Theory of Mind Development in Deaf and Hard-of-Hearing Individuals
Theory of Mind(ToM)is aconstruct that includes a range of connected abilities linked to the understanding of others' mental states. During the last three decades, ToM development has been studied extensively in deaf and hard of hearing (DHH) individuals and performances compared to the typicall...
| Autores: | , , , , |
|---|---|
| Tipo de recurso: | artículo |
| Fecha de publicación: | 2025 |
| País: | España |
| Institución: | Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona |
| Repositorio: | Dipòsit Digital de Documents de la UAB |
| Idioma: | inglés |
| OAI Identifier: | oai:ddd.uab.cat:318528 |
| Acceso en línea: | https://ddd.uab.cat/record/318528 https://dx.doi.org/urn:doi:10.3390/bs15081065 |
| Access Level: | acceso abierto |
| Palabra clave: | Deaf Hard of hearing Theory of Mind False belief Signed language Cochlear implant Parent-child interactions |
| Sumario: | Theory of Mind(ToM)is aconstruct that includes a range of connected abilities linked to the understanding of others' mental states. During the last three decades, ToM development has been studied extensively in deaf and hard of hearing (DHH) individuals and performances compared to the typically hearing (TH) population. Given the advances in the early diagnosis of deafness, interventions, and hearing devices over this period, variations in task performance among DHH participants might have been reduced. The current systematic review aims to synthesize all studies of ToM in DHH individuals and answer the following question: Do DHH individuals (Population), compared to a control sample of THand/or amongthemselves (Comparator), in an assessment of ToM (Intervention), have differentiated results (Outcome)? After a search of the literature, 97 papers were included. We found that, in general, TH participants outperformed their DHH peers in ToMmeasures; however, there was a wide range of results. Explanations for this variability included the quality of early interactions and early exposure to both signed and spoken language. The review also indicates that the understanding of false belief was the most studied component within ToM, while other components, such as understanding intention and irony, require further research. Implications of these findings for clinical practice are discussed. |
|---|