Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Deictic Relational Complexity and the Development of Deception

  • Article
  • Published:
The Psychological Record Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

An empirical investigation of age-related development of the ability to deceive was conducted from the perspective of Relational Frame Theory, which, unlike the traditional approach, Theory of Mind, has been used to analyze deception in terms of the complexity of the relational responding involved. A derived relational responding—based protocol was used to compare the deception-taking skills of five different age groups. Results indicated that performances on the tasks improved as a function of age, supporting the current concept of deception as a learned relationally complex behavioral pattern. The findings are discussed in terms of their implications for the mainstream developmental literature on deception.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • ANDREWS, G., HALFORD, G., BUNCH, K., BOWDEN, D., & JONES, T. (2003). Theory of mind and relational complexity. Child Development, 74, 1476–1499.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • BARNES-HOLMES, Y., BARNES-HOLMES, D., & CULLINAN, V. (2001). Education. In S. C. Hayes, D. Barnes-Holmes, & B. T. Roche (Eds.), Relational frame theory: A post-Skinnerian account of human language and cognition. New York: Plenum.

    Google Scholar 

  • BARNES-HOLMES, D., STEWART, I., DYMOND, S., & ROCHE B. (2000). A behavior-analytic approach to some of the problems of the self: A relational frame analysis. In M. Dougher (Ed.), Clinical behavior analysis (pp. 47–74). Reno, NV: Context Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • BARON-COHEN, S. (1992). Out of sight or out of mind: Another look at deception in autism. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 33, 1141–1155.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • BARON-COHEN, S., & HAMMER, J. (1997). Parents of children with Asperger syndrome: What is the cognitive phenotype? Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 9, 548–954.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • BARON-COHEN, S., TAGER-FLUSBERG, H., & COHEN, D. (2000). Understanding other minds: Perspectives from developmental cognitive neuroscience. 2nd ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • CHANDLER, M., FRITZ, A. S., & HALA, S. (1989). Small-scale deception as a marker of two-, three-, and four-year-olds’ early theories of mind. Child Development, 60, 1263–1277.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • DYMOND, S., & BARNES, D. (1997). Behaviour-analytic approaches to self-awareness. The Psychological Record, 47, 181–200.

    Google Scholar 

  • HAYES, S. C. (1984). Making sense of spirituality. Behaviorism, 12, 99–110.

    Google Scholar 

  • HAYES, S. C., BARNES-HOLMES, D., & ROCHE, B. (2001). Relational frame theory: A post-Skinnerian account of human language and cognition. New York: Plenum.

    Google Scholar 

  • HAYES, S. C., & HAYES, L. J. (1989). The verbal action of the listener as a basis for rule-governance. In S. C. Hayes (Ed.), Rule-governed behavior: Cognition, contingencies, and instructional control (pp. 153–190). New York: Plenum.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • HEYES, C. M. (1988). Theory of Mind in nonhuman primates. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 21, 101–48.

    Google Scholar 

  • HOWLIN, P., BARON-COHEN, S., & HADWIN, J. (1999). Teaching children with autism to mind-read. A practical guide. Chichester, England: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • MARVIN, R. S., GREENBERG, M. T., & MOSSLER, D. G. (1976). The early development of conceptual perspective taking: Distinguishing among multiple perspectives. Child Development, 47, 511–514.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • MCHUGH, L., BARNES-HOLMES, Y., & BARNES-HOLMES, D. (2004). Developmental trends in perspective-taking. The Psychological Record, 54, 115–145.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • MCHUGH, L., BARNES-HOLMES, Y., BARNES-HOLMES, D., & STEWART, I. (2006). False belief as a generalized operant. The Psychological Record, 56, 341–364.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • WELLMAN, H. M., CROSS, D., & WATSON, J. (2001). Meta-analysis of theory-of-mind development: The truth about false belief. Child Development, 72, 655–684.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • WIMMER, H., & PERNER, J. (1983). Beliefs about beliefs: representation and constraining function of wrong beliefs in young children’s understanding of deception. Cognition, 13, 103–128.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Psychology, University of Wales, Swansea, Singleton Park, Swansea, SA2 8PP, UK

    Louise McHugh

  2. National University of Ireland, Maynooth, Ireland

    Yvonne Barnes-Holmes & Dermot Barnes-Holmes

  3. National University of Ireland, Galway, Ireland

    Ian Stewart

  4. University of Wales, Swansea, UK

    Simon Dymond

Authors
  1. Louise McHugh
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Yvonne Barnes-Holmes
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Dermot Barnes-Holmes
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Ian Stewart
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Simon Dymond
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Louise McHugh.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

McHugh, L., Barnes-Holmes, Y., Barnes-Holmes, D. et al. Deictic Relational Complexity and the Development of Deception. Psychol Rec 57, 517–531 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03395592

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03395592

Search

Navigation