TOM
Theory of Mind
Class: I - Natural Selection
EPA Total Score: 36 /100
Leslie, A. M., & Thaiss, L. (1992). Domain specificity in conceptual development: Neuropsychological evidence from autism. Cognition, 43(3), 225-251.
Abstract: To understand some aspects of conceptual development it is necessary to take cognitive architecture into account. For this purpose, the study of normal development is often not sufficient. Fortunately, one can also study neurodevelopmental disorders. For example, autistic children have severe difficulties developing certain kinds of concepts but not others. We find that whereas autistic children perform very poorly on tests of the concept, believes, they are at or near ceiling on comparable tasks that test understanding of pictorial representation. A similar pattern was found in a second study which looked at understanding of a false map or diagram: normal 4-years-olds showed a marked advantage in understanding a false belief over a false map, while the autistic subjects performed better on the map. These findings suggest that the concept, believes, develops as a domain-specific notion that is not equatable with “having a picture (map or diagram) in the head”. This result supports the existence of a specialized cognitive mechanism, which subserves the development of folk psychological notions, and which is dissociably damaged in autism. We extend these ideas to outline a new model of the development of false belief performance.
Submitted by:
Supporting Evidence
30/100
Submitted by niruban
30/100
Submitted by niruban
38/100
Submitted by niruban
No one has (yet) rated this source as containing any supporting Physiological evidence for this EPA.
No one has (yet) rated this source as containing any supporting Cross-Cultural evidence for this EPA.
No one has (yet) rated this source as containing any supporting Genetic evidence for this EPA.
No one has (yet) rated this source as containing any supporting Phylogenetic evidence for this EPA.
No one has (yet) rated this source as containing any supporting Hunter-Gatherer evidence for this EPA.
Supporting Evidence is evidence that suggests that this trait is an Evolved Psychological Adaptation (EPA) - i.e., that it has been shaped by natural selection to solve a particular adaptive problem.
Challenging Evidence
0/100
Submitted by niruban
0/100
Submitted by niruban
0/100
Submitted by niruban
No one has (yet) rated this source as containing any challenging Physiological evidence for this EPA.
No one has (yet) rated this source as containing any challenging Cross-Cultural evidence for this EPA.
No one has (yet) rated this source as containing any challenging Genetic evidence for this EPA.
No one has (yet) rated this source as containing any challenging Phylogenetic evidence for this EPA.
No one has (yet) rated this source as containing any challenging Hunter-Gatherer evidence for this EPA.
Challenging Evidence is evidence that suggests that this trait is not an EPA - e.g., that it is a product of cultural learning or genetic drift, or maybe it does not exist at all. However over each line of evidence for a description.