are told or shown a story involving two dolls, Sally and Anne, who have a basket and a box, respectively. Sally also has a marble, which she places into her basket, and then leaves the room. While she is out of the room, Anne takes the marble from the basket and puts it into the box. Sally returns, and the child is then asked where Sally will look for the marble. The child passes the task if she answers that Sally will look in the basket, where Sally put the marble; the child fails the task if she answers that Sally will look in the box, where the child knows the marble is hidden, even though Sally cannot know this, since she did not see it hidden there. To pass the task, the child must be able to understand that another's mental representation of the situation is different from their own, and the child must be able to predict behavior based on that understanding.[63]

Another example depicts a boy who leaves chocolate on a shelf and then leaves the room. His mother puts it in the fridge. To pass the task, the child must understand that the boy, upon returning, holds the false belief that his chocolate is still on the shelf.[64]

The results of research using false-belief tasks have been fairly consistent: most typically developing children are able to pass the tasks from around age four.[65] Notably, while most children, including those with Down syndrome, are able to pass this test, in one study, 80% of children diagnosed with autism were unable to do so.[66]

Adults may also struggle with false beliefs, for instance when they show hindsight bias—"the inclination to see events that have already happened as being more predictable than they were before they took place."[67] In one experiment, adult subjects who were asked for an independent assessment were unable to disregard information on actual outcome. Also in experiments with complicated situations, when assessing others' thinking, adults can fail to correctly disregard certain information that they have been given.[64]

Unexpected contents

Other tasks have been developed to try to extend the false-belief task. In the "Unexpected contents", or "Smarties" task, experimenters ask children what they believe to be the contents of a box that looks as though it holds a candy called "Smarties". After the child guesses (usually) "Smarties", it is shown that the box in fact contained pencils. The experimenter then re-closes the box and asks the child what she thinks another person, who has not been shown the true contents of the box, will think is inside. The child passes the task if he/she responds that another person will think that "Smarties" exist in the box, but fails the task if she responds that another person will think that the box contains pencils. Gopnik & Astington found that children pass this test at age four or five years.[68]

Other tasks

The "false-photograph" task[69] also measures theory of mind development. In this task, children must reason about what is represented in a photograph that differs from the current state of affairs. Within the false-photograph task, either a location or identity change exists.[70] In the location-change task, the examiner puts an object in one location (e.g. chocolate in an open green cupboard), whereupon the child takes a Polaroid photograph of the scene. While the photograph is developing, the examiner moves the object to a different location (e.g. a blue cupboard), allowing the child to view the examiner's action. The examiner asks the child two control questions: "When we first took the picture, where was the object?" and "Where is the object now?" The subject is also asked a "false-photograph" question: "Where is the object in the picture?" The child passes the task if he/she correctly identifies the location of the object in the picture and the actual location of the object at the time of the question. However, the last question might be misinterpreted as "Where in this room is the object that the picture depicts?" and therefore some examiners use an alternative phrasing.[71]

To make it easier for animals, young children, and individuals with classical (Leo Kanner-type) autism to understand and perform theory of mind tasks, researchers have developed tests in which verbal communication is de-emphasized: some whose administration does not involve verbal communication on the part of the examiner, some whose successful completion does not require verbal communication on the part of the subject, and some that meet both of those standards. One category of tasks uses a preferential-looking paradigm, with looking time as the dependent variable. For instance, nine-month-old infants prefer looking at behaviors performed by a human hand over those made by an inanimate hand-like object.[72] Other paradigms look at rates of imitative behavior, the ability to replicate and complete unfinished goal-directed acts,[27] and rates of pretend play.[73]

Early precursors

Research on the early precursors of theory of mind has invented ways to observe preverbal infants' understanding of other people's mental states, including perception and beliefs. Using a variety of experimental procedures, studies show that infants from their first year of life have an implicit understanding of what other people see[74] and what they know.[75][76] A popular paradigm used to study infants' theory of mind is the violation-of-expectation procedure, which exploits infants' tendency to look longer at unexpected and surprising events compared to familiar and expected events. The amount of time they look at an event gives researchers an indication of what infants might be inferring, or their implicit understanding of events. One study using this paradigm found that 16-month-olds tend to attribute beliefs to a person whose visual perception was previously witnessed as being "reliable", compared to someone whose visual perception was "unreliable". Specifically, 16-month-olds were trained to expect a person's excited vocalization and gaze into a container to be associated with finding a toy in the reliable-looker condition or an absence of a toy in the unreliable-looker condition. Following this training phase, infants witnessed, in an object-search task, the same persons searching for a toy either in the correct or incorrect location after they both witnessed the location of where the toy was hidden. Infants who experienced the reliable looker were surprised and therefore looked longer when the person searched for the toy in the incorrect location compared to the correct location. In contrast, the looking time for infants who experienced the unreliable looker did not differ for either search locations. These findings suggest that 16-month-old infants can differentially attribute beliefs about a toy's location based on the person's prior record of visual perception.[77]

Methodological problems

With the methods used to test theory of mind, it has been experimentally shown that very simple robots that only react by reflexes and are not built to have any complex cognition at all can pass the tests for having theory of mind abilities that psychology textbooks assume to be exclusive to humans older than four or five years. Whether or not such a robot passes or fails the test is influenced by completely non-cognitive factors such as placement of objects and the structure of the robot body influencing how the reflexes are conducted. It has therefore been suggested that theory of mind tests may not actually test cognitive abilities.[78]

Deficits

Theory of mind impairment, or mind-blindness, describes a difficulty someone would have with perspective-taking. Individuals with theory of mind impairment have a difficult time seeing phenomena from any other perspective than their own.[79] Individuals who experience a theory of mind deficit have difficulty determining the intentions of others, lack understanding of how their behavior affects others, and have a difficult time with social reciprocity.[80] Theory of mind deficits have been observed in people with autism spectrum disorders, people with schizophrenia, people with nonverbal learning disorder, people with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder,[6] people under the influence of alcohol and narcotics, sleep-deprived people, and people who are experiencing severe emotional or physical pain. Theory of mind deficits have also been observed in deaf children who are late signers (i.e. are born to hearing parents), but such a deficit is due to the delay in language learning, not any cognitive deficit, and therefore disappears once the child learns sign language.[81]

Autism

In 1985 Simon Baron-Cohen, Alan M. Leslie, and Uta Frith suggested that children with autism do not employ theory of mind[66] and that autistic children have particular difficulties with tasks requiring the child to understand another person's beliefs. These difficulties persist when children are matched for verbal skills[82] and they have been taken as a key feature of autism. Although in a 2019 review, Gernsbacher and Yergeau argued that "the claim that autistic people lack a theory of mind is empirically questionable", as there have been numerous failed replications of classic ToM studies and the meta-analytical effect sizes of such replications were minimal to small.[83]

Many individuals classified as autistic have severe difficulty assigning mental states to others, and some seem to lack theory of mind capabilities.[84] Researchers who study the relationship between autism and theory of mind attempt to explain the connection in a variety of ways. One account assumes that theory of mind plays a role in the attribution of mental states to others and in childhood pretend play.[85] According to Leslie,[85] theory of mind is the capacity to mentally represent thoughts, beliefs, and desires, regardless of whether or not the circumstances involved are real. This might explain why some autistic individuals show extreme deficits in both theory of mind and pretend play. However, Hobson proposes a social-affective justification,[86] in which deficits in theory of mind in autistic people result from a distortion in understanding and responding to emotions. He suggests that typically developing individuals, unlike autistic individuals, are born with a set of skills (such as social referencing ability) that later lets them comprehend and react to other people's feelings. Other scholars emphasize that autism involves a specific developmental delay, so that autistic children vary in their deficiencies, because they experience difficulty in different stages of growth. Very early setbacks can alter proper advancement of joint-attention behaviors, which may lead to a failure to form a full theory of mind.[84]

It has been speculated[73] that theory of mind exists on a continuum as opposed to the traditional view of a discrete presence or absence. While some research has suggested that some autistic populations are unable to attribute mental states to others,[2] recent evidence points to the possibility of coping mechanisms that facilitate a spectrum of mindful behavior[clarification needed].[87] A binary view regarding theory of mind contributes to the stigmatization of autistic adults that do possess perspective-taking capacity, as the assumption that autistic people do not have empathy can become a rationale for dehumanization.[88]

Tine et al. report that autistic children score substantially lower on measures of social theory of mind[clarification needed] in comparison to children diagnosed with Asperger syndrome.[89]

Generally, children with more advanced theory of mind abilities display more advanced social skills, greater adaptability to new situations, and greater cooperation with others. As a result, these children are typically well-liked. However, "children may use their mind-reading abilities to manipulate, outwit, tease, or trick their peers."[90] Individuals possessing inferior theory of mind skills, such as children with autism spectrum disorder, may be socially rejected by their peers since they are unable to communicate effectively. Social rejection has been proven to negatively impact a child's development and can put the child at greater risk of developing depressive symptoms.[91]

Peer-mediated interventions (PMI) are a school-based treatment approach for children and adolescents with autism spectrum disorder in which peers are trained to be role models in order to promote social behavior. Laghi et al. studied whether analysis of prosocial (nice) and antisocial (nasty) theory-of-mind behaviors could be used, in addition to teacher recommendations, to select appropriate candidates for PMI programs. Selecting children with advanced theory-of-mind skills who use them in prosocial ways will theoretically make the program more effective. While the results indicated that analyzing the social uses of theory of mind of possible candidates for a PMI program is invaluable[clarification needed], it may not be a good predictor of a candidate's performance as a role model.[31]

A 2014 Cochrane review on interventions based on theory of mind found that such a theory could be taught to individuals with autism but claimed little evidence of skill maintenance, generalization to other settings, or development effects on related skills.[92]

Some 21st century studies have shown that the results of some studies of theory of mind tests on autistic people may be misinterpreted based on the double empathy problem, which proposes that rather than autistic people specifically having trouble with theory of mind, autistic people and non-autistic people have equal difficulty understanding one-another due to their neurological differences.[93] Studies have shown that autistic adults perform better in theory of mind tests when paired with other autistic adults[94] as well as possibly autistic close family members.[95] Academics who acknowledge the double empathy problem also propose that it is likely autistic people understand non-autistic people to a higher degree than vise-versa, due to the necessity of functioning in a non-autistic society.[96]

Schizophrenia

Individuals diagnosed with schizophrenia can show deficits in theory of mind. Mirjam Sprong and colleagues investigated the impairment by examining 29 different studies, with a total of over 1500 participants.[97] This meta-analysis showed significant and stable deficit of theory of mind in people with schizophrenia. They performed poorly on false-belief tasks, which test the ability to understand that others can hold false beliefs about events in the world, and also on intention-inference tasks, which assess the ability to infer a character's intention from reading a short story. Schizophrenia patients with negative symptoms, such as lack of emotion, motivation, or speech, have the most impairment in theory of mind and are unable to represent the mental states of themselves and of others. Paranoid schizophrenic patients also perform poorly because they have difficulty accurately interpreting others' intentions. The meta-analysis additionally showed that IQ, gender, and age of the participants do not significantly affect the performance of theory of mind tasks.[97]

Research suggests that impairment in theory of mind negatively affects clinical insight—the patient's awareness of their mental illness.[98] Insight requires theory of mind; a patient must be able to adopt a third-person perspective and see the self as others do.[99] A patient with good insight can accurately self-represent, by comparing himself with others and by viewing himself from the perspective of others.[98] Insight allows a patient to recognize and react appropriately to his symptoms. A patient who lacks insight does not realize that he has a mental illness, because of his inability to accurately self-represent. Therapies that teach patients perspective-taking and self-reflection skills can improve abilities in reading social cues and taking the perspective of another person.[98]

Research indicates that theory-of-mind deficit is a stable trait-characteristic rather than a state-characteristic of schizophrenia.[100] The meta-analysis conducted by Sprong et al. showed that patients in remission still had impairment in theory of mind. This indicates that the deficit is not merely a consequence of the active phase of schizophrenia.[97]

Schizophrenic patients' deficit in theory of mind impairs their interactions with others. Theory of mind is particularly important for parents, who must understand the thoughts and behaviors of their children and react accordingly. Dysfunctional parenting is associated with deficits in the first-order theory of mind, the ability to understand another person's thoughts, and in the second-order theory of mind, the ability to infer what one person thinks about another person's thoughts.[101] Compared with healthy mothers, mothers with schizophrenia are found to be more remote, quiet, self-absorbed, insensitive, unresponsive, and to have fewer satisfying interactions with their children.[101] They also tend to misinterpret their children's emotional cues, and often misunderstand neutral faces as negative.[101] Activities such as role-playing and individual or group-based sessions are effective interventions that help the parents improve on perspective-taking and theory of mind.[101] There is a strong association between theory of mind deficit and parental role dysfunction.

Alcohol use disorders

Impairments in theory of mind, as well as other social-cognitive deficits, are commonly found in people who have alcohol use disorders, due to the neurotoxic effects of alcohol on the brain, particularly the prefrontal cortex.[8]

Depression and dysphoria

Individuals in a major depressive episode, a disorder characterized by social impairment, show deficits in theory of mind decoding.[102] Theory of mind decoding is the ability to use information available in the immediate environment (e.g., facial expression, tone of voice, body posture) to accurately label the mental states of others. The opposite pattern, enhanced theory of mind, is observed in individuals vulnerable to depression, including those individuals with past major depressive disorder (MDD),[103] dysphoric individuals,[104] and individuals with a maternal history of MDD.[105]

Developmental language disorder

Children diagnosed with developmental language disorder (DLD) exhibit much lower scores on reading and writing sections of standardized tests, yet have a normal nonverbal IQ. These language deficits can be any specific deficits in lexical semantics, syntax, or pragmatics, or a combination of multiple problems. Such children often exhibit poorer social skills than normally developing children, and seem to have problems decoding beliefs in others. A recent meta-analysis confirmed that children with DLD have substantially lower scores on theory of mind tasks compared to typically developing children.[106] This strengthens the claim that language development is related to theory of mind.

Brain mechanisms

In neurotypical people

Research on theory of mind in autism led to the view that mentalizing abilities are subserved by dedicated mechanisms that can—in some cases—be impaired while general cognitive function remains largely intact.

Neuroimaging research supports this view, demonstrating specific brain regions are consistently engaged during theory of mind tasks. PET research on theory of mind, using verbal and pictorial story comprehension tasks, identifies a set of brain regions including the medial prefrontal cortex (mPFC), and area around posterior superior temporal sulcus (pSTS), and sometimes precuneus and amygdala/temporopolar cortex.[107][108] Research on the neural basis of theory of mind has diversified, with separate lines of research focusing on the understanding of beliefs, intentions, and more complex properties of minds such as psychological traits.

Studies from Rebecca Saxe's lab at MIT, using a false-belief versus false-photograph task contrast aimed at isolating the mentalizing component of the false-belief task, have consistently found activation in mPFC, precuneus, and temporoparietal junction (TPJ), right-lateralized.[109][110] In particular, it has been proposed[who?] that the right TPJ (rTPJ) is selectively involved in representing the beliefs of others.[111] Some debate exists, as the same rTPJ region is consistently activated during spatial reorienting of visual attention;[112][113] Jean Decety from the University of Chicago and Jason Mitchell from Harvard thus propose that the rTPJ subserves a more general function involved in both false-belief understanding and attentional reorienting, rather than a mechanism specialized for social cognition. However, it is possible that the observation of overlapping regions for representing beliefs and attentional reorienting may simply be due to adjacent, but distinct, neuronal populations that code for each. The resolution of typical fMRI studies may not be good enough to show that distinct/adjacent neuronal populations code for each of these processes. In a study following Decety and Mitchell, Saxe and colleagues used higher-resolution fMRI and showed that the peak of activation for attentional reorienting is approximately 6–10mm above the peak for representing beliefs. Further corroborating that differing populations of neurons may code for each process, they found no similarity in the patterning of fMRI response across space.[114]

Using single-cell recordings in the human dorsomedial prefrontal cortex (dmPFC), researchers at MGH identified neurons that encode information about others' beliefs, which were distinct from self beliefs, across different scenarios in a False-belief task. They further showed high specificity between cells[jargon] based on the content of the others' beliefs and were able to accurately predict whether these beliefs were true or false.[115] These findings suggest a prominent role of distinct neuronal populations in the dmPFC in theory of Mmind complemented by the TPJ and pSTS.

Functional imaging also illuminates the detection of mental state information in Heider-Simmel-esque animations[jargon] of moving geometric shapes, which typical humans automatically perceive as social interactions laden with intention and emotion. Three studies found remarkably similar patterns of activation during the perception of such animations versus a random or deterministic motion control: mPFC, pSTS, fusiform face area (FFA), and amygdala were selectively engaged during the theory of mind condition.[116] Another study presented subjects with an animation of two dots moving with a parameterized degree of intentionality (quantifying the extent to which the dots chased each other), and found that pSTS activation correlated with this parameter.[117]

A separate body of research implicates the posterior superior temporal sulcus in the perception of intentionality in human action. This area is also involved in perceiving biological motion, including body, eye, mouth, and point-light display motion.[118] One study found increased pSTS activation while watching a human lift his hand versus having his hand pushed up by a piston (intentional versus unintentional action).[119] Several studies found increased pSTS activation when subjects perceive a human action that is incongruent with the action expected from the actor's context and inferred intention. Examples would be: a human performing a reach-to-grasp motion on empty space next to an object, versus grasping the object;[120] a human shifting eye gaze toward empty space next to a checkerboard target versus shifting gaze toward the target;[121] an unladen human turning on a light with his knee, versus turning on a light with his knee while carrying a pile of books;[122] and a walking human pausing as he passes behind a bookshelf, versus walking at a constant speed.[123] In these studies, actions in the "congruent" case have a straightforward goal, and are easy to explain in terms of the actor's intention. The incongruent actions, on the other hand, require further explanation (why would someone twist empty space next to a gear?), and apparently demand more processing in the STS. This region is distinct from the temporoparietal area activated during false belief tasks.[123] pSTS activation in most of the above studies was largely right-lateralized, following the general trend in neuroimaging studies of social cognition and perception. Also right-lateralized are the TPJ activation during false belief tasks, the STS response to biological motion, and the FFA response to faces.

Neuropsychological evidence supports neuroimaging results regarding the neural basis of theory of mind. Studies with patients with a lesion of the frontal lobes and the temporoparietal junction of the brain (between the temporal lobe and parietal lobe) report that they have difficulty with some theory of mind tasks.[124] This shows that theory of mind abilities are associated with specific parts of the human brain. However, the fact that the medial prefrontal cortex and temporoparietal junction are necessary for theory of mind tasks does not imply that these regions are specific to that function.[112][125] TPJ and mPFC may subserve more general functions necessary for Theory of Mind.

Research by Vittorio Gallese, Luciano Fadiga, and Giacomo Rizzolatti[126] shows that some sensorimotor neurons, referred to as mirror neurons and first discovered in the premotor cortex of rhesus monkeys, may be involved in action understanding. Single-electrode recording revealed that these neurons fired when a monkey performed an action, as well as when the monkey viewed another agent performing the same action. fMRI studies with human participants show brain regions (assumed to contain mirror neurons) that are active when one person sees another person's goal-directed action.[127] These data led some authors to suggest that mirror neurons may provide the basis for theory of mind in the brain, and to support simulation theory of mind reading.[128]

There is also evidence against a link between mirror neurons and theory of mind. First, macaque monkeys have mirror neurons but do not seem to have a 'human-like' capacity to understand theory of mind and belief. Second, fMRI studies of theory of mind typically report activation in the mPFC, temporal poles, and TPJ or STS,[129] but those brain areas are not part of the mirror neuron system. Some investigators, like developmental psychologist Andrew Meltzoff and neuroscientist Jean Decety, believe that mirror neurons merely facilitate learning through imitation and may provide a precursor to the development of theory of mind.[130] Others, like philosopher Shaun Gallagher, suggest that mirror-neuron activation, on a number of counts, fails to meet the definition of simulation as proposed by the simulation theory of mindreading.[131][132]

In autism

Several neuroimaging studies have looked at the neural basis for theory of mind impairment in subjects with Asperger syndrome and high-functioning autism (HFA). The first PET study of theory of mind in autism (also the first neuroimaging study using a task-induced activation paradigm in autism) replicated a prior study in neurotypical individuals, which employed a story-comprehension task.[133] This study found displaced and diminished mPFC activation in subjects with autism. However, because the study used only six subjects with autism, and because the spatial resolution of PET imaging is relatively poor, these results should be considered preliminary.

