Normative data and psychometric properties of a farsi translation of the strange stories test

Abstract

This new translation of the Strange Stories test is a reliable and valid instrument to evaluate higher level theory of mind abilities in community samples of Farsi speaking children. Autism Res 2017, 10: 1960-1967. © 2017 International Society for Autism Research, Wiley Periodicals, Inc. LAY SUMMARY: "Mentalizing" or "theory of mind," the ability to recognize others' mental states, is a key aspect of social understanding. Mentalizing problems are characteristic of some clinical conditions such as autism. The Strange Stories is a test evaluating mentalizing in every day social situations. It was translated into Farsi language and administered to a group of Iranian school-aged children. The instrument was useful in assessing children's mind reading. Older children and girls were better in mentalizing ability.

Development and Psychometric Properties of a Culturally Adapted Video Version of Strange Stories as a Measure of Advanced Theory of Mind in Youths

“…This finding is consistent with other literature where it has been suggested that females were better in understanding social situations and intentions (Białecka-Pikul et al, 2017) and adds to the construct validity data of the relationships between ToM and gender (e.g. Calero et al, 2013; Shahrivar et al, 2017). In terms of concurrent validity (as part of criterion validity to answer research question 3), there are significant correlations among the Y-ToM social and physical scores with the Happé’s Strange Stories social and physical scores.…”

“…The Strange Stories test has been adapted as a Farsi (paper-and-pen format) translation for an Iranian community sample of school-aged children aged 9–11 (Shahrivar et al, 2017) and also been adapted as a video version to assess ToM in Australian sample of adults (mean age of 27 years old) with ASD (Brewer et al, 2017). Expanding available advanced ToM tools in an Asian context could be a good reason to adapt the Strange Stories to understand the development of advanced ToM in the light of cultural differences (Perez-Zapata et al, 2016; Slaughter & Perez-Zapata, 2014).…”

“…For instance, previous research suggests that there may be differences in cultural aspects of understanding mental states such as liars’ intentions (Cameron et al, 2012; Cheung et al, 2015). A study found that their Iranian school-aged sample understood the concept of white lie better than English-speaking children (Shahrivar et al, 2017). Other research studies also found that Chinese children perceived white lie as a pro-social behaviour and they understood that white lies might not be negative as compared to their European counterparts (Cameron et al, 2012; Ma et al, 2011).…”

Empirical failures of the claim that autistic people lack a theory of mind.

“…But numerous studies document failures of prediction. For example, performance on theory-of-mind tasks fails to significantly predict autistic traits in either autistic or nonautistic participants , as measured by clinicians’ observation, self-report, or informant-report ( N = 1513 nonautistic adults, Kunihira, Senju, Dairoku, Wakabayashi, & Hasegawa, 2006; N = 638 nonautistic children, Ronald, Viding, Happé, & Plomin, 2006; N = 395 autistic adults, Lombardo et al, 2015; N = 220 nonautistic adults, Ragsdale & Foley, 2011; N = 206 nonautistic men, Voracek & Dressler, 2006; N = 194 autistic and 60 nonautistic children, Scheeren et al, 2013; N = 178 autistic men, 168 nonautistic women, and 152 nonautistic men, Baron-Cohen et al, 2015; N = 108 nonautistic adults, Melchers, Montag, Markett, & Reuter, 2015; N = 100 autistic adolescents, Lukito et al, 2017; N = 100 autistic adolescents, Jones et al, 2018; N = 89 autistic and 89 nonautistic adults, Wilson et al, 2014; N = 79 nonautistic women, Valla et al, 2010; N = 56 autistic children, Salter, Seigal, Claxton, Lawrence, & Skuse, 2008; see similar results with smaller samples in Bryant, Coffey, Povinelli, & Pruett, 2013; Burnside, Wright, & Poulin-Dubois, 2017; Clemmensen et al, 2016; Dziobek et al, 2006; Murray et al, 2017; Ozonoff & McEvoy, 1994) empathy and emotional understanding ( N = 484 nonautistic adults, Olderbak et al, 2015; N = 395 autistic adults, Lombardo et al, 2015; N = 342 nonautistic adolescents, Sharp & Vanwoerden, 2014; N = 220 nonautistic adults, Ragsdale & Foley, 2011; N = 200 nonautistic adults, Vellante et al, 2013; N = 178 autistic men, 168 nonautistic women, and 152 nonautistic men, Baron-Cohen et al, 2015; N = 162 nonautistic adults, Ferguson & Austin, 2010; N = 121 nonautistic adolescents and adults, Gökçen, Frederickson, & Petrides, 2016; N = 108 nonautistic adults, Melchers et al, 2015; N = 89 autistic and 89 nonautistic adults, Wilson et al, 2014; N = 58 nonautistic children, Tsang, Gillespie-Lynch, & Hutman, 2016; N = 53 nonautistic adults, Lawrence et al, 2004; see similar results with smaller samples in Carroll & Chiew, 2006; Campbell et al, 2011; Muller et al, 2010; Peterson, 2014) everyday social skills ( N = 398 nonautistic children, Shahrivar, Tehrani-Doost, Khorrami Banaraki, Mohammadzadeh, & Happé, 2017; N = 164 and 140 nonautistic adults, Ames & Kammrath, 2004; N = 124 nonautistic adolescents, Botting & Conti-Ramsden, 2008; N = 101 nonautistic children, Lunn, Lewis, & Sher...…”

“…everyday social skills (N ϭ 398 nonautistic children,Shahrivar, Tehrani-Doost, Khorrami Banaraki, Mohammadzadeh, & Happé, 2017; N ϭ 164 and 140 nonautistic adults,Ames & Kammrath, 2004; N ϭ 124 nonautistic adolescents, Botting & Conti-Ramsden, 2008; N ϭ 101 nonautistic children, Lunn, Lewis, & Sherlock, 2015; N ϭ 97 nonautistic children, Lew et al, 2015; N ϭ 65 nonautistic children, Raud et al, 2015; N ϭ 63 nonautistic adults, Stanford, Messinger, Malaspina, & Corcoran, 2011; N ϭ 60 nonautistic children, Raud et al, 2015; N ϭ 53 nonautistic adults, Chen et al, 2017; N ϭ 50 nonautistic adults, McCleery et al, 2012; see similar results with smaller samples of autistic children and adults in…”