Developing communicative competence: a longitudinal study of the acquisition of mental state terms and indirect requests

Abstract

This longitudinal study involving 101 Dutch four- and five-year-olds charts indirect request (IR) and mental state term (MST) understanding and investigates the role that Theory of Mind (ToM) and general linguistic ability (vocabulary, syntax, and spatial language) play in this development. The results showed basic understanding of IR and MST in four-year-olds, but full understanding had not been reached even at five years old. Furthermore, although ToM predicted both IR and MST when linguistic ability was not taken into account, this relationship was no longer significant once the language measures were added. Linguistic ability thus seems to play an important role in the development of both IR and MST. Additional analyses revealed that whereas syntactic ability was the primary predictor of IR, spatial language was the best predictor of MST, suggesting that IR relies primarily on general linguistic skills, but that more specific aspects of language may bootstrap MST.

A Multi-Method Investigation of Pragmatic Development in Individuals With Down Syndrome

“…Findings indicating that associations diminished when controlling for mental age and MLU likely reflect the strong relationship between theory of mind and highlight the role of syntactic development in particular (de Villiers, 2007). For instance, De Mulder (2015) found that syntactic ability predicted the understanding of indirect requests (e.g. shivering to signal to another person that they should turn up the heat) in TD children.…”

A Review of Language, Executive Function, and Intervention in Autism Spectrum Disorder

“…For example, use and understanding of mental state terms, which refer to one's emotional or cognitive state, require theory of mind. 33 Similarly, correct use of personal pronouns requires the speaker to know if the communication partner is aware of the referent. If not, a communication breakdown can occur.…”

Acquiring Epistemic Modal Auxiliaries: the Role of Theory of Mind

“…Moore et al (1990), for example, looked at four-year-olds' understanding of both mental state verbs ('know' and 'think') and modal auxiliaries ('must' and 'might') and demonstrated that the children's understanding of the mental terms was related to their understanding of beliefs. Similarly, De Mulder (2015) found an association between the understanding of mental state verbs, modal auxiliaries and modal adjuncts and ToM development in typically developing Dutch-speaking four-and five-year-olds. Furthermore, Papafragou (2001), Papafragou and Li (2001) and Ifantidou (2005) have all argued that children's acquisition of evidential markers (the linguistic encoding of information source), is constrained by the development of ToM, in particular the understanding of the source of beliefs and speaker certainty.…”

“…This study investigated the relationship between ToM and the understanding of epistemic modal auxiliaries in Dutch typically developing and autistic children. Given the finding from previous research that Dutch five-year-olds demonstrate a basic understanding of the Dutch epistemic modal auxiliary system (De Mulder, 2015), it was expected that the typically developing six-year-olds would be capable of understanding the strength distinctions between the various epistemic modal auxiliaries. This expectation was indeed borne out by the data: the typically developing six-year-olds showed above chance performance in their understanding of the epistemic terms.…”