A subsequent fMRI study scanned normally developing adults and adults with HFA while performing a "reading the mind in the eyes" task: viewing a photo of a human's eyes and choosing which of two adjectives better describes the person's mental state, versus a gender discrimination control.[134] The authors found activity in orbitofrontal cortex, STS, and amygdala in normal subjects, and found less amygdala activation and abnormal STS activation in subjects with autism.

A more recent PET study looked at brain activity in individuals with HFA and Asperger syndrome while viewing Heider-Simmel animations (see above) versus a random motion control.[135] In contrast to normally-developing subjects, those with autism showed little STS or FFA activation, and less mPFC and amygdala activation. Activity in extrastriate regions V3 and LO was identical across the two groups, suggesting intact lower-level visual processing in the subjects with autism. The study also reported less functional connectivity between STS and V3 in the autism group. However decreased temporal correlation between activity in STS and V3 would be expected simply from the lack of an evoked response in STS to intent-laden animations in subjects with autism. A more informative analysis would be to compute functional connectivity after regressing out evoked responses from all-time series.

A subsequent study, using the incongruent/congruent gaze-shift paradigm described above, found that in high-functioning adults with autism, posterior STS (pSTS) activation was undifferentiated while they watched a human shift gaze toward a target and then toward adjacent empty space.[136] The lack of additional STS processing in the incongruent state may suggest that these subjects fail to form an expectation of what the actor should do given contextual information, or that feedback about the violation of this expectation doesn't reach STS. Both explanations involve an impairment or deficit in the ability to link eye gaze shifts with intentional explanations. This study also found a significant anticorrelation between STS activation in the incongruent-congruent contrast and social subscale score on the Autism Diagnostic Interview-Revised, but not scores on the other subscales.

An fMRI study demonstrated that the right temporoparietal junction (rTPJ) of higher-functioning adults with autism was not more selectively activated for mentalizing judgments when compared to physical judgments about self and other.[137] rTPJ selectivity for mentalizing was also related to individual variation on clinical measures of social impairment: individuals whose rTPJ was increasingly more active for mentalizing compared to physical judgments were less socially impaired, while those who showed little to no difference in response to mentalizing or physical judgments were the most socially impaired. This evidence builds on work in typical development that suggests rTPJ is critical for representing mental state information, irrespective of whether it is about oneself or others. It also points to an explanation at the neural level for the pervasive mind-blindness difficulties in autism that are evident throughout the lifespan.[138]

In schizophrenia

The brain regions associated with theory of mind include the superior temporal gyrus (STS), the temporoparietal junction (TPJ), the medial prefrontal cortex (mPFC), the precuneus, and the amygdala.[139] The reduced activity in the mPFC of individuals with schizophrenia is associated with theory of mind deficit and may explain impairments in social function among people with schizophrenia.[140] Increased neural activity in mPFC is related to better perspective-taking, emotion management, and increased social functioning.[140] Disrupted brain activities in areas related to theory of mind may increase social stress or disinterest in social interaction, and contribute to the social dysfunction associated with schizophrenia.[140]

Practical validity

Main article: Collective intelligence

Group member average scores of theory of mind abilities, measured with the Reading the Mind in the Eyes test[141] (RME), are possibly drivers of successful group performance.[142] High group average scores on the RME are correlated with the collective intelligence factor c, defined as a group's ability to perform a wide range of mental tasks,[142][143] a group intelligence measure similar to the g factor for general individual intelligence. RME is a theory of mind test for adults[141] that shows sufficient test-retest reliability[144] and constantly differentiates control groups from individuals with functional autism or Asperger syndrome.[141] It is one of the most widely accepted and well-validated tests for theory of mind abilities within adults.[145]

Evolution

The evolutionary origin of theory of mind remains obscure. While many theories make claims about its role in the development of human language and social cognition, few of them specify in detail any evolutionary neurophysiological precursors.

One theory claims that theory of mind has its roots in two defensive reactions—immobilization stress and tonic immobility—which are implicated in the handling of stressful encounters and also figure prominently in mammalian childrearing practices.[146] Their combined effect seems capable of producing many of the hallmarks of theory of mind, such as eye-contact, gaze-following, inhibitory control, and intentional attributions.

Non-human

See also: Animal consciousness and Theory of mind in animals

An open question is whether non-human animals have a genetic endowment and social environment that allows them to acquire a theory of mind like human children do.[12] This is a contentious issue because of the difficulty of inferring from animal behavior the existence of thinking or of particular thoughts, or the existence of a concept of self or self-awareness, consciousness, and qualia. One difficulty with non-human studies of theory of mind is the lack of sufficient numbers of naturalistic observations, giving insight into what the evolutionary pressures might be on a species' development of theory of mind.

Non-human research still has a major place in this field. It is especially useful in illuminating which nonverbal behaviors signify components of theory of mind, and in pointing to possible stepping points in the evolution of that aspect of social cognition. While it is difficult to study human-like theory of mind and mental states in species of whose potential mental states we have an incomplete understanding, researchers can focus on simpler components of more complex capabilities. For example, many researchers focus on animals' understanding of intention, gaze, perspective, or knowledge (of what another being has seen). A study that looked at understanding of intention in orangutans, chimpanzees, and children showed that all three species understood the difference between accidental and intentional acts.[26]

Individuals exhibit theory of mind by extrapolating another's internal mental states from their observable behavior. So one challenge in this line of research is to distinguish this from more run-of-the-mill stimulus-response learning, with the other's observable behavior being the stimulus.

Recently,[may be outdated as of March 2022] most non-human theory of mind research has focused on monkeys and great apes, who are of most interest in the study of the evolution of human social cognition. Other studies relevant to attributions theory of mind have been conducted using plovers[147] and dogs,[148] which show preliminary evidence of understanding attention—one precursor of theory of mind—in others.

There has been some controversy over the interpretation of evidence purporting to show theory of mind ability—or inability—in animals.[149] For example, Povinelli et al.[150] presented chimpanzees with the choice of two experimenters from whom to request food: one who had seen where food was hidden, and one who, by virtue of one of a variety of mechanisms (having a bucket or bag over his head, a blindfold over his eyes, or being turned away from the baiting) does not know, and can only guess. They found that the animals failed in most cases to differentially request food from the "knower". By contrast, Hare, Call, and Tomasello found that subordinate chimpanzees were able to use the knowledge state of dominant rival chimpanzees to determine which container of hidden food they approached.[49] William Field and Sue Savage-Rumbaugh believe that bonobos have developed theory of mind, and cite their communications with a captive bonobo, Kanzi, as evidence.[151]

In one experiment, ravens (Corvus corax) took into account visual access of unseen conspecifics. The researchers argued that "ravens can generalize from their own perceptual experience to infer the possibility of being seen".[152]

Evolutionary anthropologist Christopher Krupenye studied the existence of theory of mind, and particularly false beliefs, in non-human primates.[153]

Keren Haroush and Ziv Williams outlined the case for a group of neurons in primates' brains that uniquely predicted the choice selection of their interacting partner. These primates' neurons, located in the anterior cingulate cortex of rhesus monkeys, were observed using single-unit recording while the monkeys played a variant of the iterative prisoner's dilemma game.[154] By identifying cells that represent the yet unknown intentions of a game partner, Haroush & Williams' study supports the idea that theory of mind may be a fundamental and generalized process, and suggests that anterior cingulate cortex neurons may act to complement the function of mirror neurons during social interchange.[155]

