Individual differences in false belief understanding are stable from 3 to 6 years of age and predict children’s mental state talk with school friends

The development of false belief understanding in Samoa was investigated in two studies testing more than 300 children. Children’s understanding was assessed with a change of location task. The results of study 1 suggest that Samoan children improve gradually and slowly, with no succeeding majority before 8 years of age. One third of the 10–13-year-olds still failed. Study 2 used a different translation among 55 children from 4–8 years of age and supports the former results. These findings speak for the cultural variability of theory of mind development and provide the first cross-cultural continuous survey on false belief understanding of children older than 5 years of age with a large sample in a place where mental states are no suitable object for conjecture.

Download Full-text

Language, Mental State Vocabulary, and False Belief Understanding in Children With Cochlear Implants

Language Speech and Hearing Services in Schools ◽

10.1044/0161-1461(2009/07-0079) ◽

2009 ◽

Vol 40 (3) ◽

pp. 245-255 ◽

Cited By ~ 16

Author(s):

Kimberly Peters ◽

Ethan Remmel ◽

Debra Richards

Keyword(s):

Cochlear Implants ◽

Mental State ◽

False Belief ◽

False Belief Understanding

Download Full-text

Pragmatic Language Performance of Children Adopted Internationally

American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology ◽

10.1044/2018_ajslp-18-0075 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 28 (2) ◽

pp. 501-514

Author(s):

Deborah A. Hwa-Froelich ◽

Hisako Matsuo

Keyword(s):

Social Communication ◽

False Belief ◽

Pragmatic Language ◽

Eastern European ◽

Language Performance ◽

Emotion Identification ◽

False Belief Understanding ◽

Quasi Experimental ◽

Pragmatic Communication ◽

Eastern European Countries

Purpose Pragmatic language is important for social communication across all settings. Children adopted internationally (CAI) may be at risk of poorer pragmatic language because of adverse early care, delayed adopted language development, and less ability to inhibit. The purpose of this study was to compare pragmatic language performance of CAI from Asian and Eastern European countries with a nonadopted group of children who were of the same age and from similar socioeconomic backgrounds as well as explore the relationship among emotion identification, false belief understanding, and inhibition variables with pragmatic language performance. Method Using a quasi-experimental design, 35 four-year-old CAI (20 Asian, 15 Eastern European) and 33 children who were not adopted were included in this study. The children's pragmatic language, general language, and social communication (emotion identification of facial expressions, false belief understanding, inhibition) were measured. Comparisons by region of origin and adoption experience were completed. We conducted split-half correlation analyses and entered significant correlation variables into simple and backward regression models. Results Pragmatic language performance differed by adoption experience. The adopted and nonadopted groups demonstrated different correlation patterns. Language performance explained most of the pragmatic language variance. Discussion Because CAI perform less well than their nonadopted peers on pragmatic communication measures and different variables are related to their pragmatic performance, speech-language pathologists may need to adapt assessment and intervention practices for this population.

Download Full-text