The Impact of Verbal Capacity on Theory of Mind in Deaf and Hard of Hearing Children

Levrez, Clovis; Bourdin, Béatrice; Driant, Barbara Le; d’Arc, Baudouin Forgeot; Vandromme, Luc

doi:10.1353/aad.2012.1610

Cited by 12 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 43 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…A limited number of studies on false belief understanding in deaf and hard of hearing children compared to hearing controls found no differences in ToM abilities. However, in these studies children were much older than the control group, making the groups difficult to compare (Peterson et al 2005;Peters et al 2009;Peterson & Wellman 2009;Levrez et al 2012). Since the introduction of early identification of hearing loss and early cochlear implantation, results have changed.…”

Section: Belief Understandingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Can You Hear What I Think? Theory of Mind in Young Children With Moderate Hearing Loss

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Belief Understandingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Can You Hear What I Think? Theory of Mind in Young Children With Moderate Hearing Loss

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This task was designed to assess FB understanding based on various paradigms (i.e., appearance‐reality, change of location, and reality unknown). It was tested in typically developing children aged between 4 and 7 years (Forgeot d’Arc, 2009), in deaf children (Levrez et al, 2012) and in adults (Forgeot d’Arc & Ramus, 2011). For example, one cartoon shows two plants, one on a yellow table and another on a red table (see Figure 3).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Theory‐of‐mind during childhood: Investigating syntactic and executive contributions

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Both syntax and Executive Functions (EF) are involved in Theory‐of‐Mind (ToM) but their contributory roles have mainly been studied separately. Moreover, researchers have mostly administered False Belief (FB) tasks while they may not be representative of all ToM abilities. Studies of adults give valuable information regarding whether syntax and EF are useful for ToM reasoning (i.e., Reasoning account), however, only the study of children brings direct evidence in favor of ToM emergence (i.e., Emergence account). Also, because the ToM tasks used often entail verbal and executive demands, the links observed could mostly result from such confounds (i.e., Expression account). We evaluated ToM, syntactic and EF abilities in 126 children (3‐11 y.o.) using a set of ToM tasks with minimal verbal and executive demands. Our goals were to assess (1) the hierarchical contribution of syntax and EF to ToM, (2) whether results previously obtained for FB tasks are representative of ToM in general, (3) whether the ToM‐syntax and ToM‐EF links are constant (i.e., Reasoning account) or decrease during development (i.e., Emergence accounts). Results of stepwise regression analyses showed a predominant role of syntax over EF to predict ToM abilities. The comparison of results for ToM and FB tasks showed that FB is not always representative of ToM. Finally, there was no moderating effect of age on the syntax‐ToM or EF‐ToM relations, thus suggestive of the Reasoning account rather than the Emergence account.

show abstract

“…Vocabulary (and especially words related to mental states e.g. 'think' and 'know') and grammar development have been found to correlate with the mastery of ToM understanding in hearing children (de Villiers & Pyers, 2002;Slade & Ruffman, 2005), and also in children who are DHH, even when using nonverbal ToM tasks (Levrez, Bourdin, Le Driant, d'Arc, & Vandromme, 2012). However, some authors have suggested that delays in ToM, including emotion understanding documented for children who are DHH, are not only due to formal aspects of language such as vocabulary, but also to delays in early communication abilities that grow out of social interactions and conversations (Peterson, Wellman, & Slaughter, 2012;Rieffe, 2012;Morgan et al, 2014;but see: Dyck et al, 2004).…”

Section: Language and Tom In Children With Hearing Lossmentioning

confidence: 99%

Understanding of Pretend Emotions in Children Who Are Deaf and Hard of Hearing

Caballero

Morgan

Serrat

2020

The Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Children who are deaf and hard of hearing (DHH) and born to hearing parents have delays in their social-cognitive development and in particular in their Theory of Mind (ToM). These delays are often attributed to the difficulties they encounter in acquiring age-appropriate linguistic and communicative skills. The present study asks whether this developmental delay extends to problems with understanding pretend emotions and if linguistic difficulties are related to this area. A total of 173 children (82 DHH and 91 hearing) between 3 and 8 years of age received a set of emotion and language measures. Results showed that children who are DHH were delayed in understanding pretend emotions and this was strongly related to their difficulties with expressive vocabulary and pragmatics. In summary, children who are DHH and have experienced reduced access to language and communicative interaction have a restricted understanding of the communicative intentions of emotional expressions. These delays may have implications for their social relationships with surrounding family and other children. Literature Review

show abstract

The Impact of Verbal Capacity on Theory of Mind in Deaf and Hard of Hearing Children

Cited by 12 publications

References 43 publications

Can You Hear What I Think? Theory of Mind in Young Children With Moderate Hearing Loss

Can You Hear What I Think? Theory of Mind in Young Children With Moderate Hearing Loss

Theory‐of‐mind during childhood: Investigating syntactic and executive contributions

Understanding of Pretend Emotions in Children Who Are Deaf and Hard of Hearing

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About