See also

References

  1. ^ Apperly, Ian A.; Butterfill, Stephen A. (2009). "Do humans have two systems to track beliefs and belief-like states?". Psychological Review. 116 (4): 953–970. doi:10.1037/a0016923. PMID 19839692.
  2. ^ a b c d e Baron-Cohen, Simon (1991), "Precursors to a theory of mind: Understanding attention in others", in Whiten, Andrew (ed.), Natural theories of mind: evolution, development, and simulation of everyday mindreading, Oxford, UK Cambridge, Massachusetts: B. Blackwell, pp. 233–251, ISBN 9780631171942.
  3. ^ Gernsbacher, Morton Ann; Yergeau, Melanie (2019-12-09). "Empirical failures of the claim that autistic people lack a theory of mind". Archives of Scientific Psychology. American Psychological Association. 7 (1): 102–118. doi:10.1037/arc0000067. ISSN 2169-3269. PMC 6959478. PMID 31938672. Supporting documentation: Gernsbacher, Morton Ann (2018), Critical Review of Autism and Theory and Mind: A Tech Report, doi:10.17605/OSF.IO/3R2QY – via Open Science Framework
  4. ^ See the review and meta-analyses by Morton Ann Gernsbacher regarding many failed replications of classic theory of mind studies[3]
  5. ^ Bora, Emre; Köse, Sezen (2016-07-18). "Meta-analysis of theory of mind in anorexia nervosa and bulimia nervosa: A specific İmpairment of cognitive perspective taking in anorexia nervosa?". International Journal of Eating Disorders. 49 (8): 739–740. doi:10.1002/eat.22572. hdl:11343/291969. ISSN 0276-3478. PMID 27425037.
  6. ^ a b Korkmaz, Baris (May 2011). "Theory of mind and neurodevelopmental disorders of childhood". Pediatric Research. New York City: Springer Nature. 69 (5 Pt 2): 101R–8R. doi:10.1203/PDR.0b013e318212c177. PMID 21289541. S2CID 2675335.
  7. ^ Sanvicente-Vieira, Breno; Kluwe-Schiavon, Bruno; Corcoran, Rhiannon; Grassi-Oliveira, Rodrigo (1 March 2017). "Theory of Mind Impairments in Women With Cocaine Addiction". Journal of Studies on Alcohol and Drugs. New Brunswick, New Jersey: Rutgers University. 78 (2): 258–267. doi:10.15288/jsad.2017.78.258. PMID 28317506.
  8. ^ a b Uekermann, Jennifer; Daum, Irene (May 2008). "Social cognition in alcoholism: a link to prefrontal cortex dysfunction?". Addiction. London, England: Wiley-Blackwell. 103 (5): 726–35. doi:10.1111/j.1360-0443.2008.02157.x. PMID 18412750.
  9. ^
    • Ieong, Hada Fong-ha; Yuan, Zhen (April 2018). "Emotion recognition and its relation to prefrontal function and network in heroin plus nicotine dependence: a pilot study". Neurophotonics. Bellingham, Washington: SPIE. 5 (2): 025011. doi:10.1117/1.NPh.5.2.025011. PMC 5993953. PMID 29901032.
    • Gernsbacher, Morton Ann; Yergeau, Melanie (2019). "Empirical Failures of the Claim That Autistic People Lack a Theory of Mind". Archives of Scientific Psychology. 7 (1): 102–118. doi:10.1037/arc0000067. ISSN 2169-3269. PMC 6959478. PMID 31938672.
  10. ^ Völlm, Birgit A. (1 January 2006). "Neuronal correlates of theory of mind and empathy: A functional magnetic resonance imaging study in a nonverbal task". NeuroImage. 29 (1): 90–98. doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2005.07.022. ISSN 1053-8119. PMID 16122944. S2CID 6659365.
  11. ^ a b c d Shahaeian, Ameneh; Peterson, Candida C.; Slaughter, Virginia; Wellman, Henry M. (2011). "Culture and the sequence of steps in theory of mind development". Developmental Psychology. 47 (5): 1239–1247. doi:10.1037/a0023899. PMID 21639620.
  12. ^ a b c d Premack, David; Woodruff, Guy (December 1978). "Does the chimpanzee have a theory of mind?". Behavioral and Brain Sciences. 1 (4): 515–526. doi:10.1017/S0140525X00076512.
  13. ^ Bruner, J. S. (1981). "Intention in the structure of action and interaction." In L. P. Lipsitt & C. K. Rovee-Collier (Eds.), Advances in infancy research. Vol. 1 (pp. 41–56). Norwood, New Jersey: Ablex Publishing Corporation.
  14. ^ Gordon, R. M. (1996). "'Radical' simulationism." In P. Carruthers & P. K. Smith, Eds. Theories of theories of mind. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  15. ^
    • Courtin, C. (2000). "The impact of sign language on the cognitive development of deaf children: The case of theories of mind". Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education. 5 (3): 266–276. doi:10.1093/deafed/5.3.266. PMID 15454505.
    • Courtin, C.; Melot, A.-M. (2005). "Metacognitive development of deaf children: Lessons from the appearance-reality and false belief tasks". Developmental Science. 8 (1): 16–25. doi:10.1111/j.1467-7687.2005.00389.x. PMID 15647063.
    • Macaulay, C. E.; Ford, R.M (2013). "Family influences on the cognitive development of profoundly deaf children: Exploring the effects of socioeconomic status and siblings." Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education. 4 (18): 545–562. doi:10.1093/deafed/ent019. PMID 23614903. Retrieved 18 May 2021.
  16. ^ Demetriou, A., Mouyi, A., & Spanoudis, G. (2010). "The development of mental processing", Nesselroade, J. R. (2010). "Methods in the study of life-span human development: Issues and answers." In W. F. Overton (Ed.), Biology, cognition and methods across the life-span. Volume 1 of the Handbook of life-span development (pp. 36–55), Editor-in-chief: R. M. Lerner. Hoboken, New Jersey: Wiley.
  17. ^ de Waal, Franz B.M. (2007), "Commiserating Mice" Scientific American, 24 June 2007
  18. ^ Hynes, Catherine A.; Baird, Abigail A.; Grafton, Scott T. (2006). "Differential role of the orbital frontal lobe in emotional versus cognitive perspective-taking". Neuropsychologia. 44 (3): 374–383. doi:10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2005.06.011. PMID 16112148. S2CID 13159903.
  19. ^ Hayes, S. C., Barnes-Holmes, D., & Roche, B. (2001). Relational frame theory: A post-Skinnerian account of human language and cognition. New York: Kluwer Academic/Plenum.
  20. ^ Rehfeldt, R. A., and Barnes-Holmes, Y., (2009). Derived Relational Responding: Applications for learners with autism and other developmental disabilities. Oakland, California: New Harbinger.
  21. ^ McHugh, L. & Stewart, I. (2012). The self and perspective-taking: Contributions and applications from modern behavioral science. Oakland, California: New Harbinger.
  22. ^ Carruthers, P. (1996). "Simulation and self-knowledge: a defence of the theory-theory." In P. Carruthers & P.K. Smith, Eds. Theories of theories of mind. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  23. ^ Dennett, D. (1987). The Intentional Stance. Cambridge: MIT Press.
  24. ^ Fox, Eric. "Functional Contextualism". Association for Contextual Behavioral Science. Retrieved March 29, 2014.
  25. ^ Dennett, Daniel C. (1987). "Reprint of Intentional systems in cognitive ethology: The Panglossian paradigm defended (to p. 260)". The Brain and Behavioral Sciences. 6 (3): 343–390. doi:10.1017/s0140525x00016393. S2CID 32108464.
  26. ^ a b Call, J.; Tomasello, M. (1998). "Distinguishing intentional from accidental actions in orangutans (Pongo pygmaeus), chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes), and human children (Homo sapiens)". Journal of Comparative Psychology. 112 (2): 192–206. doi:10.1037/0735-7036.112.2.192. PMID 9642787.
  27. ^ a b Meltzoff, A. (1995). "Understanding the intentions of others: Re-enactment of intended acts by 18-month-old children". Developmental Psychology. 31 (5): 838–850. doi:10.1037/0012-1649.31.5.838. PMC 4137788. PMID 25147406.
  28. ^ Gagliardi JL, et al. (1995). "Seeing and knowing: Knowledge attribution versus stimulus control in adult humans (Homo sapiens)". Journal of Comparative Psychology. 109 (2): 107–114. doi:10.1037/0735-7036.109.2.107. PMID 7758287.
  29. ^ Meltzoff, Andrew N. (2003), "Imitation as a mechanism of social cognition: Origins of empathy, theory of mind, and the representation of action", in Goswami, Usha (ed.), Blackwell handbook of childhood cognitive development, Malden, Massachusetts: Blackwell Publishers, pp. 6–25, ISBN 9780631218401.
  30. ^ Horowitz, Alexandra C. (2003). "Do humans ape? or Do apes human? Imitation and intention in humans and other animals". Journal of Comparative Psychology. 17 (3): 325–336. CiteSeerX 10.1.1.688.3721. doi:10.1037/0735-7036.117.3.325. PMID 14498809.
  31. ^ a b Laghi, Fiorenzo; Lonigro, Antonia; Levanto, Simona; Ferraro, Maurizio; Baumgartner, Emma; Baiocco, Roberto (2016), "The Role of Nice and Nasty Theory of Mind in Teacher-Selected Peer Models for Adolescents with Autism Spectrum Disorders", Measurement and Evaluation in Counseling and Development, 49 (3): 207–216, doi:10.1177/0748175615596784, S2CID 147180970
  32. ^ Etel, Evren; Yagmurlu, Bilge (2015), "Social Competence, Theory of Mind, and Executive Function in Institution-reared Turkish Children", International Journal of Behavioral Development, 39 (6): 519–529, doi:10.1177/0165025414556095, S2CID 147324302
  33. ^ Milligan, Karen; Astington, Janet Wilde; Dack, Lisa Ain (March–April 2007). "Language and theory of mind: meta-analysis of the relation between language ability and false-belief understanding". Child Development. 78 (2): 622–646. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8624.2007.01018.x. PMID 17381794.
  34. ^ Dan., Sperber (2001). Relevance : communication and cognition. Wilson, Deirdre. (2nd ed.). Oxford: Blackwell Publishers. ISBN 978-0631198789. OCLC 32589501.
  35. ^ Tauzin, Tibor; Gergely, György (2018-06-22). "Communicative mind-reading in preverbal infants". Scientific Reports. 8 (1): 9534. Bibcode:2018NatSR...8.9534T. doi:10.1038/s41598-018-27804-4. ISSN 2045-2322. PMC 6015048. PMID 29934630.
  36. ^ a b Miller, Carol A. (May 2006). "Developmental relationships between language and theory of mind". American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology. 15 (2): 142–154. doi:10.1044/1058-0360(2006/014). PMID 16782686.
  37. ^ Ruffman, Ted; Slade, Lance; Crowe, Elena (May–June 2002). "The relation between children's and mothers' mental state language and theory-of-mind understanding". Child Development. 73 (3): 734–751. doi:10.1111/1467-8624.00435. PMID 12038548. Pdf.
  38. ^ Woolfe, Tyron; Want, Stephen C.; Siegal, Michael (May–June 2002). "Signposts to development: theory of mind in deaf children". Child Development. 73 (3): 768–778. CiteSeerX 10.1.1.70.4337. doi:10.1111/1467-8624.00437. PMID 12038550. Pdf.
  39. ^ Moore, Chris; Pure, Kiran; Furrow, David (June 1990). "Children's understanding of the modal expression of speaker certainty and uncertainty and its relation to the development of a representational theory of mind". Child Development. 61 (3): 722–730. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8624.1990.tb02815.x. JSTOR 1130957. PMID 2364747.
  40. ^ de Villiers, Jill G.; Pyers, Jennie E. (January–March 2002). "Complements to cognition: a longitudinal study of the relationship between complex syntax and false-belief-understanding". Cognitive Development. 17 (1): 1037–1060. doi:10.1016/S0885-2014(02)00073-4.
  41. ^ Saxe, R; Kanwisher, N (August 2003). "People thinking about thinking people. The role of the temporo-parietal junction in "theory of mind"". NeuroImage. 19 (4): 1835–42. doi:10.1016/S1053-8119(03)00230-1. PMID 12948738. S2CID 206118958.
  42. ^ Ian., Apperly (2011). Mindreaders : the cognitive basis of "theory of mind". Hove: Psychology Press. ISBN 9780203833926. OCLC 705929873.
  43. ^ Keysar, Boaz; Lin, Shuhong; Barr, Dale J (2003-08-01). "Limits on theory of mind use in adults". Cognition. 89 (1): 25–41. doi:10.1016/S0010-0277(03)00064-7. ISSN 0010-0277. PMID 12893123. S2CID 8523033.
  44. ^ Royzman, Edward B.; Cassidy, Kimberly Wright; Baron, Jonathan (2003). ""I know, you know": Epistemic egocentrism in children and adults". Review of General Psychology. 7 (1): 38–65. doi:10.1037/1089-2680.7.1.38. ISSN 1089-2680. S2CID 197665718.
  45. ^
    • Brown-Schmidt, Sarah (2009-10-01). "The role of executive function in perspective taking during online language comprehension". Psychonomic Bulletin & Review. 16 (5): 893–900. doi:10.3758/PBR.16.5.893. ISSN 1531-5320. PMID 19815795.
    • Epley, Nicholas; Keysar, Boaz; Van Boven, Leaf; Gilovich, Thomas (2004). "Perspective Taking as Egocentric Anchoring and Adjustment". Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 87 (3): 327–339. CiteSeerX 10.1.1.315.8009. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.87.3.327. ISSN 1939-1315. PMID 15382983.
  46. ^ Kovacs, Agnes; Teglas, Erno; Endress, Ansgar Denis (2010-12-24). "The Social Sense: Susceptibility to Others' Beliefs in Human Infants and Adults". Science. 330 (6012): 1830–1834. Bibcode:2010Sci...330.1830K. doi:10.1126/science.1190792. ISSN 0036-8075. PMID 21205671. S2CID 2908352.
  47. ^ Samson, Dana; Apperly, Ian A.; Braithwaite, Jason J.; Andrews, Benjamin J.; Bodley Scott, Sarah E. (2010). "Seeing it their way: Evidence for rapid and involuntary computation of what other people see". Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance. 36 (5): 1255–1266. doi:10.1037/a0018729. ISSN 1939-1277. PMID 20731512.
  48. ^ a b Heyes, Celia (2014). "Submentalizing: I Am Not Really Reading Your Mind". Current Perspectives on Psychological Science. 9 (2): 131–143. doi:10.1177/1745691613518076. PMID 26173251. S2CID 206778161.
  49. ^ a b Hare, B.; Call, J.; Tomasello, M. (2001). "Do chimpanzees know what conspecifics know and do not know?". Animal Behaviour. 61 (1): 139–151. doi:10.1006/anbe.2000.1518. PMID 11170704. S2CID 3402554.
  50. ^ Apperly, Ian A.; Butterfill, Stephen A. (2009). "Do humans have two systems to track beliefs and belief-like states?". Psychological Review. 116 (4): 953–970. CiteSeerX 10.1.1.377.3254. doi:10.1037/a0016923. ISSN 1939-1471. PMID 19839692.
  51. ^ Kahneman, Daniel (2011-10-25). Thinking, fast and slow (1st ed.). New York. ISBN 9780374275631. OCLC 706020998.
  52. ^ Carruthers, Peter (2017-03-01). "Mindreading in adults: evaluating two-systems views". Synthese. 194 (3): 673–688. doi:10.1007/s11229-015-0792-3. ISSN 1573-0964. S2CID 6049635.
  53. ^ Henry, Julie D.; Phillips, Louise H.; Ruffman, Ted; Bailey, Phoebe E. (2013). "A meta-analytic review of age differences in theory of mind". Psychology and Aging. 28 (3): 826–839. doi:10.1037/a0030677. PMID 23276217.
  54. ^ Reiter, Andrea M. F.; Kanske, Philipp; Eppinger, Ben; Li, Shu-Chen (2017-09-08). "The Aging of the Social Mind - Differential Effects on Components of Social Understanding". Scientific Reports. 7 (1): 11046. Bibcode:2017NatSR...711046R. doi:10.1038/s41598-017-10669-4. ISSN 2045-2322. PMC 5591220. PMID 28887491.
  55. ^ Stietz, Julia; Pollerhoff, Lena; Kurtz, Marcel; Li, Shu-Chen; Reiter, Andrea M. F.; Kanske, Philipp (2021). "The ageing of the social mind: replicating the preservation of socio-affective and the decline of socio-cognitive processes in old age". Royal Society Open Science. 8 (8): 210641. Bibcode:2021RSOS....810641S. doi:10.1098/rsos.210641. PMC 8386516. PMID 34457343.
  56. ^ Kalbe, Elke (2010), "Dissociating Cognitive from Affective Theory of Mind: A TMS Study", Cortex, 46 (6): 769–780, doi:10.1016/j.cortex.2009.07.010, PMID 19709653, S2CID 16815856
  57. ^ Duval, Céline; Piolino, Pascale; Benjanin, Alexandre; Eustache, Francis; Desgranges, Béatrice (2011), "Age Effects on Different Components of Theory of Mind", Consciousness and Cognition, 20 (3): 627–642, doi:10.1016/j.concog.2010.10.025, PMID 21111637, S2CID 7877493
  58. ^ a b Wellman, Henry M.; Liu, David (2004-03-01). "Scaling of Theory-of-Mind Tasks". Child Development. 75 (2): 523–541. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8624.2004.00691.x. ISSN 1467-8624. PMID 15056204.
  59. ^ Callaghan, T.; Rochat, P.; Lillard, A.; Claux, M. L.; Odden, H.; Itakura, S.; Singh, S. (2005). "Synchrony in the onset of mental-state reasoning: Evidence from five cultures". Psychological Science. 16 (5): 378–384. doi:10.1111/j.0956-7976.2005.01544.x. PMID 15869697. S2CID 1183819.
  60. ^ Wellman, Henry M.; Fang, Fuxi; Liu, David; Zhu, Liqi; Liu, Guoxiong (2006). "Scaling of Theory-of-Mind Understandings in Chinese Children". Psychological Science. 17 (12): 1075–1081. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9280.2006.01830.x. PMID 17201790. S2CID 18632127.
  61. ^ the German word Umwelt means "environment" or "surrounding world"
  62. ^ Wimmer, H.; Perner, J. (1983). "Beliefs about beliefs: Representation and constraining function of wrong beliefs in young children's understanding of deception". Cognition. 13 (1): 103–128. doi:10.1016/0010-0277(83)90004-5. PMID 6681741. S2CID 17014009.
  63. ^ O'Brien, Karen; Slaughter, Virginia; Peterson, Candida C (2011), "Sibling influences on theory of mind development for children with ASD", Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 52 (6): 713–719, doi:10.1111/j.1469-7610.2011.02389.x, PMID 21418062, retrieved 18 May 2021
  64. ^ a b Mitchell, Peter (2011), "Acquiring a theory of mind", in Slater, Alan; Bremner, J. Gavin (eds.), An introduction to developmental psychology (3rd ed.), Hoboken, New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons Inc., pp. 381–406, ISBN 9781118767207.
  65. ^ Roessler, Johannes (2013). "When the Wrong Answer Makes Perfect Sense - How the Beliefs of Children Interact With Their Understanding of Competition, Goals and the Intention of Others". University of Warwick Knowledge Centre. August 2014. Retrieved 2013-08-15.
  66. ^ a b Baron-Cohen, Simon; Leslie, Alan M.; Frith, Uta (October 1985). (PDF). Cognition. 21 (1): 37–46. doi:10.1016/0010-0277(85)90022-8. PMID 2934210. S2CID 14955234. Archived from the original (PDF) on 2017-09-28.
  67. ^ Mitchell, P. (2011). "Acquiring a Theory of Mind." In Alan Slater, & Gavin Bremner (eds.) An Introduction to Developmental Psychology: Second Edition, BPS Blackwell. page 371
  68. ^ Gopnik A, Aslington JW (1988). "Children's understanding of representational change and its relation to the understanding of false belief and the appearance-reality distinction". Child Development. 59 (1): 26–37. doi:10.2307/1130386. JSTOR 1130386. PMID 3342716.
  69. ^
    • Zaitchik, D. (1990). "When representations conflict with reality: the preschooler's problem with false beliefs and 'false' photographs". Cognition. 35 (1): 41–68. doi:10.1016/0010-0277(90)90036-J. PMID 2340712. S2CID 1799960.
    • Leslie, A.; Thaiss, L. (1992). "Domain specificity in conceptual development". Cognition. 43 (3): 225–51. doi:10.1016/0010-0277(92)90013-8. PMID 1643814. S2CID 17296136.
  70. ^ Sabbagh, M.A.; Moses, L.J.; Shiverick, S (2006). "Executive functioning and preschoolers' understanding of false beliefs, false photographs, and false signs". Child Development. 77 (4): 1034–1049. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8624.2006.00917.x. PMID 16942504.
  71. ^ Apperly, Ian A.; Samson, Dana; Chiavarino, Claudia; Bickerton, Wai-Ling; Humphreys, Glyn W. (2007-05-01). "Testing the domain-specificity of a theory of mind deficit in brain-injured patients: Evidence for consistent performance on non-verbal, "reality-unknown" false belief and false photograph tasks". Cognition. 103 (2): 300–321. doi:10.1016/j.cognition.2006.04.012. ISSN 0010-0277. PMID 16781700. S2CID 7377954.
  72. ^ Woodward, "Infants selectively encode the goal object of an actor's reach," Cognition (1998)
  73. ^ a b Leslie, A. M. (1991). "Theory of mind impairment in autism." In A. Whiten (Ed.), Natural theories of mind: Evolution, development and simulation of everyday mindreading (pp. 63–77). Oxford: Basil Blackwell.
  74. ^ Poulin-Dubois, Diane; Sodian, Beate; Metz, Ulrike; Tilden, Joanne; Schoeppner, Barbara (2007). "Out of Sight is Not Out of Mind: Developmental Changes in Infants' Understanding of Visual Perception During the Second Year". Journal of Cognition and Development. 8 (4): 401–425. doi:10.1080/15248370701612951. S2CID 143291042.
  75. ^ Onishi, K. H.; Baillargeon, R (2005). "Do 15-Month-Old Infants Understand False Beliefs?". Science. 308 (5719): 255–8. Bibcode:2005Sci...308..255O. doi:10.1126/science.1107621. PMC 3357322. PMID 15821091.
  76. ^ Kovács, Ágnes Melinda; Téglás, Ernő; Endress, Ansgar Denis (2010-12-24). "The Social Sense: Susceptibility to Others' Beliefs in Human Infants and Adults". Science. 330 (6012): 1830–1834. Bibcode:2010Sci...330.1830K. doi:10.1126/science.1190792. ISSN 0036-8075. PMID 21205671. S2CID 2908352.
  77. ^ Poulin-Dubois, Diane; Chow, Virginia (2009). "The effect of a looker's past reliability on infants' reasoning about beliefs". Developmental Psychology. 45 (6): 1576–82. doi:10.1037/a0016715. PMID 19899915. S2CID 6916359.
  78. ^ How the Body Shapes the Way We Think: A New View of Intelligence, Rolf Pfeifer and Josh Bongard, October 2006
  79. ^ Moore, S. (2002). Asperger Syndrome and the Elementary School Experience. Shawnee Mission, Kansas: Autism Asperger Publishing Company.
  80. ^ Baker, J. (2003). Social Skills Training: for children and adolescents with Asperger Syndrome and Social-Communication Problems. Mission, Kansas: Autism Asperger Publishing Company.
  81. ^ Peterson, Candida; et al. (2016), "Peer Social Skills and Theory of Mind in Children with Autism, Deafness, or Typical Development", Developmental Psychology, 52 (1): 46–57, doi:10.1037/a0039833, PMID 26524383[permanent dead link]
