Editing Theory of mind (section)

== Definition ==
The "theory of mind" is described as a [[theory]] because the behavior of the other person, such as their statements and expressions, is the only thing being directly observed; no one has direct access to the mind of another, and the existence and nature of the mind must be inferred.<ref name="Premack, D. G. 1978">{{cite journal |last1=Premack |first1=David |last2=Woodruff |first2=Guy |title=Does the chimpanzee have a theory of mind? |journal=Behavioral and Brain Sciences |volume=1 |issue=4 |pages=515&ndash;526 |doi=10.1017/S0140525X00076512 |date=December 1978 |doi-access=free }}</ref> It is typically assumed others have minds analogous to one's own; this assumption is based on three reciprocal social interactions, as observed in [[joint attention]],<ref name="Baron-Cohen, S. 1991 pp. 233-251">{{cite book |last=Baron-Cohen |first=Simon |author-link=Simon Baron-Cohen |contribution=Precursors to a theory of mind: Understanding attention in others |editor-last=Whiten |editor-first=Andrew |title=Natural theories of mind: evolution, development, and simulation of everyday mindreading |pages=233–251 |publisher=B. Blackwell |location=Oxford, UK Cambridge, Massachusetts |year=1991 |isbn=978-0-631-17194-2}}</ref> the functional use of language,<ref>Bruner, J. S. (1981). "Intention in the structure of action and interaction". In L. P. Lipsitt & C. K. Rovee-Collier (Eds.), ''Advances in infancy research'', Vol.&nbsp;1, pp.&nbsp;41–56. Norwood, New Jersey: Ablex Publishing Corporation.</ref> and the understanding of others' emotions and actions.<ref>Gordon, R. M. (1996). "'Radical' simulationism". In P. Carruthers & P. K. Smith, Eds. ''Theories of theories of mind''. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.</ref> Theory of mind allows one to attribute thoughts, desires, and intentions to others, to predict or explain their actions, and to posit their intentions. It enables one to understand that mental states can be the cause of—and can be used to explain and predict—the behavior of others.<ref name="Premack, D. G. 1978" /> Being able to attribute mental states to others and understanding them as causes of behavior implies, in part, one must be able to conceive of the mind as a "generator of representations".<ref>{{Unbulleted list citebundle 
|1={{cite journal |last1=Courtin |first1=C. |year=2000 |title=The impact of sign language on the cognitive development of deaf children: The case of theories of mind |journal=Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education |volume=5 |issue =3 |pages=266–276 |doi=10.1093/deafed/5.3.266 |pmid=15454505 |doi-access=free }}
|2={{cite journal |last1=Courtin |first1=C. |last2=Melot |first2=A.-M. |year=2005 |title=Metacognitive development of deaf children: Lessons from the appearance-reality and false belief tasks |journal=Developmental Science |volume=8 |issue=1 |pages=16–25 |pmid=15647063 |doi=10.1111/j.1467-7687.2005.00389.x }}
|3={{cite journal |last1=Macaulay |first1=C. E. |last2=Ford |first2=R. M. |title=Family influences on the cognitive development of profoundly deaf children: Exploring the effects of socioeconomic status and siblings|journal=Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education |date=2013 |volume=4 |issue=18 |pages=545–562 |doi=10.1093/deafed/ent019 |pmid=23614903 |url=https://academic.oup.com/jdsde/article/18/4/545/559674?login=true |access-date=18 May 2021|doi-access=free }} }}</ref> If a person does not have a mature theory of mind, it may be a sign of cognitive or developmental impairment.<ref name="Wellman-2006" />

Theory of mind appears to be an innate potential ability in humans that requires social and other experience over many years for its full development. Different people may develop more or less effective theories of mind. [[Neo-Piagetian theories of cognitive development]] maintain that theory of mind is a byproduct of a broader [[hypercognitive]] ability of the human mind to register, monitor, and represent its own functioning.<ref>Demetriou, A., Mouyi, A., & Spanoudis, G. (2010). "The development of mental processing", Nesselroade, J. R. (2010). "Methods in the study of life-span human development: Issues and answers". In W. F. Overton (Ed.), ''Biology, cognition and methods across the life-span'', Volume 1 of the ''Handbook of life-span development'' (pp.&nbsp;36–55), Editor-in-chief: R. M. Lerner. Hoboken, New Jersey: Wiley.</ref>

[[Empathy]]—the recognition and understanding of the states of mind of others, including their beliefs, desires, and particularly emotions—is a related concept. Empathy is often characterized as the ability to "put oneself into another's shoes". Recent [[ethology|neuro-ethological]] studies of animal behavior suggest that rodents may exhibit empathetic abilities.<ref>de Waal, Franz B. M. (2007), "Commiserating Mice". ''Scientific American'', 24 June 2007.</ref> While empathy is known as emotional perspective-taking, theory of mind is defined as cognitive perspective-taking.<ref>{{Cite journal|last1=Hynes|first1=Catherine A.|last2=Baird|first2=Abigail A.|last3=Grafton|first3=Scott T.|title=Differential role of the orbital frontal lobe in emotional versus cognitive perspective-taking|journal=Neuropsychologia|volume=44|issue=3|pages=374–383|doi=10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2005.06.011|pmid=16112148|year=2006|s2cid=13159903}}</ref>

Research on theory of mind, in humans and animals, adults and children, normally and atypically developing, has grown rapidly in the years since [[David Premack|Premack]] and Guy Woodruff's 1978 paper, "Does the chimpanzee have a theory of mind?".<ref name="Premack, D. G. 1978" /> The field of [[social neuroscience]] has also begun to address this debate by imaging the brains of humans while they perform tasks that require the understanding of an intention, belief, or other mental state in others.

An alternative account of theory of mind is given in [[Operant conditioning|operant]] psychology and provides [[empirical evidence]] for a functional account of both perspective-taking and empathy. The most developed operant approach is founded on research on derived relational responding{{technical inline|date=March 2022}} and is subsumed within [[relational frame theory]]. Derived relational responding relies on the ability to identify ''derived relations'', or relationships between stimuli that are not directly learned or [[reinforcement|reinforced]]; for example, if "snake" is related to "danger" and "danger" is related to "fear", people may know to fear snakes even without learning an explicit connection between snakes and fear.<ref>Blackledge, J. T. (2003). "An introduction to relational frame theory: Basics and applications". ''The Behavior Analyst Today'', 3(4), 421–433. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0099997.</ref> According to this view, empathy and perspective-taking comprise a complex set of derived relational abilities based on learning to discriminate and respond verbally to ever more complex relations between self, others, place, and time, and through established relations.<ref>Hayes, S. C., Barnes-Holmes, D., & Roche, B. (2001). ''Relational frame theory: A post-Skinnerian account of human language and cognition''. New York: Kluwer Academic/Plenum.</ref><ref>Rehfeldt, R. A., and Barnes-Holmes, Y., (2009). [https://books.google.com/books?id=_7dtHoHcwoUC&q=%22theory+of+mind%22 ''Derived Relational Responding: Applications for learners with autism and other developmental disabilities''. Oakland, California: New Harbinger.] ''Google Books''.</ref><ref>McHugh, L. & Stewart, I. (2012). [https://books.google.com/books?id=sl_QvE902k4C&q=%22theory+of+mind%22 ''The self and perspective-taking: Contributions and applications from modern behavioral science''. Oakland, California: New Harbinger.] ''Google Books''.</ref>