قابلیت تبیین زبان در نظریه ذهن کودکان با اختلال طیف اتیسم

نوع مقاله: مقاله پژوهشی

نویسندگان

1 کارشناسی ارشد روانشناسی و آموزش کودکان استثنایی، دانشگاه تهران

2 دانشیار گروه روان شناسی و آموزش کودکان استثنایی

3 استادیار دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی

چکیده

توانایی نسبت دادن ادراکات ذهنی ­ای همچون باور، نیت، میل، وانمود کردن، دانش و از این قبیل به خود و دیگران و فهم این موضوع که ادراکات ذهنی‌ دیگران می­ تواند با  ادراکات ما و حتی با واقعیت متفاوت باشد، نظریه ذهن نامیده می‌شود. با توجه به ناتوانی شدید کودکان اتیستیک در رشد مهارت‌های ارتباطی، پژوهش حاضر با هدف بررسی این فرضیه مطرح شد که آیا بین نظریه ذهن و زبان در این کودکان ارتباطی وجود دارد و اگر چنین ارتباطی وجود دارد، کدام یک از مؤلفه‌های زبانی قابلیت تبیین توانمندی در نظریه ذهن را دارند. به این منظور، 110 کودک اتیستیک 4 الی 16 ساله با استفاده از نسخه فارسی آزمون رشد زبان (حسن­ زاده و مینایی، 1380) و تکالیف باور کاذب (ویمر و ورنر، 1983) مورد بررسی قرار گرفتند. نتایج به‌دست ‌آمده  نشان دادند که بین توانمندی در درک دستوری، واژگان تصویری و واژگان شفاهی با توانایی در نظریه ذهن ارتباط وجود دارد.

کلیدواژه‌ها


عنوان مقاله [English]

Language as an Explanatory Factor for Theory of Mind in Children with Autism Spectrum Disorder

نویسندگان [English]

  • Kiana Taghikhan 1
  • Saeid Hassanzadeh 2
  • Soheila Khodaverdian 3
چکیده [English]

Theory of mind is the ability to attribute mental states—belief, intent, desire, pretending, knowledge, etc.—to oneself and others and to understand that others have mental states that are different from one's own and also reality. Regarding the considerable impairment of communication abilities in children with autism, the present study addresses the relationship between Theory of Mind and language, as well as those components of language that explain the abilities involved in ToM, in these children. The subjects comprised 110 children with autism, aged 4 to 16, who were evaluated using the Persian version of The Test of Language Development (Hassanzadeh & Minaei, 2002) and False Belief Tasks (Wimmer& Perner, 1983). The results of analysis of  data revealed significant impact of subtests of grammatical understanding, picture vocabulary and oral vocabulary on the Theory of Mind in autistic children.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • autism
  • theory of mind
  • Language Development
American Psychiatric Association. (2013). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders (5th ed.). Arlington, VA: American Psychiatric Publishing.

Astington, J .W., & Jenkins JM. (1999). A longitudinal study of a relation between language and theory of mind development. Developmental Psychology, 35(5), 1311-1320.

Baron-Cohen, S.,Leslie, A. M., & Frith, U. (1985). Does the autistic child have a “theory of mind”?. Cognition, 21(1), 37-46.

Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. 2nd ed. New Jersey. Lawrence Erlbaum; 1988.

De Villiers, J.G. and De Villiers, p.A. (2003). Language and thoughts: Coming to understand false beliefs. In D Genter & S. Goldin Meadow, (eds) Language in mind: Advances in the study of language and cognition. Cambridge, M.A: MIT Press.

Gillot, A., Furniss, F., & Walter, A. (2004). Theory of mind ability in children with specific language impairment. Children language, 20(1). 1-11.

Hassanzadeh, S., Mohseni, N., Afrooz, Gh.A., and Hejazi, E.(2007). Cognition Development in Deaf Children based on Theory of Mind, Research on Exceptional Children,7(1),19-44, [In Persian].

]Hassanzadeh,s. and Minaei, A.(2002). Test of language Development Primary, Adaptation and Standardization to Persian Language, Research on Exceptional children,1(2);119-134,[ In Persian].

Lind, S. E., & Bowler D. M., (2009). Language and theory of mind in autism spectrum disorder: the relationship between complement syntax and false belief task performance. Journal developmental disorder. 39(6). 929-937.

Mahdizadeh,M., Falahi, M.H., and Vahab,M.(2015). The Study of Different Aspects of Language Ability in 5-8-year-old Autistic children Compared to their Normal Peers. Quarterly journal of languagr research.7(15),131-150,[ In Persian].

Milligan, K., Astington, J. W., & Dack, L. A., (2007). Language and theory of mind: meta-analysis of relation between language ability and false belief understanding. Child developmental. 78(2), 622- 646.

Moore, C., Pure, K., & Furrow, D. (1990). Children’s understanding of the modal expressions of speaker certainty and uncertainty and it’s relation to the development of a representational theory of mind. Child development, 61, 722-730.

Newcomer,P.L.,& Hammill,D.D.(1988). Test of Language development-2: primary. Austin, TX: Pro-ed.

Oberman, M.L., Ramachandran, S. V., Pineda, J. A., Hubbarda, E., Cleery, M. C., Altschulera, E (2005). EEG evidence for mirror neuron dysfunction in autism spectrum disorders. Cognitive brain research, 24, 190-198.

Olson, D.R. (1988). On the origins of beliefs and other intentional states in children. Developing theories of mind (pp. 414-426). New York: Cambridge University Press.

Peterson, C., Siegal, M. (2000). Insights into Theory of Mid from Deafness and Autism. Mind and Language, 15, 1, 123-145.

Premack, D. and Woodruff, G (1978). Does the chimpanzee have a theory of mind? Journal of the behavioral and brain sciences, 4,515-526.

Segal, G. (1998). Representing representations. In P. Carruthers & J Boucher (Eds.), Language and thought: interdisciplinary themes (pp. 146-161). Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.

Sobhani rad, D., Moghimi,A., Ghanaei ch.A., Maroofi, p.(2013). The investigation and comparison of language characteristics in autistic children, Research in Clinical Psychology and Counselings, 3(1), 119-128,[ In Persian].

Tager-Flusberg, H. (2000). Language and understanding minds: connections in autism. (pp: 124-149). Oxford, Oxford university press.

Tager-Flusberg, H (2001). Understanding the language and communicative Impairments in Autism. International Review of Research in Mental Retardation. 23. pp. 183 – 205.

Wimmer, H.; Perner, J. (1983). "Beliefs about beliefs: Representation and constraining function of wrong beliefs in young children's understanding of deception". Cognition. 13 (1): 103–128.