  82. ^ Happe, FG (1995). "The role of age and verbal ability in the theory of mind task performance of subjects with autism". Child Development. 66 (3): 843–55. doi:10.2307/1131954. JSTOR 1131954. PMID 7789204.
  83. ^ "Empirical Failures of the Claim That Autistic People Lack a Theory of Mind".
  84. ^ a b Baron-Cohen, Simon (1991), "Precursors to a theory of mind: Understanding attention in others", in Whiten, Andrew (ed.), Natural theories of mind: Evolution, development, and simulation of everyday mindreading, Cambridge, Massachusetts: Basil Blackwell, pp. 233–251, ISBN 9780631171942.
  85. ^ a b Leslie, Alan M. (1991), "Theory of mind impairment in autism", in Whiten, Andrew (ed.), Natural theories of mind: Evolution, development, and simulation of everyday mindreading, Cambridge, Massachusetts: Basil Blackwell, ISBN 9780631171942.
  86. ^ Hobson, R.P. (1995). Autism and the development of mind. Hillsdale, N.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum. ISBN 9780863772399.
  87. ^ Dapretto, M.; et al. (2006). "Understanding emotions in others: mirror neuron dysfunction in children with autism spectrum disorders". Nature Neuroscience. 9 (1): 28–30. doi:10.1038/nn1611. PMC 3713227. PMID 16327784.
  88. ^ Yergeau, Melanie (2013). "Clinically Significant Disturbance: On Theorists Who Theorize Theory of Mind". Disability Studies Quarterly. 33 (4). doi:10.18061/dsq.v33i4.3876. I will say something about autism, and someone will assert that nothing I've said matters or applies to anything. Because I am self-centered. Because I do not have the capacity to intuit other minds or to understand the life experiences of others.
  89. ^ Tine, Michele; Lucariello, Joan (2012). "Unique Theory of Mind Differentiation in Children with Autism and Asperger Syndrome". Autism Research and Treatment. 2012: 1–11. doi:10.1155/2012/505393. PMC 3420603. PMID 22934174.
  90. ^ Astington, J. W. (2003), "Sometimes necessary, never sufficient: False-belief understanding and social competence", Individual Differences in Theory of Mind: Implications for Typical and Atypical Development: 13–38
  91. ^ Chung, K.; Reavis, S.; Mosconi, M.; Drewry, J.; Matthews, T.; Tassé, M. J. (2007), "Peer-mediated social skills training program for young children with high-functioning autism", Research in Developmental Disabilities, 28 (4): 423–436, doi:10.1016/j.ridd.2006.05.002, PMID 16901676
  92. ^ Fletcher-Watson, Sue; McConnell, Fiona; Manola, Eirini; McConachie, Helen (2014-03-21). "Interventions based on the Theory of Mind cognitive model for autism spectrum disorder (ASD)". The Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. 2014 (3): CD008785. doi:10.1002/14651858.CD008785.pub2. ISSN 1469-493X. PMC 6923148. PMID 24652601.
  93. ^ Milton, Damian E.M. (2012-10-01). "On the ontological status of autism: the 'double empathy problem'". Disability & Society. 27 (6): 883–887. doi:10.1080/09687599.2012.710008. ISSN 0968-7599. S2CID 54047060.
  94. ^ Crompton, Catherine J.; Sharp, Martha; Axbey, Harriet; Fletcher-Watson, Sue; Flynn, Emma G.; Ropar, Danielle (2020-10-23). "Neurotype-Matching, but Not Being Autistic, Influences Self and Observer Ratings of Interpersonal Rapport". Frontiers in Psychology. 11: 586171. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2020.586171. ISSN 1664-1078. PMC 7645034. PMID 33192918.
  95. ^ Sucksmith, E.; Allison, C.; Baron-Cohen, S.; Chakrabarti, B.; Hoekstra, R. A. (2013-01-01). "Empathy and emotion recognition in people with autism, first-degree relatives, and controls". Neuropsychologia. 51 (1): 98–105. doi:10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2012.11.013. ISSN 0028-3932. PMC 6345368. PMID 23174401.
  96. ^ Chown, Nicholas (2014-11-26). "More on the ontological status of autism and double empathy". Disability & Society. 29 (10): 1672–1676. doi:10.1080/09687599.2014.949625. ISSN 0968-7599. S2CID 143826899.
  97. ^ a b c Sprong, M.; Schothorst, P.; Vos, E.; Hox, J.; Van Engeland, H. (2007). "Theory of mind in schizophrenia". British Journal of Psychiatry. 191 (1): 5–13. doi:10.1192/bjp.bp.107.035899. PMID 17602119.
  98. ^ a b c Ng, R.; Fish, S.; Granholm, E. (2015). "Insight and theory of mind in schizophrenia". Psychiatry Research. 225 (1–2): 169–174. doi:10.1016/j.psychres.2014.11.010. PMC 4269286. PMID 25467703.
  99. ^ Konstantakopoulos, G.; Ploumpidis, D.; Oulis, P.; Patrikelis, P.; Nikitopoulou, S.; Papadimitriou, G. N.; David, A. S. (2014). "The relationship between insight and theory of mind in schizophrenia". Schizophrenia Research. 152 (1): 217–222. doi:10.1016/j.schres.2013.11.022. PMID 24321712. S2CID 9566263.
  100. ^ Cassetta, B.; Goghari, V. (2014). "Theory of mind reasoning in schizophrenia patients and non-psychotic relatives". Psychiatry Research. 218 (1–2): 12–19. doi:10.1016/j.psychres.2014.03.043. PMID 24745472. S2CID 13944284.
  101. ^ a b c d Mehta, U. M.; Bhagyavathi, H. D.; Kumar, C. N.; Thirthalli, J.; Gangadhar, B. N. (2014). "Cognitive deconstruction of parenting in schizophrenia: The role of theory of mind". Australian & New Zealand Journal of Psychiatry. 48 (3): 249–258. doi:10.1177/0004867413500350. PMID 23928275. S2CID 206399183.
  102. ^ Lee, L.; et al. (2005). "Mental state decoding abilities in clinical depression". Journal of Affective Disorders. 86 (2–3): 247–58. doi:10.1016/j.jad.2005.02.007. PMID 15935244.
  103. ^ Harkness, Kate L.; Jacobson, Jill A.; Duong, David; Sabbagh, Mark A. (April 2010). "Mental state decoding in past major depression: Effect of sad versus happy mood induction". Cognition & Emotion. 24 (3): 497–513. doi:10.1080/02699930902750249. ISSN 0269-9931. S2CID 40376607.
  104. ^ Harkness, K. L.; et al. (2005). "Enhanced accuracy of mental state decoding in dysphoric college students". Cognition and Emotion. 19 (7): 999–1025. doi:10.1080/02699930541000110. S2CID 144573653.
  105. ^ Harkness, K. L.; et al. (2011). "Maternal history of depression is associated with enhanced theory of mind ability in depressed and non-depressed women". Psychiatry Research. 189 (1): 91–96. doi:10.1016/j.psychres.2011.06.007. PMID 21733579. S2CID 22903698.
  106. ^ Nilsson, Kristine Kahr; de López, Kristine Jensen (January–February 2016). "Theory of mind in children with specific language impairment: A systematic review and meta-analysis". Child Development. 87 (1): 143–153. doi:10.1111/cdev.12462. PMID 26582261.
  107. ^ Gallagher, Helen L.; Frith, Christopher D. (2003). "Functional imaging of 'theory of mind'". Trends in Cognitive Sciences. 7 (2): 77–83. CiteSeerX 10.1.1.319.778. doi:10.1016/S1364-6613(02)00025-6. PMID 12584026. S2CID 14873867.
  108. ^ Schurz, Matthias; Radua, Joaquim; Tholen, Matthias G.; Maliske, Lara; Margulies, Daniel S.; Mars, Rogier B.; Sallet, Jerome; Kanske, Philipp (March 2021). "Toward a hierarchical model of social cognition: A neuroimaging meta-analysis and integrative review of empathy and theory of mind". Psychological Bulletin. 147 (3): 293–327. doi:10.1037/bul0000303. hdl:2066/226714. ISSN 1939-1455. PMID 33151703. S2CID 226272359.
  109. ^ Saxe, R; Kanwisher, N (2003). "People thinking about thinking peopleThe role of the temporo-parietal junction in "theory of mind"". NeuroImage. 19 (4): 1835–42. doi:10.1016/S1053-8119(03)00230-1. PMID 12948738. S2CID 206118958.
  110. ^ Saxe, Rebecca; Schulz, Laura E.; Jiang, Yuhong V. (2006). "Reading minds versus following rules: Dissociating theory of mind and executive control in the brain". Social Neuroscience. 1 (3–4): 284–98. CiteSeerX 10.1.1.392.1433. doi:10.1080/17470910601000446. PMID 18633794. S2CID 10733339.
  111. ^ Saxe, R.; Powell, L. J. (2006). "It's the Thought That Counts: Specific Brain Regions for One Component of Theory of Mind". Psychological Science. 17 (8): 692–9. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9280.2006.01768.x. PMID 16913952. S2CID 4656022.
  112. ^ a b Decety, J.; Lamm, C. (2007). "The Role of the Right Temporoparietal Junction in Social Interaction: How Low-Level Computational Processes Contribute to Meta-Cognition". The Neuroscientist. 13 (6): 580–93. doi:10.1177/1073858407304654. PMID 17911216. S2CID 37026268.
  113. ^ Mitchell, J. P. (2007). "Activity in Right Temporo-Parietal Junction is Not Selective for Theory-of-Mind". Cerebral Cortex. 18 (2): 262–71. doi:10.1093/cercor/bhm051. PMID 17551089.
  114. ^ Scholz, Jonathan; Triantafyllou, Christina; Whitfield-Gabrieli, Susan; Brown, Emery N.; Saxe, Rebecca (2009). Lauwereyns, Jan (ed.). "Distinct Regions of Right Temporo-Parietal Junction Are Selective for Theory of Mind and Exogenous Attention". PLOS ONE. 4 (3): e4869. Bibcode:2009PLoSO...4.4869S. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0004869. PMC 2653721. PMID 19290043.
  115. ^ Jamali, Mohsen; Grannan, Benjamin L.; Fedorenko, Evelina; Saxe, Rebecca; Báez-Mendoza, Raymundo; Williams, Ziv M. (2021). "Single-neuronal predictions of others' beliefs in humans". Nature. 591 (7851): 610–614. Bibcode:2021Natur.591..610J. doi:10.1038/s41586-021-03184-0. PMC 7990696. PMID 33505022.
  116. ^
    • Castelli, Fulvia; Happé, Francesca; Frith, Uta; Frith, Chris (2000). "Movement and Mind: A Functional Imaging Study of Perception and Interpretation of Complex Intentional Movement Patterns". NeuroImage. 12 (3): 314–25. doi:10.1006/nimg.2000.0612. PMID 10944414. S2CID 22294793.
    • Martin, Alex; Weisberg, Jill (2003). "Neural Foundations for Understanding Social and Mechanical Concepts". Cognitive Neuropsychology. 20 (3–6): 575–87. doi:10.1080/02643290342000005. PMC 1450338. PMID 16648880.
    • Schultz, R. T.; Grelotti, D. J.; Klin, A.; Kleinman, J.; Van Der Gaag, C.; Marois, R.; Skudlarski, P. (2003). "The role of the fusiform face area in social cognition: Implications for the pathobiology of autism". Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences. 358 (1430): 415–427. doi:10.1098/rstb.2002.1208. PMC 1693125. PMID 12639338.
  117. ^ Schultz, Johannes; Friston, Karl J.; O'Doherty, John; Wolpert, Daniel M.; Frith, Chris D. (2005). "Activation in Posterior Superior Temporal Sulcus Parallels Parameter Inducing the Percept of Animacy". Neuron. 45 (4): 625–35. doi:10.1016/j.neuron.2004.12.052. PMID 15721247. S2CID 9435424.
  118. ^ Allison, Truett; Puce, Aina; McCarthy, Gregory (2000). "Social perception from visual cues: Role of the STS region". Trends in Cognitive Sciences. 4 (7): 267–278. doi:10.1016/S1364-6613(00)01501-1. PMID 10859571. S2CID 11942671.
  119. ^ Morris, James P.; Pelphrey, Kevin A.; McCarthy, Gregory (2008). "Perceived causality influences brain activity evoked by biological motion". Social Neuroscience. 3 (1): 16–25. doi:10.1080/17470910701476686. PMID 18633843. S2CID 24726037.
  120. ^ Pelphrey, Kevin A.; Morris, James P.; McCarthy, Gregory (2004). "Grasping the Intentions of Others: The Perceived Intentionality of an Action Influences Activity in the Superior Temporal Sulcus during Social Perception". Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience. 16 (10): 1706–16. doi:10.1162/0898929042947900. PMID 15701223. S2CID 207576449.
  121. ^ Mosconi, Matthew W.; Mack, Peter B.; McCarthy, Gregory; Pelphrey, Kevin A. (2005). "Taking an "intentional stance" on eye-gaze shifts: A functional neuroimaging study of social perception in children". NeuroImage. 27 (1): 247–52. doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2005.03.027. PMID 16023041. S2CID 25792636.
  122. ^ Brass, Marcel; Schmitt, Ruth M.; Spengler, Stephanie; Gergely, György (2007). "Investigating Action Understanding: Inferential Processes versus Action Simulation". Current Biology. 17 (24): 2117–21. doi:10.1016/j.cub.2007.11.057. PMID 18083518. S2CID 14318837.
  123. ^ a b Saxe, R; Xiao, D.-K; Kovacs, G; Perrett, D.I; Kanwisher, N (2004). "A region of right posterior superior temporal sulcus responds to observed intentional actions". Neuropsychologia. 42 (11): 1435–46. doi:10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2004.04.015. PMID 15246282. S2CID 15079818.
  124. ^
    • Rowe, Andrea D; Bullock, Peter R; Polkey, Charles E; Morris, Robin G (2001). "'Theory of mind' impairments and their relationship to executive functioning following frontal lobe excisions". Brain. 124 (3): 600–616. doi:10.1093/brain/124.3.600. PMID 11222459.
    • Samson, Dana; Apperly, Ian A; Chiavarino, Claudia; Humphreys, Glyn W (2004). "Left temporoparietal junction is necessary for representing someone else's belief". Nature Neuroscience. 7 (5): 499–500. doi:10.1038/nn1223. PMID 15077111. S2CID 9818818.
  125. ^ Stone, Valerie E.; Gerrans, Philip (2006). "What's domain-specific about theory of mind?". Social Neuroscience. 1 (3–4): 309–19. doi:10.1080/17470910601029221. PMID 18633796. S2CID 24446270.
  126. ^ Rizzolatti, Giacomo; Craighero, Laila (2004). "The Mirror-Neuron System". Annual Review of Neuroscience. 27 (1): 169–92. doi:10.1146/annurev.neuro.27.070203.144230. PMID 15217330. S2CID 1729870.
  127. ^ Iacoboni, Marco; Molnar-Szakacs, Istvan; Gallese, Vittorio; Buccino, Giovanni; Mazziotta, John C.; Rizzolatti, Giacomo (2005). "Grasping the Intentions of Others with One's Own Mirror Neuron System". PLOS Biology. 3 (3): e79. doi:10.1371/journal.pbio.0030079. PMC 1044835. PMID 15736981.
  128. ^ Gallese, V; Goldman, A (1998). "Mirror neurons and the simulation theory of mind-reading". Trends in Cognitive Sciences. 2 (12): 493–501. doi:10.1016/S1364-6613(98)01262-5. PMID 21227300. S2CID 10108122.
  129. ^ Frith, U.; Frith, C. D. (2003). "Development and neurophysiology of mentalizing". Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences. 358 (1431): 459–73. doi:10.1098/rstb.2002.1218. PMC 1693139. PMID 12689373.
  130. ^
    • Meltzoff, A. N.; Decety, J. (2003). "What imitation tells us about social cognition: A rapprochement between developmental psychology and cognitive neuroscience". Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences. 358 (1431): 491–500. doi:10.1098/rstb.2002.1261. PMC 1351349. PMID 12689375.
    • Sommerville, Jessica A.; Decety, Jean (2006). "Weaving the fabric of social interaction: Articulating developmental psychology and cognitive neuroscience in the domain of motor cognition". Psychonomic Bulletin & Review. 13 (2): 179–200. doi:10.3758/BF03193831. PMID 16892982. S2CID 14689479.
  131. ^ Gallagher, Shaun (2007). "Simulation trouble". Social Neuroscience. 2 (3–4): 353–65. doi:10.1080/17470910601183549. PMID 18633823. S2CID 205924856.
  132. ^ Gallagher, Shaun (2008). "Neural Simulation and Social Cognition". Mirror Neuron Systems. Mirror Neuron Systems. pp. 355–371. doi:10.1007/978-1-59745-479-7_16. ISBN 978-1-934115-34-3.
  133. ^
    • Happe, F; et al. (1996). "'Theory of mind' in the brain. Evidence from a PET scan study of Asperger syndrome". NeuroReport. 8 (1): 197–201. doi:10.1097/00001756-199612200-00040. hdl:21.11116/0000-0001-A166-6. PMID 9051780. S2CID 2970614.
    • Fletcher, P. C.; et al. (1995). "Other minds in the brain: a functional imaging study of 'theory of mind' in story comprehension". Cognition. 57 (2): 109–128. doi:10.1016/0010-0277(95)00692-R. hdl:21.11116/0000-0001-A1FA-F. PMID 8556839. S2CID 16321133.
  134. ^ Baron-Cohen, Simon; et al. (June 1999). "Social intelligence in the normal and autistic brain: an fMRI study". European Journal of Neuroscience. 11 (6): 1891–1898. doi:10.1046/j.1460-9568.1999.00621.x. PMID 10336657. S2CID 9436565.
  135. ^ Castelli, F; et al. (2002). "Autism, Asperger syndrome and brain mechanisms for the attribution of mental states to animated shapes". Brain. 125 (Pt 8): 1839–1849. doi:10.1093/brain/awf189. PMID 12135974.
  136. ^ Pelphrey, K. A.; et al. (2005). "Neural basis of eye gaze processing deficits in autism". Brain. 128 (Pt 5): 1038–1048. doi:10.1093/brain/awh404. PMID 15758039.
  137. ^ Lombardo MV, Chakrabarti B, Bullmore ET, Baron-Cohen S, et al. (MRC AIMS Consortium) (2011). "Specialization of right temporo-parietal junction for mentalizing and its relation to social deficits in autism". NeuroImage. 56 (3): 1832–1838. doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2011.02.067. PMID 21356316. S2CID 14782731.
  138. ^ Senju A, Southgate V, White S, Frith U (2009). "Mindblind eyes: an absence of spontaneous theory of mind in Asperger syndrome" (PDF). Science. 325 (5942): 883–885. Bibcode:2009Sci...325..883S. doi:10.1126/science.1176170. PMID 19608858. S2CID 9747918.
  139. ^ Pedersen, A.; Koelkebeck, K.; Brandt, M.; Wee, M.; Kueppers, K. A.; Kugel, H.; Kohl, W.; Bauer, J.; Ohrmann, P. (2012). "Theory of mind in patients with schizophrenia: Is mentalizing delayed?". Schizophrenia Research. 137 (1–3): 224–229. doi:10.1016/j.schres.2012.02.022. PMID 22406281. S2CID 3167761.
  140. ^ a b c Dodell-Feder, D.; Tully, L. M.; Lincoln, S. H.; Hooker, C. I. (2013). "The neural basis of theory of mind and its relationship to social functioning and social anhedonia in individuals with schizophrenia". NeuroImage: Clinical. 4: 154–163. doi:10.1016/j.nicl.2013.11.006. PMC 3871293. PMID 24371798.
  141. ^ a b c Baron-Cohen, Simon; Wheelwright, Sally; Hill, Jacqueline; Raste, Yogini; Plumb, Ian (February 2001). "The "Reading the Mind in the Eyes" Test revised version: a study with normal adults, and adults with Asperger syndrome or high-functioning autism" (PDF). Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry. 42 (2): 241–251. doi:10.1111/1469-7610.00715. PMID 11280420.
  142. ^ a b Woolley, Anita Williams; Chabris, Christopher F.; Pentland, Alex; Hashmi, Nada; Malone, Thomas W. (2010-10-29). "Evidence for a Collective Intelligence Factor in the Performance of Human Groups". Science. 330 (6004): 686–688. Bibcode:2010Sci...330..686W. doi:10.1126/science.1193147. PMID 20929725. S2CID 74579.
  143. ^ Engel, David; Woolley, Anita Williams; Jing, Lisa X.; Chabris, Christopher F.; Malone, Thomas W. (2014-12-16). "Reading the Mind in the Eyes or Reading between the Lines? Theory of Mind Predicts Collective Intelligence Equally Well Online and Face-To-Face". PLOS ONE. 9 (12): e115212. Bibcode:2014PLoSO...9k5212E. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0115212. PMC 4267836. PMID 25514387.
  144. ^ Hallerbäck, Maria Unenge; Lugnegård, Tove; Hjärthag, Fredrik; Gillberg, Christopher (2009). "The Reading the Mind in the Eyes Test: test-retest reliability of a Swedish version". Cognitive Neuropsychiatry. 14 (2): 127–143. doi:10.1080/13546800902901518. PMID 19370436. S2CID 28946179.
  145. ^ Pinkham, Amy E.; Penn, David L.; Green, Michael F.; Buck, Benjamin; Healey, Kristin; Harvey, Philip D. (2014-07-01). "The Social Cognition Psychometric Evaluation Study: Results of the Expert Survey and RAND Panel". Schizophrenia Bulletin. 40 (4): 813–823. doi:10.1093/schbul/sbt081. PMC 4059426. PMID 23728248.
  146. ^ Tsoukalas, Ioannis (2018). "Theory of Mind: Towards an Evolutionary Theory". Evolutionary Psychological Science. 4 (1): 38–66. doi:10.1007/s40806-017-0112-x.
  147. ^ Ristau, Carolyn A. (1991). "Aspects of the cognitive ethology of an injury-feigning bird, the piping plovers". In Ristau, Carolyn A. (ed.). Cognitive Ethology: Essays in Honor of Donald R. Griffin. Hillsdale, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum. pp. 91–126. ISBN 978-1-134-99085-6.
  148. ^ Horowitz, Alexandra (2008). "Attention to attention in domestic dog (Canis familiaris) dyadic play". Animal Cognition. 12 (1): 107–18. doi:10.1007/s10071-008-0175-y. PMID 18679727. S2CID 207050813.
  149. ^ Povinelli, Daniel J.; Vonk, Jennifer (2003). "Chimpanzee minds: Suspiciously human?". Trends in Cognitive Sciences. 7 (4): 157–160. CiteSeerX 10.1.1.494.1478. doi:10.1016/S1364-6613(03)00053-6. PMID 12691763. S2CID 3473587.
  150. ^ Povinelli, D.J.; Nelson, K.E.; Boysen, S.T. (1990). "Inferences about guessing and knowing by chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes)". Journal of Comparative Psychology. 104 (3): 203–210. doi:10.1037/0735-7036.104.3.203. PMID 2225758.
  151. ^ Hamilton, Jon (8 July 2006). "A Voluble Visit with Two Talking Apes". NPR. Retrieved 21 March 2012.
  152. ^ Thomas Bugnyar; Stephan A. Reber & Cameron Buckner (2015). "Ravens attribute visual access to unseen competitors". Nature Communications. 7: 10506. Bibcode:2016NatCo...710506B. doi:10.1038/ncomms10506. PMC 4740864. PMID 26835849.
  153. ^ Christopher Krupenye; Fumihiro Kano; Satoshi Hirata; Josep Call; Michael Tomasello (2016). "Great apes anticipate that other individuals will act according to false beliefs". Science. 354 (6308): 110–114. Bibcode:2016Sci...354..110K. doi:10.1126/science.aaf8110. hdl:10161/13632. PMID 27846501.
  154. ^ Haroush K, Williams Z (2015). "Neuronal Prediction of Opponent's Behavior during Cooperative Social Interchange in Primates". Cell. 160 (6): 1233–1245. doi:10.1016/j.cell.2015.01.045. PMC 4364450. PMID 25728667.
  155. ^ Sanfey AG, Civai C, Vavra P (2015). "Predicting the other in cooperative interactions" (PDF). Trends Cogn. Sci. 19 (7): 364–365. doi:10.1016/j.tics.2015.05.009. PMID 26055140. S2CID 20942680.

