Abstract
We investigated the social use of theory of mind in school-aged children. The expressions Nice Theory of Mind and Nasty Theory of Mind are used to differentiate behaviours requiring a prosocial use and an antisocial use of ToM abilities respectively. Our goals was to investigate whether and how mind reading abilities and empathy affect nice and nasty ToM behaviours. One hundred and ninety-seven children who were fourth and fifth graders took part in this study. Participants were administered stories that assessed cognitive, affective or moral mental state reasoning abilities and they also completed a self-report measure of empathy. Teachers’ rating on children’s prosocial and antisocial behaviours that underpin ToM abilities led us to identify nice and nasty ToM behaviours. We found that children who engage in nasty ToM behaviour showed good abilities to understand others’ thoughts and beliefs. However, children with nice ToM behaviour showed more moral and emotional sensitivity as compared to children who engage in nasty ToM behaviour. Furthermore, the hot component of empathy is stronger in fostering prosocial behaviours and inhibiting antisocial acts than cognitive component.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Ali, F., & Chamorro-Premuzic, T. (2010). Investigating theory of mind deficits in nonclinical psychopathy. Personality and Individual Differences, 49, 758–762.
Andreou, E. (2004). Bully/victim problems and their association with Machiavellianism and self-efficacy in Greek primary school children. British Journal of Developmental Psychology, 74(2), 297–309.
Arefi, M. (2010). Present of a casual model for social function based on theory of mind with mediating of Machiavellian beliefs and hot empathy. Social and Behavioral Sciences, 5, 694–697.
Astington, J. W. (2003). Sometimes necessary, never sufficient: False-belief understanding and social competence. In B. Repacholi & V. Slaughter (Eds.), Individual differences in theory of mind: Implications for typical and atypical development (pp. 13–38). New York: Psychology Press.
Badenes, L., Estevan, R., & Bacete, F. (2000). Theory of mind and peer rejection at school. Social Development, 9, 271–283.
Barlow, A., Qualter, P., & Stylianou, M. (2010). Relationship between Machiavellianism, emotional intelligence and theory of mind in children. Personality and Individual Differences, 48, 78–82.
Belacchi, C., & Farina, E. (2010). Prosocial/hostile roles and emotion comprehension in preschoolers. Aggressive Behavior, 36(6), 371–389.
Bellagamba, F., Laghi, F., Lonigro, A., & Pace, C. S. (2012). Re–enactment of intended acts from a video presentation by 18-and-24-month-old children. Cognitive Processing, 13(4), 381–386.
Binnie, L. E. (2005). Tom goes to school: Theory of mind understanding and its link to schooling. Educational and Child Psychology, 22(4), 81–93.
Bonino, S., Lo Coco, A., & Tani, F. (1998). Empatia. Giunti: Processi di condivisione delle emozioni. Firenze.
Capage, L., & Watson, A. C. (2001). Individual differences in theory of mind, aggressive behavior and social skills in young children. Early Education and Development, 12(4), 613–628.
Caputi, M., Lecce, S., Pagnin, A., & Banerjee, R. (2012). Longitudinal effects of theory of mind on later peer relationship: The role of prosocial behavior. Developmental Psychology, 48(1), 257–270.
Caravita, S., Di Blasio, P., & Salmivalli, C. (2009). Unique and interactive effects of empathy and social status of involvement in bullying. Social Development, 18(1), 140–163.
Caravita, S., Di Blasio, P., & Salmivalli, C. (2010). Early adolescents’ participation in bullying: is ToM involved? Journal of Early Adolescence, 30(1), 138–170.
Crick, N. R., & Dodge, K. A. (1994). A review and reformulation of social-information-processing mechanism in children’s social adjustment. Psychological Bulletin, 115(1), 74–101.
de Wied, M., Goudena, P. P., & Matthys, W. (2005). Empathy in boys with disruptive behavior disorders. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 46, 867–880.
Decety, J., & Jackson, P. L. (2004). The functional architecture of human empathy. Behavioral and Cognitive Neuroscience Review, 3, 71–100.
