The Role of Language in the Development of False Belief Understanding: A Training Study

Abstract

The current study used a training methodology to determine whether different kinds of linguistic interaction play a causal role in children's development of false belief understanding. After 3 training sessions, 3‐year‐old children improved their false belief understanding both in a training condition involving perspective‐shifting discourse about deceptive objects (without mental state terms) and in a condition in which sentential complement syntax was used (without deceptive objects). Children did not improve in a condition in which they were exposed to deceptive objects without accompanying language. Children showed most improvement in a condition using both perspective‐shifting discourse and sentential complement syntax, suggesting that each of these types of linguistic experience plays an independent role in the ontogeny of false belief understanding.

Exploring links between language and cognition in autism spectrum disorders: Complement sentences, false belief, and executive functioning

“…Given these findings, it appears to be more plausible that children with ASD rely on the skill of complementation for verbal ToM performance rather than the other way around. Further research is needed to determine whether coaching of complement sentences may have benefits for false belief reasoning in individuals with ASD, along the lines of that which has been shown by training studies conducted with TD children (Hale & Tager-Flusberg, 2003;Lohmann & Tomasello, 2003).…”

Language and Theory of Mind in Autism Spectrum Disorder: The Relationship Between Complement Syntax and False Belief Task Performance

“…False belief understanding did not predict later memory for complements. Two training studies also support the hypothesised link between complement syntax and false belief task performance (Hale & Tager-Flusberg, 2003;Lohmann & Tomasello, 2003).…”

Emotional state talk and emotion understanding: a training study with preschool children

“…Therefore, emotion language is not just a component of emotional competence; it is also a manifestation of 'theory of mind ' (ToM), the child's growing awareness of the existence of internal states in itself and in others (Harris, 1989 ;. Both cross-sectional (Dunn, Brown & Beardsale, 1991 ;Astington & Jenkins, 1999 ;de Villiers & de Villiers, 2000 ;Adriàn, Clemente, Villanueva & Rieffe, 2005;Astington & Baird, 2005) and training (Lohmann & Tomasello, 2003 ;Hale & Tager-Flusberg, 2003 ;Grazzani Gavazzi & Ornaghi, 2008) studies have shown that language plays a crucial role in fostering children's understanding of the mind (Milligan, Astington & Dack, 2007). Recent findings support the hypothesis of a bi-directional relationship between theory of mind and language (Slade & Ruffman, 2005) although the effect of language on theory of mind seems to be stronger than the other way round.…”