Further reading

  • Excerpts taken from: Davis, E. (2007) "Mental Verbs in Nicaraguan Sign Language and the Role of Language in Theory of Mind." Undergraduate senior thesis, Barnard College, Columbia University.

External links

 
Wikibooks has a book on the topic of: Consciousness
  • Eye Test Simon Baron Cohen
  • The Computational Theory of Mind
  • The Identity Theory of Mind
  • Functional Contextualism
  • Theory of Mind article in the Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy

January 16, 2023
theory, mind, confused, with, philosophy, mind, lead, section, this, article, need, rewritten, lead, layout, guide, ensure, section, follows, wikipedia, norms, inclusive, essential, details, november, 2020, learn, when, remove, this, template, message, psychol. Not to be confused with Philosophy of mind The lead section of this article may need to be rewritten Use the lead layout guide to ensure the section follows Wikipedia s norms and is inclusive of all essential details November 2020 Learn how and when to remove this template message In psychology theory of mind refers to the capacity to understand other people by ascribing mental states to them that is surmising what is happening in their mind This includes the knowledge that others mental states may be different from one s own states and include beliefs desires intentions emotions and thoughts 1 Possessing a functional theory of mind is considered crucial for success in everyday human social interactions People use such a theory when analyzing judging and inferring others behaviors The discovery and development of theory of mind primarily came from studies done with animals and infants 2 Factors including drug and alcohol consumption language development cognitive delays age and culture can affect a person s capacity to display theory of mind It has been proposed that deficits in theory of mind can occur in people with autism although this is contentious 4 anorexia nervosa 5 schizophrenia dysphoria attention deficit hyperactivity disorder 6 cocaine addiction 7 and brain damage caused by alcohol s neurotoxicity 8 deficits associated with opiate addiction are reversed after prolonged abstinence 9 Having a theory of mind is similar to but not identical with having the capacity for empathy 10 or for sympathy Theory of mind develops throughout childhood as the prefrontal cortex develops The violation of expectation procedure uses infants tendency to look longer at unexpected and surprising events Most typically developing children are able to pass the False belief task from around age four Children from Iran and China in a culture of collectivism develop knowledge access earlier and understand diverse beliefs later than Western children in a culture of individualism 11 Neuroimaging shows brain regions engaged during theory of mind include the medial prefrontal cortex mPFC and area around posterior superior temporal sulcus pSTS and sometimes precuneus and amygdala temporopolar cortex Patients with frontal lobe or temporoparietal junction lesions find some theory of mind tasks difficult Many researchers focus on animals understanding of intention gaze perspective or knowledge A study showed orangutans and chimpanzees understood the difference between accidental and intentional acts William Field and Sue Savage Rumbaugh believe that bonobos have developed theory of mind Theory of mind is distinct from philosophy of mind which is about the basic nature of the mind and how the brain enables it Contents 1 Definition 2 Philosophical and psychological roots 3 Development 3 1 Language 3 2 Theory of mind in adults 3 3 Ageing 3 4 Cultural variations 3 5 Historiography 4 Empirical investigation 4 1 False belief task 4 2 Unexpected contents 4 3 Other tasks 4 4 Early precursors 4 5 Methodological problems 5 Deficits 5 1 Autism 5 2 Schizophrenia 5 3 Alcohol use disorders 5 4 Depression and dysphoria 5 5 Developmental language disorder 6 Brain mechanisms 6 1 In neurotypical people 6 2 In autism 6 3 In schizophrenia 7 Practical validity 8 Evolution 9 Non human 10 See also 11 References 12 Further reading 13 External linksDefinition EditTheory of mind is a theory because the behavior of the other person such as their statements and expressions is the only thing being directly observed Their mind and its contents cannot be observed directly so the existence and nature of the mind must be inferred 12 The presumption that others have a mind is termed a theory of mind because each human can only observe their own mind via introspection no one has direct access to the mind of another It is typically assumed that others have minds analogous to one s own this assumption is based on reciprocal social interaction as observed in joint attention 2 the functional use of language 13 and the understanding of others emotions and actions 14 Theory of mind allows one to attribute thoughts desires and intentions to others to predict or explain their actions and to posit their intentions It enables one to understand that mental states can be the cause of and so can be used to explain and predict the behavior of others 12 Being able to attribute mental states to others and understanding them as causes of behavior implies in part that one must be able to conceive of the mind as a generator of representations 15 If a person does not have a mature theory of mind it may be a sign of cognitive or developmental impairment Theory of mind appears to be an innate potential ability in humans that requires social and other experience over many years for its full development Different people may develop more or less effective theories of mind Neo Piagetian theories of cognitive development maintain that theory of mind is a byproduct of a broader hypercognitive ability of the human mind to register monitor and represent its own functioning 16 Empathy the recognition and understanding of the states of mind of others including their beliefs desires and particularly emotions is a related concept Empathy is often characterized as the ability to put oneself into another s shoes Recent neuro ethological studies of animal behaviour suggest that even rodents may exhibit empathetic abilities 17 While empathy is known as emotional perspective taking theory of mind is defined as cognitive perspective taking 18 Research on theory of mind in humans and animals adults and children normally and atypically developing has grown rapidly in the years since Premack and Guy Woodruff s 1978 paper Does the chimpanzee have a theory of mind 12 The field of social neuroscience has also begun to address this debate by imaging the brains of humans while they perform tasks that require the understanding of an intention belief or other mental state in others An alternative account of theory of mind is given in operant psychology and provides empirical evidence for a functional account of both perspective taking and empathy The most developed operant approach is founded on research on derived relational responding jargon and is subsumed within relational frame theory According to this view empathy and perspective taking comprise a complex set of derived relational abilities based on learning to discriminate and respond verbally to ever more complex relations between self others place and time and through established relations 19 20 21 Philosophical and psychological roots EditDiscussions of theory of mind have their roots in philosophical debate from the time of Rene Descartes Second Meditation which set the groundwork for considering the science of the mind Two contrasting approaches in the philosophical literature to theory of mind are theory theory and simulation theory clarification needed The theory theorist posits a veritable theory folk psychology that people use to reason about others minds Such a theory is developed automatically and innately though it is instantiated through social interactions 22 It is also closely related to person perception and attribution theory from social psychology It is common and intuitive to assume that others are minded People anthropomorphize non human animals inanimate objects and even natural phenomena Daniel Dennett referred to this tendency as taking an intentional stance toward things we assume they have intentions to help predict their future behavior 23 However there is an important distinction between taking an intentional stance toward something and entering a shared world with it The intentional stance is a detached and functional clarification needed theory we resort to during interpersonal interactions A shared world is directly perceived and its existence structures reality itself for the perceiver It is not just automatically applied to perception it in many ways constitutes perception clarification needed The philosophical roots of the relational frame theory RFT account of theory of mind arise from contextual psychology which refers to the study of organisms both human and non human interacting in and with a historical and current situational context It is an approach based on contextualism a philosophy in which any event is interpreted as an ongoing act inseparable from its current and historical context and in which a radically functional approach to truth and meaning is adopted As a variant of contextualism RFT focuses on the construction of practical scientific knowledge This scientific form of contextual psychology is virtually synonymous with the philosophy of operant psychology 24 Development EditThe study of which animals are capable of attributing knowledge and mental states to others as well as the development of this ability in human ontogeny and phylogeny identifies several behavioral precursors to theory of mind Understanding attention understanding of others intentions and imitative experience with others are hallmarks of a theory of mind that may be observed early in the development of what later becomes a full fledged theory Simon Baron Cohen proposed that infants understanding of attention in others acts as a critical precursor to the development of theory of mind 2 Understanding attention involves understanding that seeing can be directed selectively as attention that the looker assesses the seen object as of interest and that seeing can induce beliefs A possible illustration of theory of mind in infants is joint attention Joint attention refers to when two people look at and attend to the same thing Parents often use the act of pointing to prompt infants to engage in joint attention understanding this prompt requires that infants take into account another person s mental state and understand that the person notices an object or finds it of interest Baron Cohen speculates that the inclination to spontaneously reference an object in the world as of interest via pointing protodeclarative pointing and to likewise appreciate the directed attention of another may be the underlying motive behind all human communication 2 Understanding of others intentions is another critical precursor to understanding other minds because intentionality or aboutness is a fundamental feature of mental states and events The intentional stance was defined by Daniel Dennett 25 as an understanding that others actions are goal directed and arise from particular beliefs or desires Both two and three year old children could discriminate when an experimenter intentionally vs accidentally marked a box with stickers as baited clarification needed 26 Even earlier in ontogeny Andrew N Meltzoff found that 18 month old infants could perform target manipulations that adult experimenters attempted and failed suggesting the infants could represent the object manipulating behavior of adults as involving goals and intentions 27 While attribution of intention the box marking and knowledge false belief tasks is investigated in young humans and nonhuman animals to detect precursors to a theory of mind Gagliardi et al have pointed out that even adult humans do not always act in a way consistent with an attributional perspective 28 In their experiment adult human subjects made choices about baited containers when guided by confederates who could not see and so could not know which container was baited Research in developmental psychology suggests that an infant s ability to imitate others lies at the origins of both theory of mind and other social cognitive achievements like perspective taking and empathy 29 According to Meltzoff the infant s innate understanding that others are like me allows it to recognize the equivalence between the physical and mental states apparent in others and those felt by the self For example the infant uses his own experiences orienting his head eyes toward an object of interest to understand the movements of others who turn toward an object that is that they will generally attend to objects of interest or significance Some researchers in comparative disciplines have hesitated to put a too ponderous weight on imitation as a critical precursor to advanced human social cognitive skills like mentalizing and empathizing especially if true imitation is no longer employed by adults A test of imitation by Alexandra Horowitz 30 found that adult subjects imitated an experimenter demonstrating a novel task far less closely than children did Horowitz points out that the precise psychological state underlying imitation is unclear and cannot by itself be used to draw conclusions about the mental states of humans While much research has been done on infants theory of mind develops continuously throughout childhood and into late adolescence as the synapses neuronal connections in the prefrontal cortex develop The prefrontal cortex is thought to be involved in planning and decision making 31 Children seem to develop theory of mind skills sequentially The first skill to develop is the ability to recognize that others have diverse desires Children are able to recognize that others have diverse beliefs soon after The next skill to develop is recognizing that others have access to different knowledge bases Finally children are able to understand that others may have false beliefs and that others are capable of hiding emotions While this sequence represents the general trend in skill acquisition it seems that more emphasis is placed on some skills in certain cultures leading to more valued skills to develop before those that are considered not as important For example in individualistic cultures such as the United States a greater emphasis is placed on the ability to recognize that others have different opinions and beliefs In a collectivistic culture such as China this skill may not be as important and therefore may not develop until later 32 Language Edit There is evidence that the development of theory of mind is closely intertwined with language development in humans One meta analysis showed a moderate to strong correlation r 0 43 between performance on theory of mind and language tasks 33 Both language and theory of mind begin to develop around the same time in children between ages two and five but many other abilities develop during this same time period as well and they do not produce such high correlations with one another nor with theory of mind Pragmatic theories of communication 34 assume that infants must possess an understanding of beliefs and mental states of others to infer the communicative content that proficient language users intend to convey Since a verbal utterance is often underdetermined and so it can have different meanings depending on the actual context theory of mind can play a crucial role in understanding the communicative and informative intentions of others and inferring the meaning of words Some empirical results 35 suggest that even 13 month old infants have an early capacity for communicative mind reading that enables them to infer what relevant information is transferred between communicative partners which implies that human language relies at least partially on theory of mind skills Carol A Miller posed further possible explanations for this relationship Perhaps the extent of verbal communication and conversation involving children in a family could explain theory of mind development Such language exposure could help introduce a child to the different mental states and perspectives of others 36 Empirical findings indicate that participation in family discussion predicts scores on theory of mind tasks 37 and that deaf children who have hearing parents and may not be able to communicate with their parents much during early years of development tend to score lower on theory of mind tasks 38 Another explanation of the relationship between language and theory of mind development has to do with a child s understanding of mental state words such as think and believe Since a mental state is not something that one can observe from behavior children must learn the meanings of words denoting mental states from verbal explanations alone requiring knowledge of the syntactic rules semantic systems and pragmatics of a language 36 Studies have shown that understanding of these mental state words predicts theory of mind in four year olds 39 A third hypothesis is that the ability to distinguish a whole sentence Jimmy thinks the world is flat from its embedded complement the world is flat and understand that one can be true while the other can be false is related to theory of mind development Recognizing these sentential complements jargon as being independent of one another is a relatively complex syntactic skill and correlates with increased scores on theory of mind tasks in children 40 There is also evidence that the areas of the brain responsible for language and theory of mind are closely connected The temporoparietal junction TPJ is involved in the ability to acquire new vocabulary as well as to perceive and reproduce words The TPJ also contains areas that specialize in recognizing faces voices and biological motion and in theory of mind Since all of these areas are located so closely together it is reasonable to suspect that they work together Studies have reported an increase in activity in the TPJ when patients are absorbing information through reading or images regarding other peoples beliefs but not while observing information about physical control stimuli 41 Theory of mind in adults Edit Neurotypical adults have theory of mind concepts that they developed as children concepts such as belief desire knowledge and intention How do they use these concepts to meet the diverse demands of social life ranging from snap decisions about how to trick an opponent in a competitive game to keeping up with who knows what in a fast moving conversation to judging the guilt or innocence of the accused in a court of law 42 Boaz Keysar Dale Barr and colleagues found that adults often failed to use their theory of mind abilities to interpret a speaker s message even though they were perfectly well aware that the speaker lacked critical knowledge 43 Other studies show that adults are prone to egocentric biases with which they are influenced by their own beliefs knowledge or preferences when judging those of other people or else they neglect other people s perspectives entirely 44 There is also evidence that adults with greater memory and inhibitory capacity and greater motivation are more likely to use their theory of mind abilities 45 In contrast evidence about indirect effects of thinking about other people s mental states suggests that adults may sometimes use their theory of mind automatically Agnes Kovacs and colleagues measured the time it took adults to detect the presence of a ball as it was revealed from behind an occluder They found that adults speed of response was influenced by whether or not an avatar in the scene thought there was a ball behind the occluder even though adults were not asked to pay attention to what the avatar thought 46 Dana Samson and colleagues measured the time it took adults to judge the number of dots on the wall of a room They found that adults responded more slowly when an avatar standing in the room happened to see fewer dots than they did even when they had never been asked to pay attention to what the avatar could see 47 It has been questioned whether these altercentric biases truly reflect automatic processing of what another person is thinking or seeing or whether they instead reflect attention and memory effects cued by the avatar but not involving any representation of what they think or see 48 Different theories seek to explain such results If theory of mind is automatic this would help explain how people keep up with the theory of mind demands of competitive games and fast moving conversations It might also explain evidence that human infants and some non human species sometimes appear capable of theory of mind despite their limited resources for memory and cognitive control 49 If theory of mind is effortful and not automatic on the other hand this explains why it feels effortful to decide whether a defendant is guilty or innocent or whether a negotiator is bluffing and economy of effort would help explain why people sometimes neglect to use their theory of mind Ian Apperly and Stephen Butterfill suggested that people have two systems for theory of mind 50 in common with two systems accounts in many other areas of psychology 51 In this account system 1 is cognitively efficient and enables theory of mind for a limited but useful set of circumstances System 2 is cognitively effortful but enables much more flexible theory of mind abilities Philosopher Peter Carruthers disagrees arguing that the same core theory of mind abilities can be used in both simple and complex ways 52 The account has been criticised by Celia Heyes who suggests that system 1 theory of mind abilities do not require representation of mental states of other people and so are better thought of as sub mentalising 48 Ageing Edit In older age theory of mind capacities decline irrespective of how exactly they are tested e g stories eyes videos false belief video false belief other and faux pas 53 However the decline in other cognitive functions is even stronger suggesting that social cognition is better preserved In contrast to theory of mind empathy shows no impairments in aging 54 55 There are two kinds of theory of mind representations cognitive concerning the mental states beliefs thoughts and intentions of others and affective concerning the emotions of others Cognitive theory of mind is further separated into first order e g I think she thinks that and second order e g he thinks that she thinks that There is evidence that cognitive and affective theory of mind processes are functionally independent from one another 56 In studies of Alzheimer s disease which typically occurs in older adults patients display impairment with second order cognitive theory of mind but usually not with first order cognitive or affective theory of mind However it is difficult to discern a clear pattern of theory of mind variation due to age There have been many discrepancies in the data collected thus far likely due to small sample sizes and the use of different tasks that only explore one aspect of theory of mind Many researchers suggest that theory of mind impairment is simply due to the normal decline in cognitive function 57 Cultural variations Edit Researchers propose that five key aspects of theory of mind develop sequentially for all children between the ages of three and five 58 diverse desires DD diverse beliefs DB knowledge access KA false beliefs FB and hidden emotions HE 58 Australian American and European children acquire theory of mind in this exact order 11 and studies with children in Canada India Peru Samoa and Thailand indicate that they all pass the false belief task at around the same time suggesting that children develop theory of mind consistently around the world 59 However children from Iran and China develop theory of mind in a slightly different order Although they begin the development of theory of mind around the same time toddlers from these countries understand knowledge access KA before Western children but take longer to understand diverse beliefs DB 11 60 Researchers believe this swap in the developmental order is related to the culture of collectivism in Iran and China which emphasizes interdependence and shared knowledge as opposed to the culture of individualism in Western countries which promotes individuality and accepts differing opinions Because of these different cultural values Iranian and Chinese children might take longer to understand that other people have different beliefs and opinions This suggests that the development of theory of mind is not universal and solely determined by innate brain processes but also influenced by social and cultural factors 11 Historiography Edit Theory of mind can help historians to more properly understand historical figures characters for example Thomas Jefferson Emancipationists like Douglas L Wilson and scholars at the Thomas Jefferson Foundation view Jefferson as an opponent of slavery all his life noting Jefferson s attempts within the limited range of options available to him to undermine slavery his many attempts at abolition legislation the manner in which he provided for slaves and his advocacy of their more humane treatment This view contrasts with that of revisionists like