Denham, S. A. (2006). Social-emotional competence as support for school readiness: What is it and how do we assess it? Early Education and Development, 17, 57–89.
Diesendruck, G., & Ben-Eliyahu, A. (2006). The relationship among social cognition, peer acceptance and social behavior in Israeli kindergarteners. International Journal of Behavioral Development, 30(2), 137–147.
Dunn, L., & Dunn, L. (1981). The Peabody picture vocabulary test- revised. Circle Pines, MN: America Guidance Service.
Eisenberg, N. (2000). Emotion, regulation, and moral development. Annual Review of Psychology, 51, 665–697.
Eisenberg, N., Fabes, R. A., & Spinrad, T. L. (2006). Prosocial development. In W. Damon, R. M. Lerner (Series Eds.), & N. Eisenberg (Vol. Ed.), Handbook of child psychology: Vol. 3. Social, emotional, and personality development (6th ed., pp. 646–718). New York: Wiley.
Eisenberg, N., & Liew, J. (2009). Empathy. In R. A. Shweder, T. R. Bidell, A. C. Dailey, S. D. Dixon, P. J. Miller, & J. Modell (Eds.), The child: An encyclopedia companion (pp. 316–318). Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
Feshbach, N. D., Caprara, G. V., Lo Coco, A., Pastorelli, C., Manna, G., & Menzres, J. (1991). Empathy and its correlates: Cross cultural data from Italy. Minneapolis: Eleventh Biennial Meeting of the International Society for the Study of Behavioral Development.
Flavell, J. H. (2004). Theory of mind development: Retrospect and prospect. Merril Palmer Quarterly, 50(3), 274–290.
Gini, G. (2006). Social cognition and moral cognition in bullying: What’s wrong? Aggressive Behavior, 32, 528–539.
Gini, G., Albiero, P., Benelli, B., & Altoe, G. (2007). Does empathy predict adolescents’ bullying and defending behavior? Aggressive Behavior, 33(5), 467–476.
Goodman, R., Meltzer, H., & Bailey, V. (1998). The strengths and difficulties questionnaire: A pilot study on the validity of the self-report version. European Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, 7(3), 125–130.
Happé, F. (1994). An advanced test of theory of mind: Understanding of story characters’ thoughts and feelings by able autistic, mentally handicapped and normal children and adults. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 24, 129–154.
Happé, F., & Frith, U. (1996). Theory of mind and social impairment in children with conduct disorder. British Journal of Developmental Psychology, 14(4), 385–398.
Hawley, P. H. (2003). Prosocial and coercitive configurations of resource control in early adolescence: A case for the well-adapted Machiavellian. Merrill-Palmer Quarterly, 49(3), 279–309.
Hay, D. F., Payne, A., & Chadwick, A. (2004). Peer relations in childhood. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 45, 84–108.
Hoglund, W. L., Lalonde, C. E., & Leadbeater, B. J. (2008). Social-cognitive competence, peer rejection and neglect, and behavioural and emotional problems in middle childhood. Social Development, 17, 528–553.
Hughes, C. (2011). Social understanding and social lives. From toddlerhood through to the transition to school. Hove, UK: Psychology Press.
Hughes, C., Dunn, J., & White, A. (1998). Trick or treat? Uneven understanding of mind and emotion and executive dysfunction in “hard–to–manage” preschoolers. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 39(7), 981–994.
Hughes, C., & Leekam, S. (2004). What are the links between ToM and social relationship? Review, reflections and the new directions for studies of typical and atypical development. Social Development, 13(4), 590–619.
Jolliffe, D., & Farrington, D. P. (2006). Examining the relationship between low empathy and bullying. Aggressive Behavior, 32(6), 540–550.
Lemerise, E. A., & Arsenio, W. F. (2000). An integrated model of emotion processes and cognition in social information processing. Child Development, 71, 107–118.
LeSure-Lester, G. E. (2000). Relation between empathy and aggression and behavior compliance among abused group home youth. Child Psychiatry and Human Development, 31, 153–161.
