The Development of Theory of Mind in Deaf Children

Abstract

Deaf children aged 4 to 16 years were given a false-belief test of theory of mind. Although the children experienced difficulty with the test, relative to hearing children, confirming a report by Peterson and Siegal (1995), performance was age-related, with a significantly higher proportion of 13- to 16-year-olds passing the test. It was concluded that deaf children raised in a spoken language environment show a developmental delay in theory of mind acquisition. This delay is consistent with the assumption that their early opportunities for learning about mental states are relatively restricted and that the normal development of theory of mind is dependent upon such opportunities.

Adolescent development of psychosis as an outcome of hearing impairment: a 10-year longitudinal study

“…In addition, persecutory delusions and auditory hallucinations may develop as a result of delays in the acquisition of Theory of Mind (Frith, 1992 ;Janssen et al 2003) in children with HI. Theory of Mind abilities normally emerge during preschool years (Peterson et al 2005) and are highly dependent on day-to-day social interactions (Russell et al 1998). Selective deprivation of access to these early conversations by HI during critical developmental phases may interfere with Theory of Mind acquisition.…”

Autism Spectrum Disorder

“…Miller, 2001;Russell, Hosie, Gray, Scott, Hunter, Banks & Macaulay, 1998) and therefore ToM impairments are not unique to ASD.…”

Deaf Children Attending Different School Environments: Sign Language Abilities and Theory of Mind

“…Research conducted on deaf children with hearing families (often referred to as "late signers" or "non-native signers") showed a delay of up to several years in ToM development (Courtin, 2000;de Villiers & de Villiers, 2000;de Villers & Pyers, 2002;Jackson, 2001, Peterson & Siegal, 1995, 1997Russell et al, 1998;Steeds, Rowe, & Dowker, 1997).…”

“…False belief tasks administered to all participants were: -two "unexpected change" tasks using the "Sally -Ann tasks 1 and 2" (Baron-Cohen, Leslie, & Frith, 1985;Baron-Cohen, 1995;Peterson & Siegal, 1995, 1998Russell et al, 1998); -one "unexpected content" using "the Smarties task" (Perner, Frith, Leslie, & Leekman, 1989). …”

“…A pilot study has been conducted with deaf pupils who did not participated in the study in order to ensure that the test and the control questions in LIS were clear (for more details see Tomasuolo, 2006). For coding ToM tasks, the following criteria were considered: -According to Peterson and Siegal (1995) and Russell et al (1998), the child was credited with possessing an understanding of false beliefs if he/she had passed both the Sally-Ann 1 and Sally-Ann 2 tasks. The age range of Peterson and Siegal's 26 deaf participants was 8.1-13 years.…”