Paul Finkelman who criticizes Jefferson for racism slavery and hypocrisy Emancipationist views on this hypocrisy recognize that if he tried to be true to his word it would have alienated his fellow Virginians In another example Franklin D Roosevelt did not join NAACP leaders in pushing for federal anti lynching legislation as he believed that such legislation was unlikely to pass and that his support for it would alienate Southern congressmen including many of Roosevelt s fellow Democrats Empirical investigation EditWhether children younger than three or four years old have a theory of mind is a topic of debate among researchers It is a challenging question due to the difficulty of assessing what pre linguistic children understand about others and the world Tasks used in research into the development of theory of mind must take into account the umwelt 61 of the pre verbal child clarification needed False belief task Edit One of the most important milestones in theory of mind development is the ability to attribute false belief in other words to understand that other people can believe things which are not true To do this it is suggested one must understand how knowledge is formed that people s beliefs are based on their knowledge that mental states can differ from reality and that people s behavior can be predicted by their mental states Numerous versions of false belief task have been developed based on the initial task created by Wimmer and Perner 1983 62 In the most common version of the false belief task often called the Sally Anne test or Sally Anne task children are told or shown a story involving two dolls Sally and Anne who have a basket and a box respectively Sally also has a marble which she places into her basket and then leaves the room While she is out of the room Anne takes the marble from the basket and puts it into the box Sally returns and the child is then asked where Sally will look for the marble The child passes the task if she answers that Sally will look in the basket where Sally put the marble the child fails the task if she answers that Sally will look in the box where the child knows the marble is hidden even though Sally cannot know this since she did not see it hidden there To pass the task the child must be able to understand that another s mental representation of the situation is different from their own and the child must be able to predict behavior based on that understanding 63 Another example depicts a boy who leaves chocolate on a shelf and then leaves the room His mother puts it in the fridge To pass the task the child must understand that the boy upon returning holds the false belief that his chocolate is still on the shelf 64 The results of research using false belief tasks have been fairly consistent most typically developing children are able to pass the tasks from around age four 65 Notably while most children including those with Down syndrome are able to pass this test in one study 80 of children diagnosed with autism were unable to do so 66 Adults may also struggle with false beliefs for instance when they show hindsight bias the inclination to see events that have already happened as being more predictable than they were before they took place 67 In one experiment adult subjects who were asked for an independent assessment were unable to disregard information on actual outcome Also in experiments with complicated situations when assessing others thinking adults can fail to correctly disregard certain information that they have been given 64 Unexpected contents Edit Other tasks have been developed to try to extend the false belief task In the Unexpected contents or Smarties task experimenters ask children what they believe to be the contents of a box that looks as though it holds a candy called Smarties After the child guesses usually Smarties it is shown that the box in fact contained pencils The experimenter then re closes the box and asks the child what she thinks another person who has not been shown the true contents of the box will think is inside The child passes the task if he she responds that another person will think that Smarties exist in the box but fails the task if she responds that another person will think that the box contains pencils Gopnik amp Astington found that children pass this test at age four or five years 68 Other tasks Edit The false photograph task 69 also measures theory of mind development In this task children must reason about what is represented in a photograph that differs from the current state of affairs Within the false photograph task either a location or identity change exists 70 In the location change task the examiner puts an object in one location e g chocolate in an open green cupboard whereupon the child takes a Polaroid photograph of the scene While the photograph is developing the examiner moves the object to a different location e g a blue cupboard allowing the child to view the examiner s action The examiner asks the child two control questions When we first took the picture where was the object and Where is the object now The subject is also asked a false photograph question Where is the object in the picture The child passes the task if he she correctly identifies the location of the object in the picture and the actual location of the object at the time of the question However the last question might be misinterpreted as Where in this room is the object that the picture depicts and therefore some examiners use an alternative phrasing 71 To make it easier for animals young children and individuals with classical Leo Kanner type autism to understand and perform theory of mind tasks researchers have developed tests in which verbal communication is de emphasized some whose administration does not involve verbal communication on the part of the examiner some whose successful completion does not require verbal communication on the part of the subject and some that meet both of those standards One category of tasks uses a preferential looking paradigm with looking time as the dependent variable For instance nine month old infants prefer looking at behaviors performed by a human hand over those made by an inanimate hand like object 72 Other paradigms look at rates of imitative behavior the ability to replicate and complete unfinished goal directed acts 27 and rates of pretend play 73 Early precursors Edit Research on the early precursors of theory of mind has invented ways to observe preverbal infants understanding of other people s mental states including perception and beliefs Using a variety of experimental procedures studies show that infants from their first year of life have an implicit understanding of what other people see 74 and what they know 75 76 A popular paradigm used to study infants theory of mind is the violation of expectation procedure which exploits infants tendency to look longer at unexpected and surprising events compared to familiar and expected events The amount of time they look at an event gives researchers an indication of what infants might be inferring or their implicit understanding of events One study using this paradigm found that 16 month olds tend to attribute beliefs to a person whose visual perception was previously witnessed as being reliable compared to someone whose visual perception was unreliable Specifically 16 month olds were trained to expect a person s excited vocalization and gaze into a container to be associated with finding a toy in the reliable looker condition or an absence of a toy in the unreliable looker condition Following this training phase infants witnessed in an object search task the same persons searching for a toy either in the correct or incorrect location after they both witnessed the location of where the toy was hidden Infants who experienced the reliable looker were surprised and therefore looked longer when the person searched for the toy in the incorrect location compared to the correct location In contrast the looking time for infants who experienced the unreliable looker did not differ for either search locations These findings suggest that 16 month old infants can differentially attribute beliefs about a toy s location based on the person s prior record of visual perception 77 Methodological problems Edit With the methods used to test theory of mind it has been experimentally shown that very simple robots that only react by reflexes and are not built to have any complex cognition at all can pass the tests for having theory of mind abilities that psychology textbooks assume to be exclusive to humans older than four or five years Whether or not such a robot passes or fails the test is influenced by completely non cognitive factors such as placement of objects and the structure of the robot body influencing how the reflexes are conducted It has therefore been suggested that theory of mind tests may not actually test cognitive abilities 78 Deficits EditTheory of mind impairment or mind blindness describes a difficulty someone would have with perspective taking Individuals with theory of mind impairment have a difficult time seeing phenomena from any other perspective than their own 79 Individuals who experience a theory of mind deficit have difficulty determining the intentions of others lack understanding of how their behavior affects others and have a difficult time with social reciprocity 80 Theory of mind deficits have been observed in people with autism spectrum disorders people with schizophrenia people with nonverbal learning disorder people with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder 6 people under the influence of alcohol and narcotics sleep deprived people and people who are experiencing severe emotional or physical pain Theory of mind deficits have also been observed in deaf children who are late signers i e are born to hearing parents but such a deficit is due to the delay in language learning not any cognitive deficit and therefore disappears once the child learns sign language 81 Autism Edit In 1985 Simon Baron Cohen Alan M Leslie and Uta Frith suggested that children with autism do not employ theory of mind 66 and that autistic children have particular difficulties with tasks requiring the child to understand another person s beliefs These difficulties persist when children are matched for verbal skills 82 and they have been taken as a key feature of autism Although in a 2019 review Gernsbacher and Yergeau argued that the claim that autistic people lack a theory of mind is empirically questionable as there have been numerous failed replications of classic ToM studies and the meta analytical effect sizes of such replications were minimal to small 83 Many individuals classified as autistic have severe difficulty assigning mental states to others and some seem to lack theory of mind capabilities 84 Researchers who study the relationship between autism and theory of mind attempt to explain the connection in a variety of ways One account assumes that theory of mind plays a role in the attribution of mental states to others and in childhood pretend play 85 According to Leslie 85 theory of mind is the capacity to mentally represent thoughts beliefs and desires regardless of whether or not the circumstances involved are real This might explain why some autistic individuals show extreme deficits in both theory of mind and pretend play However Hobson proposes a social affective justification 86 in which deficits in theory of mind in autistic people result from a distortion in understanding and responding to emotions He suggests that typically developing individuals unlike autistic individuals are born with a set of skills such as social referencing ability that later lets them comprehend and react to other people s feelings Other scholars emphasize that autism involves a specific developmental delay so that autistic children vary in their deficiencies because they experience difficulty in different stages of growth Very early setbacks can alter proper advancement of joint attention behaviors which may lead to a failure to form a full theory of mind 84 It has been speculated 73 that theory of mind exists on a continuum as opposed to the traditional view of a discrete presence or absence While some research has suggested that some autistic populations are unable to attribute mental states to others 2 recent evidence points to the possibility of coping mechanisms that facilitate a spectrum of mindful behavior clarification needed 87 A binary view regarding theory of mind contributes to the stigmatization of autistic adults that do possess perspective taking capacity as the assumption that autistic people do not have empathy can become a rationale for dehumanization 88 Tine et al report that autistic children score substantially lower on measures of social theory of mind clarification needed in comparison to children diagnosed with Asperger syndrome 89 Generally children with more advanced theory of mind abilities display more advanced social skills greater adaptability to new situations and greater cooperation with others As a result these children are typically well liked However children may use their mind reading abilities to manipulate outwit tease or trick their peers 90 Individuals possessing inferior theory of mind skills such as children with autism spectrum disorder may be socially rejected by their peers since they are unable to communicate effectively Social rejection has been proven to negatively impact a child s development and can put the child at greater risk of developing depressive symptoms 91 Peer mediated interventions PMI are a school based treatment approach for children and adolescents with autism spectrum disorder in which peers are trained to be role models in order to promote social behavior Laghi et al studied whether analysis of prosocial nice and antisocial nasty theory of mind behaviors could be used in addition to teacher recommendations to select appropriate candidates for PMI programs Selecting children with advanced theory of mind skills who use them in prosocial ways will theoretically make the program more effective While the results indicated that analyzing the social uses of theory of mind of possible candidates for a PMI program is invaluable clarification needed it may not be a good predictor of a candidate s performance as a role model 31 A 2014 Cochrane review on interventions based on theory of mind found that such a theory could be taught to individuals with autism but claimed little evidence of skill maintenance generalization to other settings or development effects on related skills 92 Some 21st century studies have shown that the results of some studies of theory of mind tests on autistic people may be misinterpreted based on the double empathy problem which proposes that rather than autistic people specifically having trouble with theory of mind autistic people and non autistic people have equal difficulty understanding one another due to their neurological differences 93 Studies have shown that autistic adults perform better in theory of mind tests when paired with other autistic adults 94 as well as possibly autistic close family members 95 Academics who acknowledge the double empathy problem also propose that it is likely autistic people understand non autistic people to a higher degree than vise versa due to the necessity of functioning in a non autistic society 96 Schizophrenia Edit Individuals diagnosed with schizophrenia can show deficits in theory of mind Mirjam Sprong and colleagues investigated the impairment by examining 29 different studies with a total of over 1500 participants 97 This meta analysis showed significant and stable deficit of theory of mind in people with schizophrenia They performed poorly on false belief tasks which test the ability to understand that others can hold false beliefs about events in the world and also on intention inference tasks which assess the ability to infer a character s intention from reading a short story Schizophrenia patients with negative symptoms such as lack of emotion motivation or speech have the most impairment in theory of mind and are unable to represent the mental states of themselves and of others Paranoid schizophrenic patients also perform poorly because they have difficulty accurately interpreting others intentions The meta analysis additionally showed that IQ gender and age of the participants do not significantly affect the performance of theory of mind tasks 97 Research suggests that impairment in theory of mind negatively affects clinical insight the patient s awareness of their mental illness 98 Insight requires theory of mind a patient must be able to adopt a third person perspective and see the self as others do 99 A patient with good insight can accurately self represent by comparing himself with others and by viewing himself from the perspective of others 98 Insight allows a patient to recognize and react appropriately to his symptoms A patient who lacks insight does not realize that he has a mental illness because of his inability to accurately self represent Therapies that teach patients perspective taking and self reflection skills can improve abilities in reading social cues and taking the perspective of another person 98 Research indicates that theory of mind deficit is a stable trait characteristic rather than a state characteristic of schizophrenia 100 The meta analysis conducted by Sprong et al showed that patients in remission still had impairment in theory of mind This indicates that the deficit is not merely a consequence of the active phase of schizophrenia 97 Schizophrenic patients deficit in theory of mind impairs their interactions with others Theory of mind is particularly important for parents who must understand the thoughts and behaviors of their children and react accordingly Dysfunctional parenting is associated with deficits in the first order theory of mind the ability to understand another person s thoughts and in the second order theory of mind the ability to infer what one person thinks about another person s thoughts 101 Compared with healthy mothers mothers with schizophrenia are found to be more remote quiet self absorbed insensitive unresponsive and to have fewer satisfying interactions with their children 101 They also tend to misinterpret their children s emotional cues and often misunderstand neutral faces as negative 101 Activities such as role playing and individual or group based sessions are effective interventions that help the parents improve on perspective taking and theory of mind 101 There is a strong association between theory of mind deficit and parental role dysfunction Alcohol use disorders Edit Impairments in theory of mind as well as other social cognitive deficits are commonly found in people who have alcohol use disorders due to the neurotoxic effects of alcohol on the brain particularly the prefrontal cortex 8 Depression and dysphoria Edit Individuals in a major depressive episode a disorder characterized by social impairment show deficits in theory of mind decoding 102 Theory of mind decoding is the ability to use information available in the immediate environment e g facial expression tone of voice body posture to accurately label the mental states of others The opposite pattern enhanced theory of mind is observed in individuals vulnerable to depression including those individuals with past major depressive disorder MDD 103 dysphoric individuals 104 and individuals with a maternal history of MDD 105 Developmental language disorder Edit Children diagnosed with developmental language disorder DLD exhibit much lower scores on reading and writing sections of standardized tests yet have a normal nonverbal IQ These language deficits can be any specific deficits in lexical semantics syntax or pragmatics or a combination of multiple problems Such children often exhibit poorer social skills than normally developing children and seem to have problems decoding beliefs in others A recent meta analysis confirmed that children with DLD have substantially lower scores on theory of mind tasks compared to typically developing children 106 This strengthens the claim that language development is related to theory of mind Brain mechanisms EditIn neurotypical people Edit Research on theory of mind in autism led to the view that mentalizing abilities are subserved by dedicated mechanisms that can in some cases be impaired while general cognitive function remains largely intact Neuroimaging research supports this view demonstrating specific brain regions are consistently engaged during theory of mind tasks PET research on theory of mind using verbal and pictorial story comprehension tasks identifies a set of brain regions including the medial prefrontal cortex mPFC and area around posterior superior temporal sulcus pSTS and sometimes precuneus and amygdala temporopolar cortex 107 108 Research on the neural basis of theory of mind has diversified with separate lines of research focusing on the understanding of beliefs intentions and more complex properties of minds such as psychological traits Studies from Rebecca Saxe s lab at MIT using a false belief versus false photograph task contrast aimed at isolating the mentalizing component of the false belief task have consistently found activation in mPFC precuneus and temporoparietal junction TPJ right lateralized 109 110 In particular it has been proposed who that the right TPJ rTPJ is selectively involved in representing the beliefs of others 111 Some debate exists as the same rTPJ region is consistently activated during spatial reorienting of visual attention 112 113 Jean Decety from the University of Chicago and Jason Mitchell from Harvard thus propose that the rTPJ subserves a more general function involved in both false belief understanding and attentional reorienting rather than a mechanism specialized for social cognition However it is possible that the observation of overlapping regions for representing beliefs and attentional reorienting may simply be due to adjacent but distinct neuronal populations that code for each The resolution of typical fMRI studies may not be good enough to show that distinct adjacent neuronal populations code for each of these processes In a study following Decety and Mitchell Saxe and colleagues used higher resolution fMRI and showed that the peak of activation for attentional reorienting is approximately 6 10mm above the peak for representing beliefs Further corroborating that differing populations of neurons may code for each process they found no similarity in the patterning of fMRI response across space 114 Using single cell recordings in the human dorsomedial prefrontal cortex dmPFC researchers at MGH identified neurons that encode information about others beliefs which were distinct from self beliefs across different scenarios in a False belief task They further showed high specificity between cells jargon based on the content of the others beliefs and were able to accurately predict whether these beliefs were true or false 115 These findings suggest a prominent role of distinct neuronal populations in the dmPFC in theory of Mmind complemented by the TPJ and pSTS Functional imaging also illuminates the detection of mental state information in Heider Simmel esque animations jargon of moving geometric shapes which typical humans automatically perceive as social interactions laden with intention and emotion Three studies found remarkably similar patterns of activation during the perception of such animations versus a random or deterministic motion control mPFC pSTS fusiform face area FFA and amygdala were selectively engaged during the theory of mind condition 116 Another study presented subjects with an animation of two dots moving with a parameterized degree of intentionality quantifying the extent to which the dots chased each other and found that pSTS activation correlated with this parameter 117 A separate body of research implicates the posterior superior temporal sulcus in the perception of intentionality in human action This area is also involved in perceiving biological motion including body eye mouth and point light display motion 118 One study found increased pSTS activation while watching a human lift his hand versus having his hand pushed up by a piston intentional versus unintentional action 119 Several studies found increased pSTS activation when subjects perceive a human action that is incongruent with the action expected from the actor s context and inferred intention Examples would be a human performing a reach to grasp motion on empty space next to an object versus grasping the object 120 a human shifting eye gaze toward empty space next to a checkerboard target versus shifting gaze toward the target 121 an unladen human turning on a light with his knee versus turning on a light with his knee while carrying a pile of books 122 and a walking human pausing as he passes behind a bookshelf versus walking at a constant speed 123 In these studies actions in the congruent case have a straightforward goal and are easy to explain in terms of the actor s intention The incongruent actions on the other hand require further explanation why would someone twist empty space next to a gear and apparently demand more processing in the STS This region is distinct