Theory of mind

Theory of mind

1. action understanding develops at 9m. observe, imitate, what are your intentions, what are theirs. Rudimentary to ToM

2. definition: understanding mental states, such as beliefs, desires and knowledge, that enables us to predict and explain others behaviours. Component of empathising. Other main component, having appropriate reactions to others mental states.

   • Empathy Baron - cohen and wheelright- ven diagram between affective component (feeling appropriate emotions by seeing others emotions), cognitive (tom - understanding or appreciating what someone else might do, sympathy - feeling an emotion (part of affective compenent - but it drives you to do something)

3. Unique to humans, not shown in other primates, inveolves medial PFC, and posterior superior temporal sulcus ans well as the right temporal parietal junction

4. Development

   • develops at a young age. - 9m action understanding , 9-14 months protodeclarative pointing, 12m sensitive to where adult looks, 14m JA, 18m show concern at distress of others.

5. False Belief

   • others may have representations of the world different to yours. Others act on the basis of their beliefs. Acid test of ToM. successful reasoning about false beliefs is the only convincing evidence for the attribution of mental states of others.
   • Maxi and the chocolate bar
     • where will the child look, where do they think it is? (tom) where is it now, where was it (memory). chance, 4-5, 90% 5-6. passed memory
   • sally anne
     • children aged 4-5 TD passed
     • But, children never held false belief, smarties task, child holds false belief first. Crayons not sweets. Memory and Tom Questions. Children aged 4-5 pass.
   • Criticisms: Children pass around 4. too easy. dont test full theory of mind. ASD can pass. Second order/ higher order more difficult
     • Second order/higher order false belief tasks.
       • Ice cream truck
         • tested age 5-10. Dont respond correctly until 6-7 . 2 year lag. However, Sullivan et al (1994) over 90% 4-5 yo succeeded 2nd order when language was simplified.

6. Early development. Some claim understanding of false belief develops before 4 years.

   • Tasks are too linguistically complex. Onishi and Baillargeon (2005) actor puts toy in box, tow moves, actor reaches into box. Infants 15m look longer when adult unexpectedly got it right. Understand people should act in accordance with their beliefs.
   • Early evidenc eof ToM in word learning .
     • Brokes and Meltzoff - Infants who had better eye gaze at 10 - 11m had better language scores at 14m
     • By 15 m infants can use both a LDG and SDG to learn words. Some understanding of the intention of the teacher.
       • Baldwin 1991 - In follow in labelling (LDG) the experimenter looked at a toy the infants were looking at. In discrepent labelling (SDG) the experimenter looked at and labelled a different toy. Learn words to LDG (16-17m) SDG (18-19m). DIsplayed tendencey to make mapping errors after discrepent labling. Thus 16-19m can contribute to the social and coordination involved in JA

7. Atypical development

   • hallmark of ASD - Baron Cohen initial ToM model and emphasising / systemising Tom In ASD. 80% fail false belief. Frequently have language deficit thought to be linked to ToM
   • individual differences - variety of measures - Baron Cohen - see eyes guess emotion, IRI, EQ
     • Interpersonal reactivity index - 4 subscales 7 items. Perspective taking "point of view of others", Fantasy "imagination", Empathetic concern "others orientated feelings of sympathy", Personal distress "self oriented feelings of distress"
     • Empathy Quotient 60 item questionaire.

8. Heider and Simmel 1994 - Attribution of mental states- Attribution of mental states to inanimate geometric shapes requires higher order TOM. making sense of their behaviour. Social attribution Task

   • Abell Happe and Frith (2000) high funtioning 8yo ASD. used terms that attributed animacy less then TD, and used incorrect terms and emotions more.
     • Klin and Jones (2006) - Adults high functioning ASD impaired on SAT but not physical attribution task, deficit is domain specific, specific to social stimuli.
   • Pet Neuroimaging - compared brain activity on SAT to shapes moving randomly. greater activation in superior temporal sulcus and TPJ and mPFC when watching social . TD showed more activation than ASD. FMri Also found that SAT activated fusiliform face area.