Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Neurosociology and Theory of Mind (ToM)

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Handbook of Neurosociology

Part of the book series: Handbooks of Sociology and Social Research ((HSSR))

Abstract

Theory of mind (ToM) is the term used by cognitive psychologists and neuroscientists to describe a person’s ability to understand another person’s mental states. It is importantly involved in empathy and any behavior that takes into consideration the likely reaction of others. In this chapter, I describe the standard test used to gauge a child’s ToM, the false belief test. I trace the typical development of ToM in young children and discuss theories of this development. I discuss the association of ToM with language learning, brain bases of ToM, and the lack of development of ToM in autistic children. Last, I discuss the relevance of the development of ToM in children for sociological work on the emergence of the self, as well as other sociological perspectives.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 129.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Baron-Cohen, S. (1995). Mindblindness: An essay on autism and ToM. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bedny, M., Pascual-Leone, A., & Saxe, R. (2009, July 7). Growing up blind does not change the neural bases of ToM. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 106(27), 11312–11317.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Berger, J., Hamit Fisek, M., Norman, R. Z., & Zelditch, M., Jr. (1977). Status characteristics and social interaction: An expectations states approach. New York: Elsevier.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bloom, P. (2000). How children learn the meaning of words. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brooks, R., & Meltzoff, A. N. (2002). The importance of eyes: How infants interpret adult looking behavior. Developmental Psychology, 38(6), 958–966.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brüne, M., & Brüne-Cohrs, U. (2006). Theory of mind-evolution, ontogeny, brain mechanisms and psychopathology. Neuroscience and Biobehavioral Reviews, 30(4), 437–455.

    Google Scholar 

  • Burke, P. J. (1991). Identity processes and social stress. American Sociological Review, 56(6), 836–849.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Butterworth, G., & Cochran, E. (1980). Towards a mechanism of joint visual attention in human infancy. International Journal of Behavioral Development, 3(3), 253–272.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cattaneo, L., Fabbri-Destro, M., Boria, S., Pieraccini, C., Monti, A., Cossu, G., & Rizzolatti, G. (2007). Impairment of actions chains in autism and its possible role in intention understanding. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 104(45), 17825–17830.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cooley, C. H. (1902). Human nature and the social order. New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons.

    Google Scholar 

  • Corkum, V., & Moore, C. (1995). Development of joint visual attention in infants. In C. Moore & P. J. Dunham (Eds.), Joint attention: Its origins and role in development (pp. 61–83). Hillsdale: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  • de Waal, F. (2009). The age of empathy. New York: Crown Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fair, D. A., Cohen, A. L., Dosenbach, N. U. F., Church, J. A., Miezin, F. M., Barch, D. M., Raichle, M. E., Petersen, S. E., & Schlaggar, B. L. (2008, March 11). The maturing architecture of the brain’s default network. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 105(10), 4028–4032.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Flavell, J. H. (1999). Cognitive development: Children’s knowledge about the mind. Annual Review of Psychology, 50, 21–45.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Flavell, J. H., Everett, B. A., Croft, K., & Flavell, E. (1981). Young children’s knowledge about visual perception-Further evidence for the level 1-level 2 distinction. Developmental Psychology, 17, 99–103.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fodor, J. A. (1992). A theory of the child’s ToM. Cognition, 44, 283–296.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Franks, D. D. (2010). Neurosociology. New York: Springer.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Franks, D. D., & Gecas, V. (1992). Autonomy and conformity in Cooley’s self theory: The looking glass self and beyond. Symbolic Interaction, 15, 49–68.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Frith, U., Happé, F., & Siddons, F. (1994). Autism and theory of mind in everyday life. Social Development, 3(2), 108–124.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gallese, V., & Goldman, A. (1998). Mirror neurons and the simulation ToM-reading. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 2(12), 493–501.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gallup, G. G., Jr., Anderson, J. R., & Shillito, D. J. (2002). The mirror test. In M. Bekoff, C. Allen, & G. M. Burghardt (Eds.), The cognitive animal (pp. 325–334). Cambridge: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Garnham, W. A., & Perner, J. (2001). Actions really do speak louder than words—But only implicitly: Young children’s understanding of false belief in action. British Journal of Developmental Psychology, 19, 413–432.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Giacomo, R., & Craighero, L. L. (2004). The mirror-neuron system. Annual Review of Neuroscience, 27, 169–92.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goffman, E. (1959). The presentation of self in everyday life. New York: Double Day.

