Relations Between the Development of Teaching and Theory of Mind in Early Childhood

Ziv, Margalit; Solomon, Ayelet; Strauss, Sidney; Frye, Douglas

doi:10.1080/15248372.2015.1048862

Cited by 63 publications

(48 citation statements)

References 39 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Additionally, ToM undergoes significant qualitative change between the ages of three and five (e.g., Wellman et al, 2001;Wellman & Liu, 2004), the same period during which children's pedagogical skills are developing. Indeed, prior work has found links between ToM development and general teaching skills during the preschool years (e.g., Davis-Unger & Carlson, 2008;Strauss et al, 2002;Ziv, Solomon, Strauss, & Frye, 2016). ToM may thus be a key cognitive mechanism that supports the development of children's ability to teach others.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Given past work on the relationship between ToM and teaching abilities (Davis-Unger & Carlson, 2008;Strauss et al, 2002;Ziv et al, 2016), as well as the results from our previous two experiments, we predicted that children with more proficient false-belief understanding would also be better at pedagogical evidence selection on the preliminary testing day (i.e., prior to any CHILDREN'S THEORY OF MIND AND EVIDENCE SELECTION training). We also predicted that the pedagogical training might lead to improvements in ToM reasoning abilities; in particular, children who initially failed the false-belief battery should improve more in false-belief understanding if they took part in the pedagogical training than if they experienced a 6-week delay.…”

Section: Predictionsmentioning

confidence: 97%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Children's Developing Theory of Mind and Pedagogical Evidence Selection

Bass¹,

Gopnik²,

Hanson³

et al. 2018

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Natural pedagogy emerges early in development, but good teaching requires tailoring evidence to learners’ knowledge. How does the ability to reason about others’ minds support early pedagogical evidence selection abilities? In three experiments (N = 205), we investigated preschool-aged children’s ability to consider others’ knowledge when selecting evidence in the service of teaching. Results from Experiment 1 revealed that four-year-olds reliably selected evidence to rectify others’ false beliefs, and provided causal explanations in their teaching, whereas three-year-olds did not. In Experiment 2, we tie children’s evidence selection abilities to Theory of Mind (ToM) development, above and beyond effects of age and numerical conservation abilities. In Experiment 3, we employed a 6-week training of children’s pedagogical evidence selection with a new teaching task, and further explored the relationship between these skills and children’s ToM abilities. We qualitatively replicated our results from Experiment 2, and report tentative evidence for a link between the pedagogical training and improvements in ToM. Together, our findings suggest important connections between reasoning about others’ minds and evidential reasoning in natural pedagogy in early childhood.

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Predictionsmentioning

confidence: 97%

Children's Developing Theory of Mind and Pedagogical Evidence Selection

Bass¹,

Gopnik²,

Hanson³

et al. 2018

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…It is also plausible that children might mention more general facts when teaching because they show the ability to teach others (e.g., Ronfard, Was, & Harris, ; Strauss, Ziv, & Stein, ; Ziv, Solomon, Strauss, & Frye, ), and convey different information when teaching than when pursuing other communicative goals (Rhodes, Bonawitz, Shafto, Chen, & Caglar, ). With development, children become increasingly effective teachers and adopt teaching strategies that are more attuned with the learner (e.g., Strauss et al., ; Ziv et al., ); hence, this provides another reason to expect that children's appropriate references to general and specific information might change with age.…”

Section: Listener's Knowledge Statementioning

confidence: 99%

Fitting the Message to the Listener: Children Selectively Mention General and Specific Facts

Baer

Friedman

2017

Child Development

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In three experiments, two hundred and ninety-seven 4- to 6-year-olds were asked to describe objects to a listener, and their answers were coded for the presence of general and specific facts. In Experiments 1 and 2, the listener's knowledge of the kinds of objects was manipulated. This affected references to specific facts at all ages, but only affected references to general facts in children aged 5 and older. In Experiment 3, children's goal in communicating was either pedagogical or not. Pedagogy influenced references to general information from age 4, but not references to specific information. These findings are informative about how children vary general and specific information in conversation, and suggest that listeners' knowledge and children's pedagogical goals influenced children's responses via different mechanisms.

show abstract

“…, (Cavadel & Frye, 2017;Ziv et al, 2008;Ziv, Solomon, Strauss, & Frye, 2016). , 3, 4 (Cavadel & Frye, 2017;Ziv et al, 2008).…”

Section: Jeein Jeong 20mentioning

confidence: 99%

The Development of Young Children’s Understanding of Intentionality of Teaching and Theory of Mind, and its Relation to Their Understanding of Teaching Intention of an Actual Teaching Activity

정¹

2018

Korean J Child Stud

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: The current study intends to examine how young children understand intentionality of teaching with the theory of mind development, and how this understanding relates to their understanding of a teaching intention of an actual teaching activity. Methods: The theory of mind of 90 children aged 3-5 years and their understanding of intentionality of teaching were assessed. Additionally, children were randomly assigned to experimental condition in which the teaching intention of an activity (memory game) was explicitly revealed, or control condition in which the intention was not stated. Afterwards, their understanding of the teaching intention of the game was measured. The development of understanding of intentionality of teaching, and its relation to their theory of mind were examined. Whether age and understanding of intentionality of teaching predicted children's understanding of the teaching intention of the game was also investigated. Results: Along with the theory of mind development, children's understanding of intentionality of teaching also developed. Children's understanding of teaching intention of the game was related to their understanding of intentionality of teaching with age controlled. Children's recognition of the teaching intention of the game was predicted by understanding of the intentionality of teaching in the control condition, and it was predicted by both age and understanding of intentionality of teaching in the experimental condition. Conclusion: With the development of theory of mind, children come to understand that teaching involves a goal, and this development plays an important role in their appreciation of an actual teaching intention of the activity.

show abstract

Relations Between the Development of Teaching and Theory of Mind in Early Childhood

Cited by 63 publications

References 39 publications

Children's Developing Theory of Mind and Pedagogical Evidence Selection

Children's Developing Theory of Mind and Pedagogical Evidence Selection

Fitting the Message to the Listener: Children Selectively Mention General and Specific Facts

The Development of Young Children’s Understanding of Intentionality of Teaching and Theory of Mind, and its Relation to Their Understanding of Teaching Intention of an Actual Teaching Activity

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About