Liddle, B., & Nettle, D. (2006). Higher-order theory of mind and social competence in school-age children. Journal of Cultural and Evolutionary Psychology, 4(3–4), 231–244.
Lovett, J. B., & Sheffield, A. R. (2006). Affective empathy deficits in aggressive children and adolescents: A critical review. Clinical Psychology Review, 27, 1–13.
Lyons, M., Caldwell, T., & Shultz, S. (2010). Mind-reading and manipulation: Is machiavellianism related to theory of mind? Journal of Evolutionary Psychology, 8(3), 261–274.
Marshall, L. E., & Marshall, W. L. (2011). Empathy and antisocial behaviour. Journal of Forensic Psychiatry and Psychology, 22(5), 742–759.
McEwen, F., Happé, F., Bolton, P., Rijsdijk, F., Ronald, A., Dworzynski, K., et al. (2007). Origins of individual differences in imitation: Links with language, pretend play, and socially insightful behaviour in two-year-old twins. Child Development, 78(2), 474–492.
Mull, M. S., & Evans, E. M. (2010). Did she mean to do it? Acquiring a folk theory of intentionality. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 107, 207–228.
Razza, R., & Blair, C. (2009). Associations among false-belief understanding, executive function, an social competence: A longitudinal analysis. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 30(3), 332–343.
Renouf, A., Brendgen, M., Parent, S., Vitaro, F., Zelazo, P. D., Boivin, M., et al. (2010). Relations between theory of mind and indirect and physical aggression in kindergarten: Evidence of the moderating role of prosocial behaviors. Social Development, 19(3), 535–555.
Ronald, A., Happé, F., Hughes, C., & Plomin, R. (2005). Nice and nasty theory of mind in preschool children: Nature and nurture. Social Development, 14(4), 664–684.
Singer, T. (2006). The neuronal basis and the ontogeny of empathy and mind reading: Review of literature and implications for future research. Neuroscience and Biobehavioral Reviews, 30(6), 855–863.
Slaughter, V. (2011). Early adoption of machiavellian attitudes: Implications for children’s interpersonal relationships. In T. Barry, P. Kerig, & K. Stellwagen (Eds.), Narcissism and machiavellianism in youth: Implications for the development of adaptive and maladaptive behaviour (pp. 177–192). Washington, DC: APA Books.
Slaughter, V., Dennis, M. J., & Pritchard, M. (2002). Theory of mind and peer acceptance in preschool children. The British Journal of Developmental Psychology, 20, 545–564.
Stavrinides, P., Georgiou, S., & Theofanous, V. (2010). Bullying and empathy: A short-term longitudinal investigation. Educational Psychology, 30(7), 793–802.
Stella, G., Pizzoli, C., & Tressoldi, P. E. (2000). Peabody. Test di vocabolario recettivo. Torino: Omega Edizioni.
Sutton, J., & Keogh, E. (2000). Social competition in school: Relationships with bullying, machiavellianism and personality. The British Journal of Educational Psychology, 70, 443–456.
Sutton, J., Smith, P. K., & Swettenham, J. (1999a). Bullying and theory of mind: A critique of social deficit view of antisocial behaviour. Social Development, 8, 117–127.
Sutton, J., Smith, P. K., & Swettenham, J. (1999b). Social cognition and bullying: Social inadequacy or skilled manipulation? British Journal of Developmental Psychology, 17, 435–450.
Warden, D., & Mackinnon, S. (2003). Prosocial children, bullies, and victims: An investigation of their sociometric status, empathy and problem-solving strategies. British Journal of Developmental Psychology, 21, 367–385.
Acknowledgments
We wish to express our deep gratitude to the principals, teachers and children who participated in this study.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
This research is based in part on the thesis of the first author submitted to the Psychology Department of Sapienza University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Ph.D course.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Lonigro, A., Laghi, F., Baiocco, R. et al. Mind Reading Skills and Empathy: Evidence for Nice and Nasty ToM Behaviours in School-Aged Children. J Child Fam Stud 23, 581–590 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10826-013-9722-5
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10826-013-9722-5