Abstract
The aim of this paper is to show some of the limitations of the Theory of Mind approach to interaction compared to a conversation analytic alternative. In the former, mental state terms are examined as words that signify internal referents. This study examines children’s uses of ‘I want’ in situ. The data are taken from a corpus of family mealtimes. ‘I want’ constructions are shown to be interactionally occasioned. The analysis suggests that (a) a referential view of language does not adequately account for how mental state terms are used in talk, (b) the dominant methodology for examining children’s understanding of ‘desires’ is based on several problematic assumptions. It is concluded that participation in interaction is a social matter, a consideration that is obscured by Theory of Mind and its favoured methods.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Antaki, C. (2004). Reading minds or dealing with interactional implications? Theory and Psychology, 14(5), 667–683.
Bartsch, K., & Wellman, H. M. (1995). Children talk about the mind. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Cassidy, K. W., Cosetti, M., Jones, R., Kelton, E., Rafal, V. M., Richman, L., et al. (2005). Preschool children’s understanding of conflicting desires. Journal of Cognition and Development, 6(3), 427–454.
Childs, C. (2012). “I’m not X, I just want Y”: Formulating ‘wants’ in interaction. Discourse Studies, 14(2), 1–16.
Craven, A., & Potter, J. A. (2010). Directives: Entitlement and contingency in action. Discourse Studies, 12(4), 1–24.
Curl, T. (2006). Offers of assistance: Constraints on syntactic design. Journal of Pragmatics, 38(8), 1257–1280.
Edwards, D. (2005). Moaning, whinging and laughing: The subjective side of complaints. Discourse Studies, 7(1), 5–29.
Edwards, D. (2008). Intentionality and mens rea in police interrogations: The production of actions as crimes. Intercultural Pragmatics, 5(2), 177–199.
Gopnik, A. (2008). The theory theory as an alternative to the innateness hypothesis. In L. M. Anthony & N. Hornstein (Eds.), Chomsky and his critics (pp. 238–253). Oxford: Blackwell.
Jefferson, G. (1972). Side sequences. In D. Sudnow (Ed.), Studies in social interaction (pp. 238–253). New York: Free Press.
Leslie, A. M. (1987). Pretense and representation: The origins of “theory of mind”. Psychological Review, 94(4), 412–426.
Leslie, A. M. (1992). Pretense, autism, and the theory-of-mind module. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 1(1), 18–21.
McCabe, R. (2009). Specifying interactional markers of schizophrenia in clinical consultations. In I. Leudar & A. Costall (Eds.), Against theory of mind (pp. 108–125). Basingstoke: Palgrave MacMillan.
McElwain, N. L., Booth-LaForce, C., & Wu, X. (2011). Infant–mother attachment and children’s friendship quality: Maternal mental-state talk as an intervening mechanism. Developmental Psychology, 47(5), 1295–1311.
Ng, L., Cheung, H., & Xiao, W. (2010). False belief, complementation language, and contextual bias in preschoolers. International Journal of Behavioural Development, 34(2), 168–179.
Núñez, M., & Harris, P. L. (1998). Psychological and deontic concepts: Separate domains or intimate connection? Mind and Language, 13(2), 153–170.
Oh, S. Y. (2005). English zero anaphora as an interactional resource. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 38(3), 267–302.
Potter, J. A. (2005). Making psychology relevant. Discourse and Society, 16(5), 739–747.
Potter, J. A., & Edwards, D. (1990). Nigel Lawson’s tent: Discourse analysis, attribution theory, and the social psychology of fact. European Journal of Social Psychology, 20(5), 405–424.
Potter, J. A., & Edwards, D. (2003). Sociolinguistics, cognitivism, and discursive psychology. International Journal of English Studies, 3(1), 93–109.
Rakoczy, H., Warneken, F., & Tomasello, M. (2007). “This way!”, “No! That way!”—3-year olds know that two people can have mutually incompatible desires. Cognitive Development, 22(1), 47–68.
Repacholi, B. M., & Gopnik, A. (1997). Early reasoning about desires: Evidence from 14- and 18-month-olds. Developmental Psychology, 33(1), 12–21.
Schegloff, E. A. (1992). Repair after next turn: The last structurally provided defense of intersubjectivity in conversation. The American Journal of Sociology, 97(5), 1295–1345.
Wellman, H. M. (2010). Developing a theory of mind. In U. Goswami (Ed.), The Wiley-Blackwell handbook of childhood cognitive development (pp. 258–284). London: Wiley.
Wellman, H. M., & Woolley, J. D. (1989). From simple desires to ordinary beliefs: The early development of everyday psychology. Cognition, 35(3), 245–275.
Wootton, A. J. (1981). Two request forms of four year olds. Journal of Pragmatics, 5(6), 511–523.
Wootton, A. J. (1997). Interaction and the development of mind. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Wootton, A. J. (2006). Children’s practices and their connections with ‘mind’. Discourse Studies, 8(1), 191–198.
Acknowledgments
The author would like to thank the members of the Discourse and Rhetoric Group (DARG) at Loughborough University, with special thanks to Derek Edwards and Alexa Hepburn.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Childs, C. From Reading Minds to Social Interaction: Respecifying Theory of Mind. Hum Stud 37, 103–122 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10746-013-9284-y
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10746-013-9284-y