Meta-representative thinking in italian undergraduates

Author/s Davide Massaro, Alessandro Antonietti, Antonella Marchetti, Federica Giudici
Publishing Year 2016 Issue 2016/2
Language Italian Pages 19 P. 131-149 File size 223 KB
DOI 10.3280/RIP2016-002001
DOI is like a bar code for intellectual property: to have more infomation click here

Below, you can see the article first page

If you want to buy this article in PDF format, you can do it, following the instructions to buy download credits

Article preview

FrancoAngeli is member of Publishers International Linking Association, Inc (PILA), a not-for-profit association which run the CrossRef service enabling links to and from online scholarly content.

The growing interest in the Theory of Mind in adulthood supported the notion that this competence, as opposed to what initially speculated, continues to evolve over a lifetime. This paper explores whether the quality of the performance in mentalistic tasks by young adults may also depend on the structural nature of the tests administered, as well as the degree of involvement of basic cognitive abilities activated by the same tests (memory, executive function, and language complementation). Mentalistic skills in adults were investigated by means of tests inspired by the classical false belief tasks but more contextualized. Results show that in the classical tests second-order recursive reasoning is used more frequently than the third-order. This trend is reversed in more contextualized tasks. These findings were discussed in the light of the concept of "framing".

Keywords: Theory of Mind, undergraduates, framing

  1. de Villiers, J. G. (2005). Can Language Acquisition Give Children a Point of View? In J. W. Astington & J. A. Baird (Eds.), Why language matters for the ory of mind (pp.186-219). New York, NY, US: Oxford University Press
  2. Antonietti, A., Confalonieri, E., & Marchetti, A. (Eds.) (2014). Reflective thinking in educational settings: A cultural framework. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.
  3. Antonietti, A., Liverta-Sempio, O., & Marchetti, A. (Eds.).(2006). Theory of mind and language in developmental contexts. New York, NY: Springer.
  4. Apperly, I.A., Back, E., Samson, D., & France, L. (2008). The cost of thinking about false beliefs: evidence from adults’ performance on a non-inferential theory of mind task. Cognition, 106(3), 1093-1108. DOI: 10.1016/j.cognition.2007.05.00
  5. Astington, J.W. (2003). Sometimes necessary, never sufficient: False-belief understanding and social competence. In B. Repacholi & V. Slaughter (Eds.), Individual differences in theory of mind: Implications for typical and atypical development. New York, NY: Psychology Press.
  6. Astington, J.W. (1999). What would a theory of conversational awareness look like? Developmental Science, 2(1), 15-16. Astington, J.W. (2001). The future of theory-of-mind research: Understanding motivational states, the role of language, and real-world consequences. Commentary on "Meta-analysis of theory-of-mind development: The truth about false belief.". Child Development, 72(3), 685-687. DOI: 10.1111/1467-8624.00305
  7. Baron-Cohen, S. (1991). Precursors to a theory of mind: Understanding attention in others. In A. Whiten (Ed.), Natural theories of mind: Evolution, development and simulation of everyday mindreading. Cambridge, MA: Basil Blackwell.
  8. Bernstein, D.M., Thornton, W.L., & Sommerville, J.A. (2011). Theory of mind through the ages: older and middle-aged adults exhibit more errors than do younger adults on a continuous false belief task. Experimental Aging Research, 37(5), 481-502.
  9. Birch, S.A.J., & Bloom, P. (2004). Understanding children’s and adults’ limitations in mental state reasoning. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 8(6), 255-260. DOI: 10.1016/j.tics.2004.04.011
  10. Birch, S.A.J., & Bloom, P. (2007). The curse of knowledge in reasoning about false beliefs. Psychological Science, 18(5), 382. DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-9280.2007.01909.x
  11. Birch, S.A.J., & Bloom, P. (2003). Children are cursed: an asymmetric bias in mental-state attribution. Psychological Science, 14(3), 283-286. DOI: 10.1111/1467-9280.03436
  12. Bloom, P., & German, T.P. (2000). Two reasons to abandon the false belief task as a test of theory of mind. Cognition, 77(1), 25-B31. DOI: 10.1016/S0010-0277(00)00096-2
  13. Bretherton, I., McNew, S., & Beeghly-Smith, M. (1981). Early person knowledge as expressed in gestural and verbal communication: When do infants acquire a ‘theory of mind’? In M. E. Lamb & L. R. Sherrod (Eds.), Infant social cognition (pp. 33-373). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
  14. Bruner, J. (1996). The culture of education. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
  15. Bruner, J. (2002). Making stories. Law, literature, life. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
