Let’s do it together! The role of interaction in false belief understanding

Worse Theory of Mind in Only-Children Compared to Children With Siblings and Its Intervention

“…The first hypothesis that first-order false belief developed better than the second-order false belief of children aged 3–6 was supported. The finding was consistent with earlier studies ( Wiesmann et al, 2018 ; Marta et al, 2019 ). Generally, most of the children in the sample could make correct inferences about true events, but their abilities of inferring others’ beliefs were still developing.…”

Removing shared information improves 3- and 4-year-olds’ performance on a change-of-location explicit false belief task

“…They introduced a number of modifications that together improved task performance: keeping the agent in view at all times, emphasising the secretive character of the task, and making the agent's perspective explicit by asking questions about what she could and could not see. Various follow-up studies have been published that both support (Białecka-Pikul, Kosno, Białek & Szpak, 2019) and question (Dörrenberg, Wenzel, Profta, Rakoczy & Liszkowski, 2019;Kammermeier & Paulus, 2018) the results of the Duplo Task.…”

Is there continuity from implicit recognition of intentional action in infants to explicit mindreading in preschoolers? Systematic review of longitudinal evidence and theoretical implications (¿Hay continuidad entre el reconocimiento implícito de la acción intencional en bebés y la lectura de mente explícita en preescolares? Revisión sistemática de la evidencia longitudinal e implicaciones teóricas)

“…Longitudinal data reveal that mindreading is a broad concept that implies different graduated, hierarchical and situated socio-cognitive processes which are constantly changing and evolving. Thus, the dichotomy between implicit and explicit, preconceptual and conceptual, preverbal and verbal may potentially be limited in explaining the richness of the continuity of the development of mindreading in children (Białecka-Pikul & Białek, 2021); therefore, it is imperative to take a broader stance based on early social interaction processes (Białecka-Pikul et al, 2019;Köster & Kärtner, 2018;Reddy, 2003Reddy, , 2008Tomasello, 2018), which is also consistent with DET (Carruthers, 2016;Sodian, 2016). Nonetheless, an approach based on perspective coordination in the different domains of interaction and shared intentionality avoids these controversial dichotomies and implies a standpoint that integrates the attentional, conative, affective, visual and conceptual-epistemic determinants in the development and continuity of mindreading (Białecka-Pikul & Białek, 2021).…”

“…Los datos longitudinales evidencian que la lectura de mentes es un concepto amplio que implica diversos procesos sociocognitivos escalonados, jerárquicos y situados que están en constante cambio y evolución. Así, la dicotomía entre lo implícito y explícito, lo preconceptual y conceptual, lo preverbal y verbal podría ser potencialmente limitada para explicar la riqueza de la continuidad del desarrollo de la lectura de mentes en la infancia (Białecka-Pikul & Białek, 2021), por lo que es relevante adoptar una postura más amplia basada en los procesos de interacción social temprana (Białecka-Pikul et al, 2019;Köster & Kärtner, 2018;Reddy, 2003Reddy, , 2008Tomasello, 2018), que sea, al mismo tiempo, consistente con la TED (Carruthers, 2016;Sodian, 2016). Así, un enfoque basado en la coordinación de perspectivas en los distintos dominios de relacionamiento e intencionalidad compartida se distancia de estas dicotomías controvertidas e implica un punto de vista que integra lo atencional, conativo, afectivo, visual y conceptual-epistémico determinado en el desarrollo y continuidad de la lectura de mente (Białecka-Pikul & Białek, 2021).…”