    Google Scholar 

  • Golinkoff, R. M. (1986). I beg your pardon?: The preverbal negotiation of failed messages. Journal of Child Language, 13(3), 455–476.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gopnick, A., & Wellman, H. M. (1994). The ‘theory’ theory. In L. A. Hirschfield & S. A. Gelman (Eds.), Mapping the mind: Domain specificity in cognition and culture (pp. 257–93). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Gordon, A. S. (2006). Language evidence for changes in a theory of mind. In M. Arbib (Ed.), Action to language via the mirror neuron system. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Guglielmo, S., Monroe, A., & Malle, B. F. (2009). At the heart of morality lies folk psychology. Inquiry, 52(5), 449–466.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harris, P. L. (1992). From simulation to folk psychology: The case for development. Mind Language, 7, 120–144.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Iacoboni, M., Istvan, I. M.-S., Gallese, V., Buccino, G., Mazziotta, J. C., & Rizzolatti, G. (2005). Grasping the intentions of others with one’s own mirror neuron system. PLoS Biology, 3(3), e79.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Le Bel, R. M., Pineda, J. A., & Sharma, A. (2009). Motor–auditory–visual integration: The role of the human mirror neuron system in communication and communication disorders. Journal of Communication Disorders, 42, 299–304.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Legerstee, M. (1991). The role of person and object in eliciting early imitation. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 51, 423–433.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Legerstee, M. (1992). A review of the animate-inanimate distinction in infancy: implications for models of social and cognitive knowing. Early Development Parenting, 1, 59–67.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leslie, A. M. (1994). ToMM, ToBy and Agency: Core architecture and domain specificity. In L. A. Hirschfield & S. A. Gelman (Eds.), Mapping the mind: Domain specificity in cognition and culture (pp. 119–148). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Lewis, M., & Ramsay, D. (2004). Development of self-recognition, personal pronoun use, and pretend play during the 2nd year. Child Development, 75, 1821–1831.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lillard, A. S., & Skibbe, L. (2005). ToM: Conscious attribution and spontaneous trait inference. In R. R. Hassin, J. S. Uleman, & J. A. Bargh (Eds.), The new unconscious (pp. 277–305). New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Liu, D., Wellman, H. M., Tardif, T., & Sabbagh, M. A. (2008). ToM development in Chinese children: A meta-analysis of false-belief understanding across cultures and languages. Developmental Psychology, 44(2), 523–531.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lovett, S. B., Pillow, B. H. & Bradford H. (2010). Age-related changes in children’s and adults’ explanations of interpersonal actions. The Journal of Genetic Psychology: Research and Theory on Human Development, 171(2), 139–167.

    Google Scholar 

  • Malle, B. F. (2005). Folk ToM: Conceptual foundations of human social cognition. In R. R. Hassin, J. S. Uleman, & J. A. Bargh (Eds.), The new unconscious (pp. 225–255). New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mead, G. H. (1934). Mind, self and society. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Meltzoff, A. N., & Keith Moore, M. (1977). Facial imitation in infants. Science, 198, 75–78.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mitchell, J. P., Malia Mason, C., Macrae, N., & Banaji, M. R. (2006). Thinking about others: The neural substrates of social cognition. In J. T. Cacioppo, P. S. Visser, & C. L. Pickett (Eds.), Social neuroscience (pp. 63–82). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Montgomery, K. J., Isenberg, N., & Haxby, J. V. (2007). Communicative hand gestures and object-directed hand movements activated the mirror neuron system. Social Cognitive and Affective Neuroscience, 2(2), 114–122.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moore, C., & Corkum, V. (1998). Infant gaze following based on eye direction. British Journal of Developmental Psychology, 16(4), 495–503.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moran, J. M., Young, L. L., Saxe, R., Lee, S. M., O’Young, D., Mavros, P. L., & Gabrieli, J. D. (2011, January). Impaired ToM for moral judgment in high-functioning autism. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, Early Edition.

