How children approach the false belief test: social development, pragmatics, and the assembly of Theory of Mind

被引:0
作者
Marco Fenici
机构
[1] University of Florence,Department of Literature and Philosophy
来源
Phenomenology and the Cognitive Sciences | 2022年 / 21卷
关键词
Diverse belief; False belief; Knowledge access; Mindreading; Social cognition; Social understanding; Socio-cultural constructivism; Sociopragmatics; Theory of mind; Usage-based theory of language acquisition;
D O I
暂无
中图分类号
学科分类号
摘要
Evidence from the knowledge access task and the diverse belief task suggests that, before age four, children may find it difficult to attribute false beliefs to others, despite demonstrating a basic comprehension of the concept of belief. Challenging this view, this article assumes a sociopragmatic perspective on language to argue that even children younger than four may not understand at all the concept of belief but may nevertheless master naïvely the pragmatics of belief reports in specific conversational contexts. The proposal suggests a novel interpretation of both the reasons behind younger children’s difficulty with (elicited-response) false belief tasks, and the critical factors enabling children’s success in them. On the one hand, it proposes that younger children fail (elicited-response) false belief tasks because they do not understand the importance of focusing on an agent’s (verbally ascribed) mental states to infer her practical commitments. On the other hand, it suggests that children’s active engagement in conversations where the caregiver credits an agent with a belief is the critical factor integrating their initially scattered mastery of the pragmatics of belief reports, teaches them to track belief reports across contexts, and accordingly shapes their understanding of belief as a representational mental state.
引用
收藏
页码:181 / 201
页数:20
相关论文
共 193 条
[1]  
Allen JWP(2011)Emergent constructivism Child Development Perspectives 5 164-165
[2]  
Bickhard MH(2013)Stepping off the pendulum: Why only an action-based approach can transcend the nativist–empiricist debate Cognitive Development 28 96-133
[3]  
Allen JWP(2018)Stage fright: Internal reflection as a domain general enabling constraint on the emergence of explicit thought Cognitive Development 45 77-91
[4]  
Bickhard MH(2006)Theories of mind in transition: A microgenetic study of the development of false belief understanding Journal of Cognition and Development 7 139-172
[5]  
Allen JWP(2009)Do humans have two systems to track beliefs and belief-like states? Psychological Review 116 953-970
[6]  
Bickhard MH(1996)Teaching three year-olds to pass false belief tests: A conversational approach Social Development 5 275-291
[7]  
Amsterlaw J(2004)Acting and planning on the basis of a false belief: Its effects on 3-year-old children’s reasoning about their own false beliefs Developmental Psychology 40 953-964
[8]  
Wellman HM(2010)False-belief understanding in infants Trends in Cognitive Sciences 14 110-118
[9]  
Apperly IA(2016)Psychological reasoning in infancy Annual Review of Psychology 67 159-186
[10]  
Butterfill SA(2016)Theories, structures and simulations in the research of early mentalizing Cognitive Systems Research 40 129-143