La Relación del lenguaje con la teoría de la mente en edad escolar
In the past years a considerable amount of research has been carried out on the development of theory of mind (ToM) reporting that language and ToM performance are correlated. However it is less clear what aspect of language is related with ToM development. Some studies show a greater influence of s...
| Autores: | , , |
|---|---|
| Tipo de recurso: | artículo |
| Estado: | Versión publicada |
| Fecha de publicación: | 2011 |
| País: | España |
| Institución: | Varias* (Consorci de Biblioteques Universitáries de Catalunya, Centre de Serveis Científics i Acadèmics de Catalunya) |
| Repositorio: | Recercat. Dipósit de la Recerca de Catalunya |
| OAI Identifier: | oai:recercat.cat:10256/9729 |
| Acceso en línea: | http://hdl.handle.net/10256/9729 |
| Access Level: | acceso abierto |
| Palabra clave: | Filosofia de la ment Philosophy of mind Llenguatge i llengües -- Adquisició Language acquisition Psicolingüística Psycholinguistics |
| Sumario: | In the past years a considerable amount of research has been carried out on the development of theory of mind (ToM) reporting that language and ToM performance are correlated. However it is less clear what aspect of language is related with ToM development. Some studies show a greater influence of semantics aspects, whereas others suggest that sentential complement sentences, a specific aspect of syntax, are crucial for false belief understanding (FB). Yet others argue that pragmatic abilities correlate with FB understanding. The aim of this study is investigate, on the one side, the development of ToM between the ages of 6 and 8 and on the other side, the relationship between some aspects of language and the ToM improvement. Several ToM tasks were administrated to evaluate children’s performance at two different ages (60 participants aged 6 and 8 years) and four tasks to assess language abilities. The results show a significant increase in the understanding of the mind between the ages of 6 and 8. Furthermore, results reveal a significant relationship between syntax and tasks that require FB understanding, while pragmatics is more strongly associated with tasks that involve more complex socio-cognitive understandings |
|---|