    Google Scholar 

  • Oberman, L. M., & Ramachandran, V. S. (2007). The simulating social mind: The role of the mirror neuron system and simulation in the social and communicative deficits of autism spectrum disorders. Psychological Bulletin, 133(2), 310–327.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Oberman, L. M., Hubbard, E. M., McCleery, J. P., Altschulera, E. L., Ramachandrana, V. S., & Pineda, J. A. (2005). EEG evidence for mirror neuron dysfunction in autism spectrum disorders. Cognitive Brain Research, 24, 190–198.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pineda, J. A., & Hecht, E. (2009). Mirroring and mu rhythm involvement in social cognition: Are there dissociable subcomponents of ToM? Biological Psychology, 80(3), 306–314.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ramachandran, V. S. (2011). The tell-tale brain. New York: Norton Company.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reddy, V., Williams, E., Costantini, C., & Lang, B. (2010). Engaging with the self: Mirror behaviour in autism, Down syndrome and typical development. Autism, 14(5), 531–546.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rizzolatti Giacomo, L., Fogassi, L., & Gallese, V. (2001). Neurophysiological mechanisms underlying the understanding and imitation of action. Nature Review of Neuroscience, 2, 661–670.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Saxe, R. (2006). Four brain regions for one ToM? In J. T. Cacioppo, P. S. Visser, & C. L. Pickett (Eds.), Social neuroscience (pp. 83–102). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Saxe, R., Carey, S., & Kanwisher, N. (2004). Effect of subjective perspective taking during simulation of action: A PET investigation of agency. Nature Neuroscience, 4(5), 546–550.

    Google Scholar 

  • Scaife, M., & Bruner, J. S. (1975). The capacity for joint visual attention in the infant. Nature (London), 253(5489), 265–266.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schroeder, J. H., Desrocher, M., Bebko, J. M., & Catherine Cappadocia, M. (2010). The neurobiology of autism: Theoretical applications. Research in Autism Spectrum Disorders, 4, 555–564.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schulte-Rüther, M., Markowitsch, H. J., Fink, G. R., & Piefke, M. (2007). Mirror neuron and ToM mechanisms involved in face-to-face interactions: A functional magnetic resonance imaging approach to empathy. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 19(8), 1354–1372.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stephens, G. J., Silbert, L. J., & Hasson, U. (2010). Speaker–listener neural coupling underlies successful communication. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 107(32), 14425–14430.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stone, V. E. (2006). ToM and the evolution of social intelligence. In J. T. Cacioppo, P. S. Visser, & C. L. Pickett (Eds.), Social neuroscience: People thinking about thinking people (pp. 103–129). Cambridge: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tomasello, M., & Barton, M. (1994). Learning words in nonostensive contexts. Developmental Psychology, 30(5), 639–650.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Turner, J. H., Beeghley, L., & Powers, C. H. (1989). The emergence of sociological theory. Belmont: Wadsworth.

    Google Scholar 

  • Varley, R., & Siegal, M. (2000). Evidence for cognition without grammar from causal reasoning and “ToM” in an agrammatic aphasic patient. Current Biology, 10, 723–726.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vistoli, D., Brunet-Gouet, E., Baup-Bobin, E., Hardy-Bayle, M.-C., & Passerieux, C. (2011). Anatomical and temporal architecture of ToM: A MEG insight into the early stages. NeuroImage, 54, 1406–1414.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Webster, M., & Whitmeyer, J. M. (2002). Modeling second-order expectations. Sociological Theory, 3, 306–327.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wellman, H. M., & Gelman, S. A. (1998). Knowledge acquisition in foundation domains. In D. Kuhn & R. S. Siegler (Eds.), Handbook of child psychology, Vol. 2, Cognition, perception and language (pp. 523–573). New York: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Williams, J. H. G., Whiten, A., Suddendorf, T., & Perrett, D. I. (2001). Imitation, mirror neurons and autism. Neuroscience and Biobehaviour Review, 25, 287–295.

    Google Scholar 

  • Woodward, A. L. (1999). Infants’ ability to distinguish between purposeful and non-purposeful behaviors. Infant Behavior & Development, 22(2), 145–160.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Departmet of Sociology, University of North Carolina, Charlotte, NC, USA

    Rosemary L. Hopcroft

Authors
  1. Rosemary L. Hopcroft
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Rosemary L. Hopcroft .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Sociology, Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, VA, USA

    David D. Franks

  2. Department of Sociology, University of California, Riverside, CA, USA

    Jonathan H. Turner

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2013 Springer Science+Business Media B.V.

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Hopcroft, R.L. (2013). Neurosociology and Theory of Mind (ToM). In: Franks, D.D., Turner, J.H. (eds) Handbook of Neurosociology. Handbooks of Sociology and Social Research. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-4473-8_16

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation