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
. 2021 Feb 19;9(1):11.
doi: 10.3390/jintelligence9010011.

The Relationship between Theory of Mind and Intelligence: A Formative g Approach

Ester Navarro  1 , Sara Anne Goring  1 , Andrew R A Conway  1
Affiliations

The Relationship between Theory of Mind and Intelligence: A Formative g Approach

Ester Navarro et al. J Intell. .

Abstract

Theory of Mind (ToM) is the ability understand that other people's mental states may be different from one's own. Psychometric models have shown that individual differences in ToM can largely be attributed to general intelligence (g) (Coyle et al. 2018). Most psychometric models specify g as a reflective latent variable, which is interpreted as a general ability that plays a causal role in a broad range of cognitive tasks, including ToM tasks. However, an alternative approach is to specify g as a formative latent variable, that is, an overall index of cognitive ability that does not represent a psychological attribute (Kovacs and Conway 2016). Here we consider a formative g approach to the relationship between ToM and intelligence. First, we conducted an SEM with reflective g to test the hypothesis that ToM is largely accounted for by a general ability. Next, we conducted a model with formative g to determine whether the relationship between ToM and intelligence is influenced by domain-specific tasks. Finally, we conducted a redundancy analysis to examine the contribution of each g variable. Results suggest that the relationship between ToM and intelligence in this study was influenced by language-based tasks, rather than solely a general ability.

Keywords: factor analysis; general intelligence; structural equation modeling; theory of mind.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Reflective-g SEM Model 1. All coefficients presented are standardized.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Formative-g SEM model (Model 2). All coefficients presented are standardized.
Figure 3
Figure 3
Formative-g SEM models with additional paths. All coefficients presented are standardized.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Apperly Ian A., Butterfill Stephen A. Do Humans Have Two Systems to Track Beliefs and Belief-Like States? Psychological Review. 2009;116:953–70. doi: 10.1037/a0016923. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Apperly Ian A., Back Elisa, Samson Dana, France Lisa. The cost of thinking about false beliefs: Evidence from adults’ performance on a non-inferential theory of mind task. Cognition. 2008;106:1093–108. doi: 10.1016/j.cognition.2007.05.005. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Baker Crystal A., Peterson Eric, Pulos Steven, Kirkland Rena A. Eyes and IQ: A meta-analysis of the relationship between intelligence and “Reading the Mind in the Eyes”. Intelligence. 2014;44:78–92. doi: 10.1016/j.intell.2014.03.001. - DOI
    1. Baron-Cohen Simon, Wheelwright Sally, Hill Jacqueline, Raste Yogini, Plumb Ian. The “Reading the Mind in the Eyes” Test revised version: A study with normal adults, and adults with Asperger syndrome or high-functioning autism. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry and Allied Disciplines. 2001;42:241–51. doi: 10.1111/1469-7610.00715. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Bowman L. C., Wellman H. M. Neuroscience contributions to childhood theory-of-mind development. Contemporary Perspectives on Research in Theories of Mind in Early Childhood Education. 2014;2014:195–224.

LinkOut - more resources