Language and Theory of Mind: Meta‐Analysis of the Relation Between Language Ability and False‐belief Understanding

Milligan, Karen; Astington, Janet Wilde; Dack, Lisa Ain

doi:10.1111/j.1467-8624.2007.01018.x

Cited by 928 publications

(840 citation statements)

References 117 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

717

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Therefore, emotion language is not just a component of emotional competence; it is also a manifestation of 'theory of mind ' (ToM), the child's growing awareness of the existence of internal states in itself and in others (Harris, 1989 ;. Both cross-sectional (Dunn, Brown & Beardsale, 1991 ;Astington & Jenkins, 1999 ;de Villiers & de Villiers, 2000 ;Adriàn, Clemente, Villanueva & Rieffe, 2005;Astington & Baird, 2005) and training (Lohmann & Tomasello, 2003 ;Hale & Tager-Flusberg, 2003 ;Grazzani Gavazzi & Ornaghi, 2008) studies have shown that language plays a crucial role in fostering children's understanding of the mind (Milligan, Astington & Dack, 2007). Recent findings support the hypothesis of a bi-directional relationship between theory of mind and language (Slade & Ruffman, 2005) although the effect of language on theory of mind seems to be stronger than the other way round.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 88%

Emotional state talk and emotion understanding: a training study with preschool children

Grazzani

Ornaghi

2011

J. Child Lang.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The present study investigates whether training preschool children in the active use of emotional state talk plays a significant role in bringing about greater understanding of emotion terms and improved emotion comprehension. Participants were 100 preschool children (M=52 months; SD=9·9; range: 35–70 months), randomly assigned to experimental or control conditions. They were pre- and post-tested to assess their language comprehension, metacognitive language comprehension and emotion understanding. Analyses of pre-test data did not show any significant differences between experimental and control groups. During the intervention phase, the children were read stories enriched with emotional lexicon. After listening to the stories, children in the experimental group took part in conversational language games designed to stimulate use of the selected emotional terms. In contrast, the control group children did not take part in any special linguistic activities after the story readings. Analyses revealed that the experimental group outperformed the control group in the understanding of inner state language and in the comprehension of emotion.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 88%

Emotional state talk and emotion understanding: a training study with preschool children

Grazzani

Ornaghi

2011

J. Child Lang.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This task is representative of the major change in theory of mind capacities that start emerging in children at around 4 years of age (Wellman et al 2001). Similar tasks have been used in other studies and are part of commonly used theory of mind test batteries (Cassidy et al 2005;Milligan et al 2007). The stimulus was a sponge covered with granite gray paint to make it look like a rock.…”

Section: Measures and Proceduresmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…These hypotheses were examined while including a measure of language skills as a control variable in all analyses. The positive relation between language development and theory of mind is firmly established (Astington 2001;Milligan et al 2007). It is thus essential to control for language to eliminate the possibility that the contribution of theory of mind to reactive or proactive aggression could be better explained by a child's language skills -or lack thereof.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Interactive Links Between Theory of Mind, Peer Victimization, and Reactive and Proactive Aggression

Renouf

Brendgen

Séguin

et al. 2010

J Abnorm Child Psychol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study investigated the relation between theory of mind and reactive and proactive aggression, respectively, as well as the moderating role of peer victimization in this context. The 574 participants were drawn from a longitudinal study of twins. Theory of mind was assessed before school entry, when participants were 5 years old. Reactive and proactive aggression as well as peer victimization were assessed a year later in kindergarten. Results from multilevel regression CIHR Author Manuscript CIHR Author Manuscript CIHR Author Manuscriptanalyses revealed that low theory of mind was related to a high level of reactive aggression, but only in children who experienced average to high levels of peer victimization. In contrast, a high theory of mind was related to a high level of proactive aggression. Again, this relation was especially pronounced in children who experienced high levels of peer victimization. These findings challenge the social skills deficit view of aggression and provide support for a multidimensional perspective of aggressive behavior. KeywordsTheory of mind; Reactive and proactive aggression; Peer victimizationIn the study of aggressive behavior a fundamental distinction is made between reactive aggression and proactive aggression, which refer to two different underlying functions of aggression (Day, Bream and Paul 1992;Dodge and Coie 1987;Schwartz et al. 1998).Reactive aggression is defined as a retaliatory response to a real or perceived threat or provocation. It is associated with the frustration theory of aggression (Berkowitz 1989) and is accompanied by an activation of the autonomous system (Hubbard et al. 2002). In contrast, proactive aggression is considered a non-provoked behavior that is motivated by the desire for personal gains or the domination of others (Vitaro and Brendgen 2005). As an organized and planned behavior, proactive aggression is related to the anticipation of a positive outcome of the aggressive behavior (Dodge et al. 1997). Although studies usually report a high correlation between reactive and proactive aggression (mean r=0.68; Card and Little 2006), factor analyses and meta-analyses provide clear evidence for the validity of the distinction between the two functions of aggression (Card and Little 2006;Crick and Dodge 1996;McAuliffe et al. 2007;Poulin and Boivin 2000;Vitaro et al. 1998). As will be discussed in more detail below, evidence also suggests that these two functions of aggressive behavior are differentially related to social cognitive skills, particularly with respect to the decoding of social stimuli (Crick and Dodge 1996;Dodge et al. 1997;Dodge and Coie 1987;Hubbard et al. 2001;Schippel et al. 2003). The present study examines a specific and as yet unstudied aspect of decoding-related social cognitive skills, namely theory of mind, in relation to proactive and reactive aggression. The Role of Theory of Mind in Social BehaviorTheory of mind implies the capacity to attribute mental states to the self and to others in order to explain and predic...

show abstract

“…Language and theory of mind in autism spectrum disorder 8 unexpected contents (Perner et al, 1987) Although all participants in the current study completed both false belief tasks, given that each task entails different cognitive demands, the results from each were considered separately, rather than as a composite. For example, whereas the SallyAnne task involves a narrative and a relatively simple test question, the Smarties task does not involve a narrative but involves a more complex test question (Milligan, Astington, & Dack, 2007). In typical development, it is generally assumed that a shift to a representational ToM underlies successful false belief task performance, regardless of task-specific factors (Wellman et al, 2001).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Language and Theory of Mind in Autism Spectrum Disorder: The Relationship Between Complement Syntax and False Belief Task Performance

Lind

Bowler

2009

J Autism Dev Disord

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The original publication is available at www.springerlink.com Additional information: Use policyThe full-text may be used and/or reproduced, and given to third parties in any format or medium, without prior permission or charge, for personal research or study, educational, or not-for-pro t purposes provided that:• a full bibliographic reference is made to the original source • a link is made to the metadata record in DRO • the full-text is not changed in any way The full-text must not be sold in any format or medium without the formal permission of the copyright holders.Please consult the full DRO policy for further details.

show abstract

Language and Theory of Mind: Meta‐Analysis of the Relation Between Language Ability and False‐belief Understanding

Cited by 928 publications

References 117 publications

Emotional state talk and emotion understanding: a training study with preschool children

Emotional state talk and emotion understanding: a training study with preschool children

Interactive Links Between Theory of Mind, Peer Victimization, and Reactive and Proactive Aggression

Language and Theory of Mind in Autism Spectrum Disorder: The Relationship Between Complement Syntax and False Belief Task Performance

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About