Search

Background Previous literature suggests that children with Down syndrome (DS) have difficulties in cognitive and affective components of Theory of Mind (ToM). However, the nature of the distinction between cognitive and affective ToM has not yet been addressed in depth in this population. Aims This work is aimed at studying the cognitive and affective ToM in children with DS. Methods and Procedures Cognitive ToM tasks (first-order false belief) and affective ToM tasks (Test of Emotion Comprehension) were administered to 30 children with DS (aged from 4 to 12 years) and to 60 typically developing (TD) children (aged from 2 to 12 years). TD children were divided into 2 groups: a Language control group and a Chronological age control group. Results Results suggest that children with DS have difficulty with both the cognitive and affective ToM components, even when compared to the language control group. In contrast to children with typical development, children with DS have a better performance in affective ToM. Conclusions We discuss our results in the light of prior studies describing the difficulties of children with DS in ToM tasks and the role of language in ToM development. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

One of the most important milestones in the development of theory of mind is the understanding of false beliefs. This study compares children's understanding of representational change and others' false beliefs and evaluates the effectiveness of an appearance-reality training for improving children's false belief understanding. A total of 78 children ranging in age from 41 to 47 months were trained in three sessions and evaluated in a pretest and in a posttest. The results show that for children it is easier to understand representational change than false beliefs in others, and that the improvement after training was greater when starting from a higher score in the pretest. The implications of this for training in false belief understanding are discussed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of International Journal of Educational Psychology is the property of International Journal of Educational Psychology and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)