The Influence of Language on
Theory of Mind
Syntax and Cognitive Development
Greg Cox
Anton Lukyanenko
26 April 2007
Previous Research

Experiments show a correlation
between language and ToM.



Correlation of skills
Age of acquisition
Question: Are these causally
related?
Definitions

Theory of Mind




False belief
Appearance-reality
Unexpected contents
Sentential Complements




“John thinks that [Mary is wet].”
Embedded clause is an obligatory argument
Truth value
Verbs of communication and mental state
Hale & Tager-Flusberg Paradigm

Training Conditions




Sentential Complements (SC)
Relative Clauses (RC)
False Belief (FB)
Participants


Pretest
Age (Mean=4 years)
Hale & Tager-Flusberg Results
Hale & Tager-Flusberg Discussion


Sentential complements specifically
influence ToM performance
Problems:


Do mental verbs influence
performance?
Training involved only deceptive
experience
Lohmann & Tomasello Paradigm
Variations within Training Groups
Training
Condition
Elements in Training
Deceptive
Experience
Syntax
Verbs
Full Training
Yes
SC
Mental,
Communication
Discourse
Only
Yes
Simple clauses
(no SC)
None
No Language
Yes
None
None
Sentential
Complements
No
SC
Mental,
communcation
Lohmann & Tomasello Results
Lohmann & Tomasello Discussion

Conclusions




Sentential complement influence
independent of deceptive experience
Deceptive experience alone ineffective
Language in general doesn’t show
effect
Criticism


SC training still involved deceptive
objects
Tests for ToM involve SC phrasing
Final Thoughts





Relationship between language and
ToM?
Not Just Experience
Not Just Language
Two Separate Mechanisms?
ToM, Perspective, and Humanity



Social Behavior
Language
Morality?