from the temporoparietal area activated during false belief tasks 123 pSTS activation in most of the above studies was largely right lateralized following the general trend in neuroimaging studies of social cognition and perception Also right lateralized are the TPJ activation during false belief tasks the STS response to biological motion and the FFA response to faces Neuropsychological evidence supports neuroimaging results regarding the neural basis of theory of mind Studies with patients with a lesion of the frontal lobes and the temporoparietal junction of the brain between the temporal lobe and parietal lobe report that they have difficulty with some theory of mind tasks 124 This shows that theory of mind abilities are associated with specific parts of the human brain However the fact that the medial prefrontal cortex and temporoparietal junction are necessary for theory of mind tasks does not imply that these regions are specific to that function 112 125 TPJ and mPFC may subserve more general functions necessary for Theory of Mind Research by Vittorio Gallese Luciano Fadiga and Giacomo Rizzolatti 126 shows that some sensorimotor neurons referred to as mirror neurons and first discovered in the premotor cortex of rhesus monkeys may be involved in action understanding Single electrode recording revealed that these neurons fired when a monkey performed an action as well as when the monkey viewed another agent performing the same action fMRI studies with human participants show brain regions assumed to contain mirror neurons that are active when one person sees another person s goal directed action 127 These data led some authors to suggest that mirror neurons may provide the basis for theory of mind in the brain and to support simulation theory of mind reading 128 There is also evidence against a link between mirror neurons and theory of mind First macaque monkeys have mirror neurons but do not seem to have a human like capacity to understand theory of mind and belief Second fMRI studies of theory of mind typically report activation in the mPFC temporal poles and TPJ or STS 129 but those brain areas are not part of the mirror neuron system Some investigators like developmental psychologist Andrew Meltzoff and neuroscientist Jean Decety believe that mirror neurons merely facilitate learning through imitation and may provide a precursor to the development of theory of mind 130 Others like philosopher Shaun Gallagher suggest that mirror neuron activation on a number of counts fails to meet the definition of simulation as proposed by the simulation theory of mindreading 131 132 In autism Edit Several neuroimaging studies have looked at the neural basis for theory of mind impairment in subjects with Asperger syndrome and high functioning autism HFA The first PET study of theory of mind in autism also the first neuroimaging study using a task induced activation paradigm in autism replicated a prior study in neurotypical individuals which employed a story comprehension task 133 This study found displaced and diminished mPFC activation in subjects with autism However because the study used only six subjects with autism and because the spatial resolution of PET imaging is relatively poor these results should be considered preliminary A subsequent fMRI study scanned normally developing adults and adults with HFA while performing a reading the mind in the eyes task viewing a photo of a human s eyes and choosing which of two adjectives better describes the person s mental state versus a gender discrimination control 134 The authors found activity in orbitofrontal cortex STS and amygdala in normal subjects and found less amygdala activation and abnormal STS activation in subjects with autism A more recent PET study looked at brain activity in individuals with HFA and Asperger syndrome while viewing Heider Simmel animations see above versus a random motion control 135 In contrast to normally developing subjects those with autism showed little STS or FFA activation and less mPFC and amygdala activation Activity in extrastriate regions V3 and LO was identical across the two groups suggesting intact lower level visual processing in the subjects with autism The study also reported less functional connectivity between STS and V3 in the autism group However decreased temporal correlation between activity in STS and V3 would be expected simply from the lack of an evoked response in STS to intent laden animations in subjects with autism A more informative analysis would be to compute functional connectivity after regressing out evoked responses from all time series A subsequent study using the incongruent congruent gaze shift paradigm described above found that in high functioning adults with autism posterior STS pSTS activation was undifferentiated while they watched a human shift gaze toward a target and then toward adjacent empty space 136 The lack of additional STS processing in the incongruent state may suggest that these subjects fail to form an expectation of what the actor should do given contextual information or that feedback about the violation of this expectation doesn t reach STS Both explanations involve an impairment or deficit in the ability to link eye gaze shifts with intentional explanations This study also found a significant anticorrelation between STS activation in the incongruent congruent contrast and social subscale score on the Autism Diagnostic Interview Revised but not scores on the other subscales An fMRI study demonstrated that the right temporoparietal junction rTPJ of higher functioning adults with autism was not more selectively activated for mentalizing judgments when compared to physical judgments about self and other 137 rTPJ selectivity for mentalizing was also related to individual variation on clinical measures of social impairment individuals whose rTPJ was increasingly more active for mentalizing compared to physical judgments were less socially impaired while those who showed little to no difference in response to mentalizing or physical judgments were the most socially impaired This evidence builds on work in typical development that suggests rTPJ is critical for representing mental state information irrespective of whether it is about oneself or others It also points to an explanation at the neural level for the pervasive mind blindness difficulties in autism that are evident throughout the lifespan 138 In schizophrenia Edit The brain regions associated with theory of mind include the superior temporal gyrus STS the temporoparietal junction TPJ the medial prefrontal cortex mPFC the precuneus and the amygdala 139 The reduced activity in the mPFC of individuals with schizophrenia is associated with theory of mind deficit and may explain impairments in social function among people with schizophrenia 140 Increased neural activity in mPFC is related to better perspective taking emotion management and increased social functioning 140 Disrupted brain activities in areas related to theory of mind may increase social stress or disinterest in social interaction and contribute to the social dysfunction associated with schizophrenia 140 Practical validity EditMain article Collective intelligenceGroup member average scores of theory of mind abilities measured with the Reading the Mind in the Eyes test 141 RME are possibly drivers of successful group performance 142 High group average scores on the RME are correlated with the collective intelligence factor c defined as a group s ability to perform a wide range of mental tasks 142 143 a group intelligence measure similar to the g factor for general individual intelligence RME is a theory of mind test for adults 141 that shows sufficient test retest reliability 144 and constantly differentiates control groups from individuals with functional autism or Asperger syndrome 141 It is one of the most widely accepted and well validated tests for theory of mind abilities within adults 145 Evolution EditThe evolutionary origin of theory of mind remains obscure While many theories make claims about its role in the development of human language and social cognition few of them specify in detail any evolutionary neurophysiological precursors One theory claims that theory of mind has its roots in two defensive reactions immobilization stress and tonic immobility which are implicated in the handling of stressful encounters and also figure prominently in mammalian childrearing practices 146 Their combined effect seems capable of producing many of the hallmarks of theory of mind such as eye contact gaze following inhibitory control and intentional attributions Non human EditSee also Animal consciousness and Theory of mind in animals An open question is whether non human animals have a genetic endowment and social environment that allows them to acquire a theory of mind like human children do 12 This is a contentious issue because of the difficulty of inferring from animal behavior the existence of thinking or of particular thoughts or the existence of a concept of self or self awareness consciousness and qualia One difficulty with non human studies of theory of mind is the lack of sufficient numbers of naturalistic observations giving insight into what the evolutionary pressures might be on a species development of theory of mind Non human research still has a major place in this field It is especially useful in illuminating which nonverbal behaviors signify components of theory of mind and in pointing to possible stepping points in the evolution of that aspect of social cognition While it is difficult to study human like theory of mind and mental states in species of whose potential mental states we have an incomplete understanding researchers can focus on simpler components of more complex capabilities For example many researchers focus on animals understanding of intention gaze perspective or knowledge of what another being has seen A study that looked at understanding of intention in orangutans chimpanzees and children showed that all three species understood the difference between accidental and intentional acts 26 Individuals exhibit theory of mind by extrapolating another s internal mental states from their observable behavior So one challenge in this line of research is to distinguish this from more run of the mill stimulus response learning with the other s observable behavior being the stimulus Recently may be outdated as of March 2022 most non human theory of mind research has focused on monkeys and great apes who are of most interest in the study of the evolution of human social cognition Other studies relevant to attributions theory of mind have been conducted using plovers 147 and dogs 148 which show preliminary evidence of understanding attention one precursor of theory of mind in others There has been some controversy over the interpretation of evidence purporting to show theory of mind ability or inability in animals 149 For example Povinelli et al 150 presented chimpanzees with the choice of two experimenters from whom to request food one who had seen where food was hidden and one who by virtue of one of a variety of mechanisms having a bucket or bag over his head a blindfold over his eyes or being turned away from the baiting does not know and can only guess They found that the animals failed in most cases to differentially request food from the knower By contrast Hare Call and Tomasello found that subordinate chimpanzees were able to use the knowledge state of dominant rival chimpanzees to determine which container of hidden food they approached 49 William Field and Sue Savage Rumbaugh believe that bonobos have developed theory of mind and cite their communications with a captive bonobo Kanzi as evidence 151 In one experiment ravens Corvus corax took into account visual access of unseen conspecifics The researchers argued that ravens can generalize from their own perceptual experience to infer the possibility of being seen 152 Evolutionary anthropologist Christopher Krupenye studied the existence of theory of mind and particularly false beliefs in non human primates 153 Keren Haroush and Ziv Williams outlined the case for a group of neurons in primates brains that uniquely predicted the choice selection of their interacting partner These primates neurons located in the anterior cingulate cortex of rhesus monkeys were observed using single unit recording while the monkeys played a variant of the iterative prisoner s dilemma game 154 By identifying cells that represent the yet unknown intentions of a game partner Haroush amp Williams study supports the idea that theory of mind may be a fundamental and generalized process and suggests that anterior cingulate cortex neurons may act to complement the function of mirror neurons during social interchange 155 See also EditAttribution bias Cephalopod intelligence Cetacean intelligence Eliminative materialism Empathy Grounding in communication Intentional stance Joint attention Mental body Mentalization Mini SEA Origin of language Perspective taking Quantum mind Relational frame theory Self awareness Social neuroscience Embodied cognition Space mapping The Mind of an Ape Turing test Type physicalism Interpersonal accuracyReferences Edit Apperly Ian A Butterfill Stephen A 2009 Do humans have two systems to track beliefs and belief like states Psychological Review 116 4 953 970 doi 10 1037 a0016923 PMID 19839692 a b c d e Baron Cohen Simon 1991 Precursors to a theory of mind Understanding attention in others in Whiten Andrew ed Natural theories of mind evolution development and simulation of everyday mindreading Oxford UK Cambridge Massachusetts B Blackwell pp 233 251 ISBN 9780631171942 Gernsbacher Morton Ann Yergeau Melanie 2019 12 09 Empirical failures of the claim that autistic people lack a theory of mind Archives of Scientific Psychology American Psychological Association 7 1 102 118 doi 10 1037 arc0000067 ISSN 2169 3269 PMC 6959478 PMID 31938672 Supporting documentation Gernsbacher Morton Ann 2018 Critical Review of Autism and Theory and Mind A Tech Report doi 10 17605 OSF IO 3R2QY via Open Science Framework See the review and meta analyses by Morton Ann Gernsbacher regarding many failed replications of classic theory of mind studies 3 Bora Emre Kose Sezen 2016 07 18 Meta analysis of theory of mind in anorexia nervosa and bulimia nervosa A specific Impairment of cognitive perspective taking in anorexia nervosa International Journal of Eating Disorders 49 8 739 740 doi 10 1002 eat 22572 hdl 11343 291969 ISSN 0276 3478 PMID 27425037 a b Korkmaz Baris May 2011 Theory of mind and neurodevelopmental disorders of childhood Pediatric Research New York City Springer Nature 69 5 Pt 2 101R 8R doi 10 1203 PDR 0b013e318212c177 PMID 21289541 S2CID 2675335 Sanvicente Vieira Breno Kluwe Schiavon Bruno Corcoran Rhiannon Grassi Oliveira Rodrigo 1 March 2017 Theory of Mind Impairments in Women With Cocaine Addiction Journal of Studies on Alcohol and Drugs New Brunswick New Jersey Rutgers University 78 2 258 267 doi 10 15288 jsad 2017 78 258 PMID 28317506 a b Uekermann Jennifer Daum Irene May 2008 Social cognition in alcoholism a link to prefrontal cortex dysfunction Addiction London England Wiley Blackwell 103 5 726 35 doi 10 1111 j 1360 0443 2008 02157 x PMID 18412750 Ieong Hada Fong ha Yuan Zhen April 2018 Emotion recognition and its relation to prefrontal function and network in heroin plus nicotine dependence a pilot study Neurophotonics Bellingham Washington SPIE 5 2 025011 doi 10 1117 1 NPh 5 2 025011 PMC 5993953 PMID 29901032 Gernsbacher Morton Ann Yergeau Melanie 2019 Empirical Failures of the Claim That Autistic People Lack a Theory of Mind Archives of Scientific Psychology 7 1 102 118 doi 10 1037 arc0000067 ISSN 2169 3269 PMC 6959478 PMID 31938672 Vollm Birgit A 1 January 2006 Neuronal correlates of theory of mind and empathy A functional magnetic resonance imaging study in a nonverbal task NeuroImage 29 1 90 98 doi 10 1016 j neuroimage 2005 07 022 ISSN 1053 8119 PMID 16122944 S2CID 6659365 a b c d Shahaeian Ameneh Peterson Candida C Slaughter Virginia Wellman Henry M 2011 Culture and the sequence of steps in theory of mind development Developmental Psychology 47 5 1239 1247 doi 10 1037 a0023899 PMID 21639620 a b c d Premack David Woodruff Guy December 1978 Does the chimpanzee have a theory of mind Behavioral and Brain Sciences 1 4 515 526 doi 10 1017 S0140525X00076512 Bruner J S 1981 Intention in the structure of action and interaction In L P Lipsitt amp C K Rovee Collier Eds Advances in infancy research Vol 1 pp 41 56 Norwood New Jersey Ablex Publishing Corporation Gordon R M 1996 Radical simulationism In P Carruthers amp P K Smith Eds Theories of theories of mind Cambridge Cambridge University Press Courtin C 2000 The impact of sign language on the cognitive development of deaf children The case of theories of mind Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education 5 3 266 276 doi 10 1093 deafed 5 3 266 PMID 15454505 Courtin C Melot A M 2005 Metacognitive development of deaf children Lessons from the appearance reality and false belief tasks Developmental Science 8 1 16 25 doi 10 1111 j 1467 7687 2005 00389 x PMID 15647063 Macaulay C E Ford R M 2013 Family influences on the cognitive development of profoundly deaf children Exploring the effects of socioeconomic status and siblings Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education 4 18 545 562 doi 10 1093 deafed ent019 PMID 23614903 Retrieved 18 May 2021 Demetriou A Mouyi A amp Spanoudis G 2010 The development of mental processing Nesselroade J R 2010 Methods in the study of life span human development Issues and answers In W F Overton Ed Biology cognition and methods across the life span Volume 1 of the Handbook of life span development pp 36 55 Editor in chief R M Lerner Hoboken New Jersey Wiley de Waal Franz B M 2007 Commiserating Mice Scientific American 24 June 2007 Hynes Catherine A Baird Abigail A Grafton Scott T 2006 Differential role of the orbital frontal lobe in emotional versus cognitive perspective taking Neuropsychologia 44 3 374 383 doi 10 1016 j neuropsychologia 2005 06 011 PMID 16112148 S2CID 13159903 Hayes S C Barnes Holmes D amp Roche B 2001 Relational frame theory A post Skinnerian account of human language and cognition New York Kluwer Academic Plenum Rehfeldt R A and Barnes Holmes Y 2009 Derived Relational Responding Applications for learners with autism and other developmental disabilities Oakland California New Harbinger McHugh L amp Stewart I 2012 The self and perspective taking Contributions and applications from modern behavioral science Oakland California New Harbinger Carruthers P 1996 Simulation and self knowledge a defence of the theory theory In P Carruthers amp P K Smith Eds Theories of theories of mind Cambridge Cambridge University Press Dennett D 1987 The Intentional Stance Cambridge MIT Press Fox Eric Functional Contextualism Association for Contextual Behavioral Science Retrieved March 29 2014 Dennett Daniel C 1987 Reprint of Intentional systems in cognitive ethology The Panglossian paradigm defended to p 260 The Brain and Behavioral Sciences 6 3 343 390 doi 10 1017 s0140525x00016393 S2CID 32108464 a b Call J Tomasello M 1998 Distinguishing intentional from accidental actions in orangutans Pongo pygmaeus chimpanzees Pan troglodytes and human children Homo sapiens Journal of Comparative Psychology 112 2 192 206 doi 10 1037 0735 7036 112 2 192 PMID 9642787 a b Meltzoff A 1995 Understanding the intentions of others Re enactment of intended acts by 18 month old children Developmental Psychology 31 5 838 850 doi 10 1037 0012 1649 31 5 838 PMC 4137788 PMID 25147406 Gagliardi JL et al 1995 Seeing and knowing Knowledge attribution versus stimulus control in adult humans Homo sapiens Journal of Comparative Psychology 109 2 107 114 doi 10 1037 0735 7036 109 2 107 PMID 7758287 Meltzoff Andrew N 2003 Imitation as a mechanism of social cognition Origins of empathy theory of mind and the representation of action in Goswami Usha ed Blackwell handbook of childhood cognitive development Malden Massachusetts Blackwell Publishers pp 6 25 ISBN 9780631218401 Horowitz Alexandra C 2003 Do humans ape or Do apes human Imitation and intention in humans and other animals Journal of Comparative Psychology 17 3 325 336 CiteSeerX 10 1 1 688 3721 doi 10 1037 0735 7036 117 3 325 PMID 14498809 a b Laghi Fiorenzo Lonigro Antonia Levanto Simona Ferraro Maurizio Baumgartner Emma Baiocco Roberto 2016 The Role of Nice and Nasty Theory of Mind in Teacher Selected Peer Models for Adolescents with Autism Spectrum Disorders Measurement and Evaluation in Counseling and Development 49 3 207 216 doi 10 1177 0748175615596784 S2CID 147180970 Etel Evren Yagmurlu Bilge 2015 Social Competence Theory of Mind and Executive Function in Institution reared Turkish Children International Journal of Behavioral Development 39 6 519 529 doi 10 1177 0165025414556095 S2CID 147324302 Milligan Karen Astington Janet Wilde Dack Lisa Ain March April 2007 Language and theory of mind meta analysis of the relation between language ability and false belief understanding Child Development 78 2 622 646 doi 10 1111 j 1467 8624 2007 01018 x PMID 17381794 Dan Sperber 2001 Relevance communication and cognition Wilson Deirdre 2nd ed Oxford Blackwell Publishers ISBN 978 0631198789 OCLC 32589501 Tauzin Tibor Gergely Gyorgy 2018 06 22 Communicative mind reading in preverbal infants Scientific Reports 8 1 9534 Bibcode 2018NatSR 8 9534T doi 10 1038 s41598 018 27804 4 ISSN 2045 2322 PMC 6015048 PMID 29934630 a b Miller Carol A May 2006 Developmental relationships between language and theory of mind American Journal of Speech Language Pathology 15 2 142 154 doi 10 1044 1058 0360 2006 014 PMID 16782686 Ruffman Ted Slade Lance Crowe Elena May June 2002 The relation between children s and mothers mental state language and theory of mind understanding Child Development 73 3 734 751 doi 10 1111 1467 8624 00435 PMID 12038548 Pdf Woolfe Tyron Want Stephen C Siegal Michael May June 2002 Signposts to development theory of mind in deaf children Child Development 73 3 768 778 CiteSeerX 10 1 1 70 4337 doi 10 1111 1467 8624 00437 PMID 12038550 Pdf Moore Chris Pure Kiran Furrow David June 1990 Children s understanding of the modal expression of speaker certainty and uncertainty and its relation to the development of a representational theory of mind Child Development 61 3 722 730 doi 10 1111 j 1467 8624 1990 tb02815 x JSTOR 1130957 PMID 2364747 de Villiers Jill G Pyers Jennie E January March 2002 Complements to cognition a longitudinal study of the relationship between complex syntax and false belief understanding Cognitive Development 17 1 1037 1060 doi 10 1016 S0885 2014 02 00073 4 Saxe R Kanwisher N August 2003 People thinking about thinking people The role of the temporo parietal junction in theory of mind NeuroImage 19 4 1835 42 doi 10 1016 S1053 8119 03 00230 1 PMID 12948738 S2CID 206118958 Ian Apperly 2011 Mindreaders the cognitive basis of theory of mind Hove Psychology Press ISBN 9780203833926 OCLC 705929873 Keysar Boaz Lin Shuhong Barr Dale J 2003 08 01 Limits on theory of mind use in adults Cognition 89 1 25 41 doi 10 1016 S0010 0277 03 00064 7 ISSN 0010 0277 PMID 12893123 S2CID 8523033 Royzman Edward B Cassidy Kimberly Wright Baron Jonathan 2003 I know you know Epistemic egocentrism in children and adults Review of General Psychology 7 1 38 65 doi 10 1037 1089 2680 7 1 38 ISSN 1089 2680 S2CID 197665718 Brown Schmidt Sarah 2009 10 01 The role of executive function in perspective taking during online language comprehension Psychonomic Bulletin amp Review 16 5 893 900 doi 10 3758 PBR 16 5 893 ISSN 1531 5320 PMID 19815795 Epley Nicholas Keysar Boaz Van Boven Leaf Gilovich Thomas 2004 Perspective Taking as Egocentric Anchoring and Adjustment Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 87 3 327 339 CiteSeerX 10 1 1 315 8009 doi 10 1037 0022 3514 87 3 327 ISSN 1939 1315 PMID 15382983 Kovacs Agnes Teglas Erno Endress Ansgar Denis 2010 12 24 The Social Sense Susceptibility to Others Beliefs in Human Infants and Adults Science 330 6012 1830 1834 Bibcode 2010Sci 330 1830K doi 10 1126 science 1190792 ISSN 0036 8075 PMID 21205671 S2CID 2908352 Samson Dana Apperly Ian A Braithwaite Jason J Andrews Benjamin J Bodley Scott Sarah E 2010 Seeing it their way Evidence for rapid and involuntary computation of what other people see Journal of Experimental Psychology Human Perception and Performance 36 5 1255 1266 doi 10 1037 a0018729 ISSN 1939 1277 PMID 20731512 a b Heyes Celia 2014 Submentalizing I Am Not Really Reading Your Mind Current Perspectives on Psychological Science 9 2 131 143 doi 10 1177 1745691613518076 PMID 26173251 S2CID 206778161 a b Hare B Call J Tomasello M 2001 Do chimpanzees know what conspecifics know and do not know Animal Behaviour 61 1 139 151 doi 10 1006 anbe 2000 1518 PMID 11170704 S2CID 3402554 Apperly Ian A Butterfill Stephen A 2009 Do humans have two systems to track beliefs and belief like states Psychological Review 116 4 953 970 CiteSeerX 10 1 1 377 3254 doi 10 1037 a0016923 ISSN 1939 1471 PMID 19839692 Kahneman Daniel 2011 10 25 Thinking fast and slow 1st ed New York ISBN 9780374275631 OCLC 706020998 Carruthers Peter 2017 03 01 Mindreading in adults evaluating two systems views Synthese 194 3 673 688 doi 10 1007 s11229 015 