Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Comparative Study
. 2020 Sep;44(9):e12891.
doi: 10.1111/cogs.12891.

Analogical Comparison Promotes Theory-of-Mind Development

Affiliations
Free article
Comparative Study

Analogical Comparison Promotes Theory-of-Mind Development

Christian Hoyos et al. Cogn Sci. 2020 Sep.
Free article

Abstract

Theory-of-mind (ToM) is an integral part of social cognition, but how it develops remains a critical question. There is evidence that children can gain insight into ToM through experience, including language training and explanatory interactions. But this still leaves open the question of how children gain these insights-what processes drive this learning? We propose that analogical comparison is a key mechanism in the development of ToM. In Experiment 1, children were shown true- and false-belief scenarios and prompted to engage in multiple comparisons (e.g., belief vs. world). In Experiments 2a, 2b, and 3, children saw a series of true- and false-belief events, varying in order and in their alignability. Across these experiments, we found that providing support for comparing true- and false-belief scenarios led to increased performance on false-belief tests. These findings show that analogical comparison can support ToM learning.

Keywords: Analogy; Comparison; False beliefs; Relational processing; Theory-of-mind.

PubMed Disclaimer

References

    1. Amsterlaw, J., & Wellman, H. M. (2006). Theories of mind in transition: A microgenetic study of the development of false belief understanding. Journal of Cognition and Development, 7(2), 139-172. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327647jcd0702_1
    1. Apperly, I. A. (2012). What is “theory of mind”? Concepts, cognitive processes and individual differences. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 65(5), 825-839. https://doi.org/10.1080/17470218.2012.676055
    1. Apperly, I. A., & Butterfill, S. A. (2009). Do humans have two systems to track beliefs and belief-like states? Psychological Review, 116(4), 953. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0016923
    1. Appleton, M., & Reddy, V. (1996). Teaching three-year-olds to pass false belief tests: A conversational approach. Social Development, 5(3), 275-291. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9507.1996.tb00086.x
    1. 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 (pp. 13-38). New York: Psychology Press.

Publication types

LinkOut - more resources