In this task, children are presented with two opaque boxes; each with a window facing the child. However, in one of these boxes contains a desired treat.
If the child is performing the task alone, he or she must indicate the box that does not contain the desired treat. If they do so correctly, they get a treat. If they indicate the box with the treat, then they do not get the treat. When performing the task with an opponent, the child must direct the opponent to choose the box that does not contain the desired treat in order for them to get the treat instead.
It is crucial to note that in this condition; only the child has the ability to see which box contains the treat through the usage of the window on the side of the boxes. This task is used to examine cognitive functioning in children because it does two things: 1 it inhibits the dominant response to want to point to the desired treat 2 it get children to hold in mind the rule that the empty box without the desired object must be indicated in order to get the treat Rusell et al.
Studies that have used this task in Autistic children have found that they have relatively poor performance levels. This is caused by the fact that they continuously point at the box with the desired treat as opposed to the box without it.
This in turn indicates their deficit in inhibition and mental flexibility. Russell, J. The automated windows task: The performance of preschool children, children with autism, and children with moderate learning difficulties.
The child cannot inhibit their response to point at the reward and therefore continually fails the task. Claire Hughes has said that the ability to deceive requires the ability to inhibit a prepotent response, such as pointing at the desired reward in order to obtain it. However, this might not be attributable to executive function. An idea suggested by Bartsch is that such problems arise from the relationship of the ideas of desire and belief.
However, by the ages of four and five, the child shifts this relationship around to a more adult type of reasoning. This is not the only theory opposing the ideas of executive function development dictating advances in theory of mind. There is the idea of counterfactual reasoning. This explains false belief failures of children in terms of them having to imagine hypothetical situation s.
Children might lack the ability to perform this sort of reasoning rather than having any sort of theory of mind problems.
Riggs et al. There is another possible theory, one related to language and communication. Astington and Jenkins have found a strong relationship between the language abilities of children and their performances in theory of mind tasks. If a child does not understand what these words mean, then they are likely to fail false belief tasks. This is just one view within this general theory, that is, that language development drives the development of theory of mind.
However, some believe that the development of theory of mind does not depend on language development, but rather language development is dependent on advancements in theory of mind. There is some neurophysiological evidence that might support the executive function theory.
Executive processes should occur in the prefrontal cortex and indeed Ozonoff et al. But Russell highlights a problem that, although there does appear to be some sort of relationship between false belief tasks and prefrontal cortex function, there is not necessarily a causal link between the two. Underdeveloped executive functioning seems to be a plausible explanation for the development of theory of mind.
However, as with so many theories in Psychology , the evidence is not yet conclusive, and the true mechanism of theory of mind development probably has elements of most of the theories proposed. Autistic children appear not to develop theory of mind, at least not in a normal way.
Hyperactive Agency Detector folk psychology false flag operation Holographic Theory The Little Hut Log in or register to write something here or to contact authors. Theory of Mind.
The term "Theory of Mind" was coined by Guy Woodruff and David Premack in a paper published in investigating a chimpanzee 's ability to predict a persons behaviour by means of mental state attribution. Basically they were trying to show that their chimp , Sarah , could infer the "intentions" and "motivations" of a man and thus predict his actions.
In the many years since the paper was first published the most extensive research in this area has been seen in developmental psychology , where scientists investigate what human children know about the minds of others. The Development of Theory of Mind: There are several proposed answers as to why young children have problems in overcoming false belief task s. Kaufman, P. Delayed response performance in males with Fragile X.
Journal of Clinical and Experimental Neuropsychology, 12 , Lord , C. Autism Diagnostic Interview—Revised: A revised version of a diagnostic interview for caregivers of individuals with possible pervasive developmental disorders. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 24 , — Lord, C. Los Angeles: Western Psychological Services. Liss, M. Executive functioning in high-functioning children with autism.
Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 42 , — McEvoy, R. Executive function and social communication deficits in young autistic children. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 34 , — Minshew, N. The pattern of intact and impaired memory functions in autism.
Mullen, E. Mullen scales of early learning. Cranston, RI: T. Child, Inc. Manual for the Mullen scales of early learning: AGS edition. Ozonoff, S. Reliability and validity of the Wisconsin Card Sorting Test in autism. Neuropsychology, 4 , — Executive function deficits in high-functioning autistic individuals: Relationship to theory of mind. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 31 , — Pennington, B. Executive functions and developmental psychopathologies. Rogers, S.
Modification of the Windows task for young children. Unpublished data. Russell, J. British Journal of Developmental Psychology, 9 , — Rutherford, M. Cognitive underpinnings of pretend play in autism. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 33 , — Seltzer, M. Comparison groups in autism family research: Down syndrome, fragile x syndrome, and schizophrenia. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 34 , 41— Swettenham, J.
The frequency and distribution of spontaneous attention shifts between social and nonsocial stimuli in autistic, typically developing, and nonautistic developmentally delayed infants. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 39 , — Williams, D. Impaired memory for faces and social scenes in autism: Clinical implications of the memory disorder. Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology, 20 , 1—
0コメント