  16. Bruner, J. (1995). “The cognitive revolution in children’s understanding of mind”: Commentary. Human Development, 38(4-5), 203-213. DOI: 10.1159/000278316
  17. Bruner, J. (1990). Acts of meaning. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
  18. Carretti, B., Cornoldi, C., De Beni, R., & Romano, M. (2005). Updating in working memory: a comparison of good and poor comprehenders. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 91(1), 45-66. DOI: 10.1016/j.jecp.2005.01.005
  19. Davis, H.L., & Pratt, C. (1995). The development of children’s theory of mind: The working memory explanation. Australian Journal of Psychology, 47(1), 25-31. DOI: 10.1080/00049539508258765.
  20. Fabio, R.A., Antonietti, A., & Pravettoni, G. (2008). Benefici e costi dei processi di automatizzazione dell’attenzione visiva. Ricerche di Psicologia, 30(3), 109-120.
  21. Fischhoff, B. (1975). Hindsight is not equal to foresight: The effect of outcome knowledge on judgment under uncertainty. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 1(3), 288-299. DOI: 10.1037/0096-1523.1.3.288
  22. Fonagy, P., & Target, M. (2001). Attaccamento e funzione riflessiva. Milano: Raffaello Cortina Editore.
  23. Friedman, O., & Leslie, A.M. (2004). A developmental shift in processes underlying successful belief-desire reasoning. Cognitive Science: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 28(6), 963-977. DOI: 10.1207/s15516709cog2806_4
  24. German, T., & Hehman, J. (2006). Representational and executive selection resources in ’theory of mind’: Evidence from compromised belief-desire reasoning in old age. Cognition, 101(1), 129-152. DOI: 10.1016/j.cognition.2005.05.007
  25. Keysar, B., Lin, S., & Barr, D.J. (2003). Limits on theory of mind use in adults. Cognition, 89(1), 25-41. DOI: 10.1016/S0010-0277(03)00064-7
  26. Kidd, D.C., & Castano, E. (2013). Reading literary fiction improves theory of mind. Science, 342(6156), 377-380. DOI: 10.1126/science.1239918
  27. Kinderman, P., Dunbar, R., & Bentall, R.P. (1998). Theory-of-mind deficits and causal attributions. British Journal of Psychology, 89(2), 191-204. DOI: 10.1111/j.2044-8295.1998.tb02680.x
  28. Kuhn, D. (2000). Theory of mind, metacognition, and reasoning: A life-span perspective. In P. R. Mitchell (Ed.), Children’s reasoning and the mind. Hove, UK: Psychology Press/Taylor & Francis.
  29. Leslie, A.M., Friedman, O., & German, T.P. (2004). Core mechanisms in ’theory of mind’. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 8(12), 529-533. DOI: 10.1016/j.tics.2004.10.001
  30. Lohmann, H., Tomasello, M., & Meyer, S. (2005). Linguistic Communication and Social Understanding. In J. W. Astington & J. A. Baird (Eds.), Why language matters for theory of mind (pp. 245-265). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
  31. Maugham, W. S. (1933). Ah king: Six stories. London: William Heinemann. Moron, M. (1997). Unpublished MA Thesis.
  32. Perner, J., & Wimmer, H. (1985). "John thinks that Mary thinks that.": Attribution of second-order beliefs by 5- to 10-year-old children. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 39(3), 437-471. DOI: 10.1016/0022-0965(85)90051-7
  33. Roux, J.-P., & Gilly, M. (1993). Social significance of tasks, routines, and pragmatic schemas in distribution activities. European Journal of Social Psychology, 23(4), 355-371. DOI: 10.1002/(ISSN)1099-0992.
  34. Siegal, M. (1997). Knowing children: Experiments in conversation and cognition. Hove, UK: Psychology Press.
  35. Siegal, M., & Beattie, K. (1991). Where to look first for children’s knowledge of false beliefs. Cognition, 38(1), 1-12. DOI: 10.1016/0010-0277(91)90020-5
  36. Sommerville, J.A., Bernstein, D.M., & Meltzoff, A.N. (2013). Measuring beliefs in centimeters: private knowledge biases preschoolers’ and adults’ representation of others’ beliefs. Child Development, 84(6), 1846-1854. DOI: 10.1111/cdev.12110
  37. Stone, V.E., Baron-Cohen, S., & Knight, R.T. (1998). Frontal lobe contributions to theory of mind. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 10(5), 640-656. DOI: 10.1162/089892998562942
  38. Valle, A., Massaro, D., Castelli, I., & Marchetti, A. (2015). Theory of Mind development in adolescence and early adulthood: The growing complexity of recursive thinking ability. Europena Journal of Psychology, 11(1), 112-124. DOI: 10.5964/ejop.v11i1.829
  39. Wimmer, H., & Perner, J. (1983). Beliefs about beliefs: Representation and constraining function of wrong beliefs in young children’s understanding of deception. Cognition, 13(1), 103-128. DOI: 10.1016/0010-0277(83)90004-5

Davide Massaro, Alessandro Antonietti, Antonella Marchetti, Federica Giudici, Il pensiero meta-rappresentativo degli studenti universitari italiani in "RICERCHE DI PSICOLOGIA " 2/2016, pp 131-149, DOI: 10.3280/RIP2016-002001