Advanced theory of mind in children with mild intellectual disability and deaf or hard of hearing children: A two-year longitudinal study in middle childhood

The present study investigates the development of advanced theory of mind (AToM) among typically developing (TD) children, children with mild intellectual disability (MID), and deaf or hard of hearing (DHH) children. The 2-year longitudinal study comprised three waves and included a large sample of children from Poland in middle childhood aged around 7.5–9.5 years (N = 779; M = 7.7, SD = 0.92 at wave 1). The analysis of children’s understanding of second-order false belief and the Faux-Pas Recognition Test showed that TD children outperformed children with MID and DHH children on both measures. At 7.5 years, almost 60% of the TD children correctly solved the second-order false belief task; correct performance at 7.5 years in children with MID and DHH children was 27 and 38% respectively. Two years later, correct performance rose to 80% (TD children), 45% (children with MID), and 63% (DHH children). Despite these differences, the speed of AToM development did not differ across the groups. The development of faux-pas recognition followed a non-linear pattern, with TD children showing no further significant development after mid-elementary school. Our findings show differences in AToM development between TD children, children with MID, and DHH children, and they suggest that children’s development of AToM may follow different developmental pathways, depending on the aspect of AToM under study.     

How sensitivity to provocation shapes encoding and interpretation of ambivalent scenes in an eye tracking study

ABSTRACT

Hostility bias is based on the attribution of intentionality, personality traits such as trait anger and sensitivity to provocation (SP), as well as gender. Eye-tracking studies have shown that, prior to the interpretation of everyday social encounters, people might pay attention to hostile and non-hostile cues differently depending on trait anger; however, little is known about the encoding patterns of individuals sensitive to provocation. We conducted two studies, one of which was on interpretation and the other on encoding. Study 1 (N = 75) found that people low in SP gazed significantly longer at non-hostile cues than at hostile cues. Study 2 (N = 197, 84 men) revealed a significant interaction for judgment of intentionality in ambiguous scenes between gender and both SP and trait-anger; SP, trait anger and intentionality were negatively related in females, whereas in males they were positively related, although the relationships themselves (simple effects) were non-significant.     

Beyond Single-Mindedness: A Figure-Ground Reversal for the Cognitive Sciences

A fundamental fact about human minds is that they are never truly alone: all minds are steeped in situated interaction. That social interaction matters is recognized by any experimentalist who seeks to exclude its influence by studying individuals in isolation. On this view, interaction complicates cognition. Here, we explore the more radical stance that interaction co-constitutes cognition: that we benefit from looking beyond single minds toward cognition as a process involving interacting minds. All around the cognitive sciences, there are approaches that put interaction center stage. Their diverse and pluralistic origins may obscure the fact that collectively, they harbor insights and methods that can respecify foundational assumptions and fuel novel interdisciplinary work. What might the cognitive sciences gain from stronger interactional foundations? This represents, we believe, one of the key questions for the future. Writing as a transdisciplinary collective assembled from across the classic cognitive science hexagon and beyond, we highlight the opportunity for a figure-ground reversal that puts interaction at the heart of cognition. The interactive stance is a way of seeing that deserves to be a key part of the conceptual toolkit of cognitive scientists.