0792 3 ISSN 1573 0964 S2CID 6049635 Henry Julie D Phillips Louise H Ruffman Ted Bailey Phoebe E 2013 A meta analytic review of age differences in theory of mind Psychology and Aging 28 3 826 839 doi 10 1037 a0030677 PMID 23276217 Reiter Andrea M F Kanske Philipp Eppinger Ben Li Shu Chen 2017 09 08 The Aging of the Social Mind Differential Effects on Components of Social Understanding Scientific Reports 7 1 11046 Bibcode 2017NatSR 711046R doi 10 1038 s41598 017 10669 4 ISSN 2045 2322 PMC 5591220 PMID 28887491 Stietz Julia Pollerhoff Lena Kurtz Marcel Li Shu Chen Reiter Andrea M F Kanske Philipp 2021 The ageing of the social mind replicating the preservation of socio affective and the decline of socio cognitive processes in old age Royal Society Open Science 8 8 210641 Bibcode 2021RSOS 810641S doi 10 1098 rsos 210641 PMC 8386516 PMID 34457343 Kalbe Elke 2010 Dissociating Cognitive from Affective Theory of Mind A TMS Study Cortex 46 6 769 780 doi 10 1016 j cortex 2009 07 010 PMID 19709653 S2CID 16815856 Duval Celine Piolino Pascale Benjanin Alexandre Eustache Francis Desgranges Beatrice 2011 Age Effects on Different Components of Theory of Mind Consciousness and Cognition 20 3 627 642 doi 10 1016 j concog 2010 10 025 PMID 21111637 S2CID 7877493 a b Wellman Henry M Liu David 2004 03 01 Scaling of Theory of Mind Tasks Child Development 75 2 523 541 doi 10 1111 j 1467 8624 2004 00691 x ISSN 1467 8624 PMID 15056204 Callaghan T Rochat P Lillard A Claux M L Odden H Itakura S Singh S 2005 Synchrony in the onset of mental state reasoning Evidence from five cultures Psychological Science 16 5 378 384 doi 10 1111 j 0956 7976 2005 01544 x PMID 15869697 S2CID 1183819 Wellman Henry M Fang Fuxi Liu David Zhu Liqi Liu Guoxiong 2006 Scaling of Theory of Mind Understandings in Chinese Children Psychological Science 17 12 1075 1081 doi 10 1111 j 1467 9280 2006 01830 x PMID 17201790 S2CID 18632127 the German word Umwelt means environment or surrounding world Wimmer H Perner J 1983 Beliefs about beliefs Representation and constraining function of wrong beliefs in young children s understanding of deception Cognition 13 1 103 128 doi 10 1016 0010 0277 83 90004 5 PMID 6681741 S2CID 17014009 O Brien Karen Slaughter Virginia Peterson Candida C 2011 Sibling influences on theory of mind development for children with ASD Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry 52 6 713 719 doi 10 1111 j 1469 7610 2011 02389 x PMID 21418062 retrieved 18 May 2021 a b Mitchell Peter 2011 Acquiring a theory of mind in Slater Alan Bremner J Gavin eds An introduction to developmental psychology 3rd ed Hoboken New Jersey John Wiley amp Sons Inc pp 381 406 ISBN 9781118767207 Roessler Johannes 2013 When the Wrong Answer Makes Perfect Sense How the Beliefs of Children Interact With Their Understanding of Competition Goals and the Intention of Others University of Warwick Knowledge Centre August 2014 Retrieved 2013 08 15 a b Baron Cohen Simon Leslie Alan M Frith Uta October 1985 Does the autistic child have a theory of mind PDF Cognition 21 1 37 46 doi 10 1016 0010 0277 85 90022 8 PMID 2934210 S2CID 14955234 Archived from the original PDF on 2017 09 28 Mitchell P 2011 Acquiring a Theory of Mind In Alan Slater amp Gavin Bremner eds An Introduction to Developmental Psychology Second Edition BPS Blackwell page 371 Gopnik A Aslington JW 1988 Children s understanding of representational change and its relation to the understanding of false belief and the appearance reality distinction Child Development 59 1 26 37 doi 10 2307 1130386 JSTOR 1130386 PMID 3342716 Zaitchik D 1990 When representations conflict with reality the preschooler s problem with false beliefs and false photographs Cognition 35 1 41 68 doi 10 1016 0010 0277 90 90036 J PMID 2340712 S2CID 1799960 Leslie A Thaiss L 1992 Domain specificity in conceptual development Cognition 43 3 225 51 doi 10 1016 0010 0277 92 90013 8 PMID 1643814 S2CID 17296136 Sabbagh M A Moses L J Shiverick S 2006 Executive functioning and preschoolers understanding of false beliefs false photographs and false signs Child Development 77 4 1034 1049 doi 10 1111 j 1467 8624 2006 00917 x PMID 16942504 Apperly Ian A Samson Dana Chiavarino Claudia Bickerton Wai Ling Humphreys Glyn W 2007 05 01 Testing the domain specificity of a theory of mind deficit in brain injured patients Evidence for consistent performance on non verbal reality unknown false belief and false photograph tasks Cognition 103 2 300 321 doi 10 1016 j cognition 2006 04 012 ISSN 0010 0277 PMID 16781700 S2CID 7377954 Woodward Infants selectively encode the goal object of an actor s reach Cognition 1998 a b Leslie A M 1991 Theory of mind impairment in autism In A Whiten Ed Natural theories of mind Evolution development and simulation of everyday mindreading pp 63 77 Oxford Basil Blackwell Poulin Dubois Diane Sodian Beate Metz Ulrike Tilden Joanne Schoeppner Barbara 2007 Out of Sight is Not Out of Mind Developmental Changes in Infants Understanding of Visual Perception During the Second Year Journal of Cognition and Development 8 4 401 425 doi 10 1080 15248370701612951 S2CID 143291042 Onishi K H Baillargeon R 2005 Do 15 Month Old Infants Understand False Beliefs Science 308 5719 255 8 Bibcode 2005Sci 308 255O doi 10 1126 science 1107621 PMC 3357322 PMID 15821091 Kovacs Agnes Melinda Teglas Erno Endress Ansgar Denis 2010 12 24 The Social Sense Susceptibility to Others Beliefs in Human Infants and Adults Science 330 6012 1830 1834 Bibcode 2010Sci 330 1830K doi 10 1126 science 1190792 ISSN 0036 8075 PMID 21205671 S2CID 2908352 Poulin Dubois Diane Chow Virginia 2009 The effect of a looker s past reliability on infants reasoning about beliefs Developmental Psychology 45 6 1576 82 doi 10 1037 a0016715 PMID 19899915 S2CID 6916359 How the Body Shapes the Way We Think A New View of Intelligence Rolf Pfeifer and Josh Bongard October 2006 Moore S 2002 Asperger Syndrome and the Elementary School Experience Shawnee Mission Kansas Autism Asperger Publishing Company Baker J 2003 Social Skills Training for children and adolescents with Asperger Syndrome and Social Communication Problems Mission Kansas Autism Asperger Publishing Company Peterson Candida et al 2016 Peer Social Skills and Theory of Mind in Children with Autism Deafness or Typical Development Developmental Psychology 52 1 46 57 doi 10 1037 a0039833 PMID 26524383 permanent dead link Happe FG 1995 The role of age and verbal ability in the theory of mind task performance of subjects with autism Child Development 66 3 843 55 doi 10 2307 1131954 JSTOR 1131954 PMID 7789204 Empirical Failures of the Claim That Autistic People Lack a Theory of Mind a b Baron Cohen Simon 1991 Precursors to a theory of mind Understanding attention in others in Whiten Andrew ed Natural theories of mind Evolution development and simulation of everyday mindreading Cambridge Massachusetts Basil Blackwell pp 233 251 ISBN 9780631171942 a b Leslie Alan M 1991 Theory of mind impairment in autism in Whiten Andrew ed Natural theories of mind Evolution development and simulation of everyday mindreading Cambridge Massachusetts Basil Blackwell ISBN 9780631171942 Hobson R P 1995 Autism and the development of mind Hillsdale N J Lawrence Erlbaum ISBN 9780863772399 Dapretto M et al 2006 Understanding emotions in others mirror neuron dysfunction in children with autism spectrum disorders Nature Neuroscience 9 1 28 30 doi 10 1038 nn1611 PMC 3713227 PMID 16327784 Yergeau Melanie 2013 Clinically Significant Disturbance On Theorists Who Theorize Theory of Mind Disability Studies Quarterly 33 4 doi 10 18061 dsq v33i4 3876 I will say something about autism and someone will assert that nothing I ve said matters or applies to anything Because I am self centered Because I do not have the capacity to intuit other minds or to understand the life experiences of others Tine Michele Lucariello Joan 2012 Unique Theory of Mind Differentiation in Children with Autism and Asperger Syndrome Autism Research and Treatment 2012 1 11 doi 10 1155 2012 505393 PMC 3420603 PMID 22934174 Astington J W 2003 Sometimes necessary never sufficient False belief understanding and social competence Individual Differences in Theory of Mind Implications for Typical and Atypical Development 13 38 Chung K Reavis S Mosconi M Drewry J Matthews T Tasse M J 2007 Peer mediated social skills training program for young children with high functioning autism Research in Developmental Disabilities 28 4 423 436 doi 10 1016 j ridd 2006 05 002 PMID 16901676 Fletcher Watson Sue McConnell Fiona Manola Eirini McConachie Helen 2014 03 21 Interventions based on the Theory of Mind cognitive model for autism spectrum disorder ASD The Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2014 3 CD008785 doi 10 1002 14651858 CD008785 pub2 ISSN 1469 493X PMC 6923148 PMID 24652601 Milton Damian E M 2012 10 01 On the ontological status of autism the double empathy problem Disability amp Society 27 6 883 887 doi 10 1080 09687599 2012 710008 ISSN 0968 7599 S2CID 54047060 Crompton Catherine J Sharp Martha Axbey Harriet Fletcher Watson Sue Flynn Emma G Ropar Danielle 2020 10 23 Neurotype Matching but Not Being Autistic Influences Self and Observer Ratings of Interpersonal Rapport Frontiers in Psychology 11 586171 doi 10 3389 fpsyg 2020 586171 ISSN 1664 1078 PMC 7645034 PMID 33192918 Sucksmith E Allison C Baron Cohen S Chakrabarti B Hoekstra R A 2013 01 01 Empathy and emotion recognition in people with autism first degree relatives and controls Neuropsychologia 51 1 98 105 doi 10 1016 j neuropsychologia 2012 11 013 ISSN 0028 3932 PMC 6345368 PMID 23174401 Chown Nicholas 2014 11 26 More on the ontological status of autism and double empathy Disability amp Society 29 10 1672 1676 doi 10 1080 09687599 2014 949625 ISSN 0968 7599 S2CID 143826899 a b c Sprong M Schothorst P Vos E Hox J Van Engeland H 2007 Theory of mind in schizophrenia British Journal of Psychiatry 191 1 5 13 doi 10 1192 bjp bp 107 035899 PMID 17602119 a b c Ng R Fish S Granholm E 2015 Insight and theory of mind in schizophrenia Psychiatry Research 225 1 2 169 174 doi 10 1016 j psychres 2014 11 010 PMC 4269286 PMID 25467703 Konstantakopoulos G Ploumpidis D Oulis P Patrikelis P Nikitopoulou S Papadimitriou G N David A S 2014 The relationship between insight and theory of mind in schizophrenia Schizophrenia Research 152 1 217 222 doi 10 1016 j schres 2013 11 022 PMID 24321712 S2CID 9566263 Cassetta B Goghari V 2014 Theory of mind reasoning in schizophrenia patients and non psychotic relatives Psychiatry Research 218 1 2 12 19 doi 10 1016 j psychres 2014 03 043 PMID 24745472 S2CID 13944284 a b c d Mehta U M Bhagyavathi H D Kumar C N Thirthalli J Gangadhar B N 2014 Cognitive deconstruction of parenting in schizophrenia The role of theory of mind Australian amp New Zealand Journal of Psychiatry 48 3 249 258 doi 10 1177 0004867413500350 PMID 23928275 S2CID 206399183 Lee L et al 2005 Mental state decoding abilities in clinical depression Journal of Affective Disorders 86 2 3 247 58 doi 10 1016 j jad 2005 02 007 PMID 15935244 Harkness Kate L Jacobson Jill A Duong David Sabbagh Mark A April 2010 Mental state decoding in past major depression Effect of sad versus happy mood induction Cognition amp Emotion 24 3 497 513 doi 10 1080 02699930902750249 ISSN 0269 9931 S2CID 40376607 Harkness K L et al 2005 Enhanced accuracy of mental state decoding in dysphoric college students Cognition and Emotion 19 7 999 1025 doi 10 1080 02699930541000110 S2CID 144573653 Harkness K L et al 2011 Maternal history of depression is associated with enhanced theory of mind ability in depressed and non depressed women Psychiatry Research 189 1 91 96 doi 10 1016 j psychres 2011 06 007 PMID 21733579 S2CID 22903698 Nilsson Kristine Kahr de Lopez Kristine Jensen January February 2016 Theory of mind in children with specific language impairment A systematic review and meta analysis Child Development 87 1 143 153 doi 10 1111 cdev 12462 PMID 26582261 Gallagher Helen L Frith Christopher D 2003 Functional imaging of theory of mind Trends in Cognitive Sciences 7 2 77 83 CiteSeerX 10 1 1 319 778 doi 10 1016 S1364 6613 02 00025 6 PMID 12584026 S2CID 14873867 Schurz Matthias Radua Joaquim Tholen Matthias G Maliske Lara Margulies Daniel S Mars Rogier B Sallet Jerome Kanske Philipp March 2021 Toward a hierarchical model of social cognition A neuroimaging meta analysis and integrative review of empathy and theory of mind Psychological Bulletin 147 3 293 327 doi 10 1037 bul0000303 hdl 2066 226714 ISSN 1939 1455 PMID 33151703 S2CID 226272359 Saxe R Kanwisher N 2003 People thinking about thinking peopleThe role of the temporo parietal junction in theory of mind NeuroImage 19 4 1835 42 doi 10 1016 S1053 8119 03 00230 1 PMID 12948738 S2CID 206118958 Saxe Rebecca Schulz Laura E Jiang Yuhong V 2006 Reading minds versus following rules Dissociating theory of mind and executive control in the brain Social Neuroscience 1 3 4 284 98 CiteSeerX 10 1 1 392 1433 doi 10 1080 17470910601000446 PMID 18633794 S2CID 10733339 Saxe R Powell L J 2006 It s the Thought That Counts Specific Brain Regions for One Component of Theory of Mind Psychological Science 17 8 692 9 doi 10 1111 j 1467 9280 2006 01768 x PMID 16913952 S2CID 4656022 a b Decety J Lamm C 2007 The Role of the Right Temporoparietal Junction in Social Interaction How Low Level Computational Processes Contribute to Meta Cognition The Neuroscientist 13 6 580 93 doi 10 1177 1073858407304654 PMID 17911216 S2CID 37026268 Mitchell J P 2007 Activity in Right Temporo Parietal Junction is Not Selective for Theory of Mind Cerebral Cortex 18 2 262 71 doi 10 1093 cercor bhm051 PMID 17551089 Scholz Jonathan Triantafyllou Christina Whitfield Gabrieli Susan Brown Emery N Saxe Rebecca 2009 Lauwereyns Jan ed Distinct Regions of Right Temporo Parietal Junction Are Selective for Theory of Mind and Exogenous Attention PLOS ONE 4 3 e4869 Bibcode 2009PLoSO 4 4869S doi 10 1371 journal pone 0004869 PMC 2653721 PMID 19290043 Jamali Mohsen Grannan Benjamin L Fedorenko Evelina Saxe Rebecca Baez Mendoza Raymundo Williams Ziv M 2021 Single neuronal predictions of others beliefs in humans Nature 591 7851 610 614 Bibcode 2021Natur 591 610J doi 10 1038 s41586 021 03184 0 PMC 7990696 PMID 33505022 Castelli Fulvia Happe Francesca Frith Uta Frith Chris 2000 Movement and Mind A Functional Imaging Study of Perception and Interpretation of Complex Intentional Movement Patterns NeuroImage 12 3 314 25 doi 10 1006 nimg 2000 0612 PMID 10944414 S2CID 22294793 Martin Alex Weisberg Jill 2003 Neural Foundations for Understanding Social and Mechanical Concepts Cognitive Neuropsychology 20 3 6 575 87 doi 10 1080 02643290342000005 PMC 1450338 PMID 16648880 Schultz R T Grelotti D J Klin A Kleinman J Van Der Gaag C Marois R Skudlarski P 2003 The role of the fusiform face area in social cognition Implications for the pathobiology of autism Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B Biological Sciences 358 1430 415 427 doi 10 1098 rstb 2002 1208 PMC 1693125 PMID 12639338 Schultz Johannes Friston Karl J O Doherty John Wolpert Daniel M Frith Chris D 2005 Activation in Posterior Superior Temporal Sulcus Parallels Parameter Inducing the Percept of Animacy Neuron 45 4 625 35 doi 10 1016 j neuron 2004 12 052 PMID 15721247 S2CID 9435424 Allison Truett Puce Aina McCarthy Gregory 2000 Social perception from visual cues Role of the STS region Trends in Cognitive Sciences 4 7 267 278 doi 10 1016 S1364 6613 00 01501 1 PMID 10859571 S2CID 11942671 Morris James P Pelphrey Kevin A McCarthy Gregory 2008 Perceived causality influences brain activity evoked by biological motion Social Neuroscience 3 1 16 25 doi 10 1080 17470910701476686 PMID 18633843 S2CID 24726037 Pelphrey Kevin A Morris James P McCarthy Gregory 2004 Grasping the Intentions of Others The Perceived Intentionality of an Action Influences Activity in the Superior Temporal Sulcus during Social Perception Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience 16 10 1706 16 doi 10 1162 0898929042947900 PMID 15701223 S2CID 207576449 Mosconi Matthew W Mack Peter B McCarthy Gregory Pelphrey Kevin A 2005 Taking an intentional stance on eye gaze shifts A functional neuroimaging study of social perception in children NeuroImage 27 1 247 52 doi 10 1016 j neuroimage 2005 03 027 PMID 16023041 S2CID 25792636 Brass Marcel Schmitt Ruth M Spengler Stephanie Gergely Gyorgy 2007 Investigating Action Understanding Inferential Processes versus Action Simulation Current Biology 17 24 2117 21 doi 10 1016 j cub 2007 11 057 PMID 18083518 S2CID 14318837 a b Saxe R Xiao D K Kovacs G Perrett D I Kanwisher N 2004 A region of right posterior superior temporal sulcus responds to observed intentional actions Neuropsychologia 42 11 1435 46 doi 10 1016 j neuropsychologia 2004 04 015 PMID 15246282 S2CID 15079818 Rowe Andrea D Bullock Peter R Polkey Charles E Morris Robin G 2001 Theory of mind impairments and their relationship to executive functioning following frontal lobe excisions Brain 124 3 600 616 doi 10 1093 brain 124 3 600 PMID 11222459 Samson Dana Apperly Ian A Chiavarino Claudia Humphreys Glyn W 2004 Left temporoparietal junction is necessary for representing someone else s belief Nature Neuroscience 7 5 499 500 doi 10 1038 nn1223 PMID 15077111 S2CID 9818818 Stone Valerie E Gerrans Philip 2006 What s domain specific about theory of mind Social Neuroscience 1 3 4 309 19 doi 10 1080 17470910601029221 PMID 18633796 S2CID 24446270 Rizzolatti Giacomo Craighero Laila 2004 The Mirror Neuron System Annual Review of Neuroscience 27 1 169 92 doi 10 1146 annurev neuro 27 070203 144230 PMID 15217330 S2CID 1729870 Iacoboni Marco Molnar Szakacs Istvan Gallese Vittorio Buccino Giovanni Mazziotta John C Rizzolatti Giacomo 2005 Grasping the Intentions of Others with One s Own Mirror Neuron System PLOS Biology 3 3 e79 doi 10 1371 journal pbio 0030079 PMC 1044835 PMID 15736981 Gallese V Goldman A 1998 Mirror neurons and the simulation theory of mind reading Trends in Cognitive Sciences 2 12 493 501 doi 10 1016 S1364 6613 98 01262 5 PMID 21227300 S2CID 10108122 Frith U Frith C D 2003 Development and neurophysiology of mentalizing Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B Biological Sciences 358 1431 459 73 doi 10 1098 rstb 2002 1218 PMC 1693139 PMID 12689373 Meltzoff A N Decety J 2003 What imitation tells us about social cognition A rapprochement between developmental psychology and cognitive neuroscience Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B Biological Sciences 358 1431 491 500 doi 10 1098 rstb 2002 1261 PMC 1351349 PMID 12689375 Sommerville Jessica A Decety Jean 2006 Weaving the fabric of social interaction Articulating developmental psychology and cognitive neuroscience in the domain of motor cognition Psychonomic Bulletin amp Review 13 2 179 200 doi 10 3758 BF03193831 PMID 16892982 S2CID 14689479 Gallagher Shaun 2007 Simulation trouble Social Neuroscience 2 3 4 353 65 doi 10 1080 17470910601183549 PMID 18633823 S2CID 205924856 Gallagher Shaun 2008 Neural Simulation and Social Cognition Mirror Neuron Systems Mirror Neuron Systems pp 355 371 doi 10 1007 978 1 59745 479 7 16 ISBN 978 1 934115 34 3 Happe F et al 1996 Theory of mind in the brain Evidence from a PET scan study of Asperger syndrome NeuroReport 8 1 197 201 doi 10 1097 00001756 199612200 00040 hdl 21 11116 0000 0001 A166 6 PMID 9051780 S2CID 2970614 Fletcher P C et al 1995 Other minds in the brain a functional imaging study of theory of mind in story comprehension Cognition 57 2 109 128 doi 10 1016 0010 0277 95 00692 R hdl 21 11116 0000 0001 A1FA F PMID 8556839 S2CID 16321133 Baron Cohen Simon et al June 1999 Social intelligence in the normal and autistic brain an fMRI study European Journal of Neuroscience 11 6 1891 1898 doi 10 1046 j 1460 9568 1999 00621 x PMID 10336657 S2CID 9436565 Castelli F et al 2002 Autism Asperger syndrome and brain mechanisms for the attribution of mental states to animated shapes Brain 125 Pt 8 1839 1849 doi 10 1093 brain awf189 PMID 12135974 Pelphrey K A et al 2005 Neural basis of eye gaze processing deficits in autism Brain 128 Pt 5 1038 1048 doi 10 1093 brain awh404 PMID 15758039 Lombardo MV Chakrabarti B Bullmore ET Baron Cohen S et al MRC AIMS Consortium 2011 Specialization of right temporo parietal junction for mentalizing and its relation to social deficits in autism NeuroImage 56 3 1832 1838 doi 10 1016 j neuroimage 2011 02 067 PMID 21356316 S2CID 14782731 Senju A Southgate V White S Frith U 2009 Mindblind eyes an absence of spontaneous theory of mind in Asperger syndrome PDF Science 325 5942 883 885 Bibcode 2009Sci 325 883S doi 10 1126 science 1176170 PMID 19608858 S2CID 9747918 Pedersen A Koelkebeck K Brandt M Wee M Kueppers K A Kugel H Kohl W Bauer J Ohrmann P 2012 Theory of mind in patients with schizophrenia Is mentalizing delayed Schizophrenia Research 137 1 3 224 229 doi 10 1016 j schres 2012 02 022 PMID 22406281 S2CID 3167761 a b c Dodell Feder D Tully L M Lincoln S H Hooker C I 2013 The neural basis of theory of mind and its relationship to social functioning and social anhedonia in individuals with schizophrenia NeuroImage Clinical 4 154 163 doi 10 1016 j nicl 2013 11 006 PMC 3871293 PMID 24371798 a b c Baron Cohen Simon Wheelwright Sally Hill Jacqueline Raste Yogini Plumb Ian February 2001 The Reading the Mind in the Eyes Test revised version a study with normal adults and adults with Asperger syndrome or high functioning autism PDF Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry 42 2 241 251 doi 10 1111 1469 7610 00715 PMID 11280420 a b Woolley Anita Williams Chabris Christopher F Pentland Alex Hashmi Nada Malone Thomas W 2010 10 29 Evidence for a Collective Intelligence Factor in the Performance of Human Groups Science 330 6004 686 688 Bibcode 2010Sci 330 686W doi 10 1126 science 1193147 PMID 20929725 S2CID 74579 Engel David Woolley Anita Williams Jing Lisa X Chabris Christopher F Malone Thomas W 2014 12 16 Reading the Mind in the Eyes or Reading between the Lines Theory of Mind Predicts Collective Intelligence Equally Well Online and Face To Face PLOS ONE 9 12 e115212 Bibcode 2014PLoSO 9k5212E doi 10 1371 journal pone 0115212 PMC 4267836 PMID 25514387 Hallerback Maria Unenge Lugnegard Tove Hjarthag Fredrik Gillberg Christopher 2009 The Reading the Mind in the Eyes Test test retest reliability of a Swedish version Cognitive Neuropsychiatry 14 2 127 143 doi 10 1080 13546800902901518 PMID 19370436 S2CID 28946179 Pinkham Amy E Penn David L Green Michael F Buck Benjamin Healey Kristin Harvey Philip D 2014 07 01 The Social Cognition Psychometric Evaluation Study Results of the Expert Survey and RAND Panel Schizophrenia Bulletin 40 4 813 823 doi 10 1093 schbul sbt081 PMC 4059426 PMID 23728248 Tsoukalas Ioannis 2018 Theory of Mind Towards an Evolutionary Theory Evolutionary Psychological Science 4 1 38 66 doi 10 1007 s40806 017 0112 x Ristau Carolyn A 1991 Aspects of the cognitive ethology of an injury feigning bird the piping plovers In Ristau Carolyn A ed Cognitive Ethology Essays in Honor of Donald R Griffin Hillsdale New Jersey Lawrence Erlbaum pp 91 126 ISBN 978 1 134 99085 6 Horowitz Alexandra 2008 Attention to attention in domestic dog Canis familiaris dyadic play Animal Cognition 12 1 107 18 doi 10 1007 s10071 008 0175 y PMID 18679727 S2CID 207050813 Povinelli Daniel J Vonk Jennifer 2003 Chimpanzee minds Suspiciously human Trends in Cognitive Sciences 7 4 157 160 CiteSeerX 10 1 1 494 1478 doi 10 1016 S1364 6613 03 00053 6 PMID 12691763 S2CID 3473587 Povinelli D J Nelson K E Boysen S T 1990 Inferences about guessing and knowing by chimpanzees Pan troglodytes Journal of Comparative Psychology 104 3 203 210 doi 10 1037 0735 7036 104 3 203 PMID 2225758 Hamilton Jon 8 July 2006 A Voluble Visit with Two Talking Apes NPR Retrieved 21 March 2012 Thomas Bugnyar Stephan A Reber amp Cameron Buckner 2015 Ravens attribute visual access to unseen competitors Nature Communications 7 10506 Bibcode 2016NatCo 710506B doi 10 1038 ncomms10506 PMC 4740864 PMID 26835849 Christopher Krupenye Fumihiro Kano Satoshi Hirata Josep Call Michael Tomasello 2016 Great apes anticipate that other individuals will act according to false beliefs Science 354 6308 110 114 Bibcode 2016Sci 354 110K doi 10 1126 science aaf8110 hdl 10161 13632 PMID 27846501 Haroush K Williams Z 2015 Neuronal Prediction of Opponent s Behavior during Cooperative Social Interchange in Primates Cell 160 6 1233 1245 doi 10 1016 j cell 2015 01 045 PMC 4364450 PMID 25728667 Sanfey AG Civai C Vavra P 2015 Predicting the other in cooperative interactions PDF Trends Cogn Sci 19 7 364 365 doi 10 1016 j tics 2015 05 009 PMID 26055140 S2CID 20942680 Further reading EditExcerpts taken from Davis E 2007 Mental Verbs in Nicaraguan Sign Language and the Role of Language in Theory of Mind Undergraduate senior thesis Barnard College Columbia University External links Edit Wikibooks has a book on the topic of Consciousness Eye Test Simon Baron Cohen The Computational Theory of Mind The Identity Theory of Mind Sally Anne and Smarties tests Functional Contextualism Theory of Mind article in the Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy Retrieved from https en wikipedia org w index php title Theory of mind amp oldid 1126430421, wikipedia, wiki, book, books, library,

article

, read, download, free, free download, mp3, video, mp4, 3gp, jpg, jpeg, gif, png, picture, music, song, movie, book, game, games.