Complements to cognition: a longitudinal study of the relationship between complex syntax and false-belief-understanding

By J. de Villiers, Jennie E. Pyers. 2002

559 citations recorded by the source corpus.

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/1de3be9a1fca14d4bf7fb8ac3946efbb3b80cb68

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

Citations in the corpus

The Role of Language in Theory of Mind Development. (2014, background): “We slowly realized that we were studying the linguistic basis for false-belief reasoning and that passing this kind of language task was in fact an important milestone, even perhaps a prerequisite, to passing the explicit false-belief tasks (de Villiers & Pyers, 2002).”
How language relates to belief, desire, and emotion understanding (2003, unknown): “de Villiers and de Villiers (2000) claim their measures (similar to those used by de Villiers & Pyers, 2002; Hale & Tager-Flusberg, in press) are unrelated to false belief, because the child need only remember or produce what they have been told the character thinks or said.”
The Innate Mind: Structure and Contents (2005, background): “A few studies have documented a significant correlation between knowledge of sentential complements and performance on theory-of-mind tasks in preschoolaged children (e.g., de Villiers & Pyers, 2002; Tager-Flusberg, 1997, 2000b).”
How language does (and does not) relate to theory of mind: A longitudinal study of syntax, semantics, working memory and false belief (2005, methodology): “…Developmental Psychology (2005), 23, 117–141 q 2005 The British Psychological Society www.bpsjournals.co.uk DOI:10.1348/026151004X21332 relative clauses (Smith, Apperly, & White, 2003) or object complements (de Villiers & de Villiers, 2000; de Villiers & Pyers, 2002; Hale & Tager-Flusberg, 2003).”
Language and theory of mind: meta-analysis of the relation between language ability and false-belief understanding. (2007, methodology): “Lastly, a child simply might not have an opportunity to produce a particular linguistic structure during a period of naturalistic observation even though he or she might be capable of producing it in an elicitation task (J. de Villiers & Pyers, 2002).”
fMRI item analysis in a theory of mind task (2011, background): “…of ToM, both because they allow the expression of mental states and because of their syntax (e.g. opacity: a sentence containing an attitude predicate can be false without affecting the truth of the full sentence, as in John thinks that there are unicorns is his yard; de Villiers and Pyers, 2002).”
Psychological and Sociomoral Reasoning in Infancy (2014, background): “others’ actions? To address this question, Dunfield and Kuhlmeier (2010) examined (in a task adapted from Behne et al.”
Hierarchical and dynamic relations of language and cognitive skills to reading comprehension: Testing the direct and indirect effects model of reading (DIER). (2019, result): “…2019) and a large body of previous, albeit piecemeal, studies indicating that foundational oral language and domain-general cognitive skills predict higher order skills (e.g., theory of mind; Arslan et al., 2017; Carlson, Moses, & Breton, 2002; de Villiers & Pyers, 2002; Slade & Ruffman, 2005).”
Why the Simple View of Reading Is Not Simplistic: Unpacking Component Skills of Reading Using a Direct and Indirect Effect Model of Reading (DIER) (2017, background): “Although theory of mind has been studied extensively as an outcome (e.g., Caillies & Sourn-Bissaoui, 2008; de Villiers & Pyers, 2002; Norbury, 2005), recent studies have shown its contribution to text comprehension (Kim, 2016; Kim & Phillips, 2014; Pelletier, 2006; Strasser & del Rio, 2014).”
Mindful storytellers: Emerging pragmatics and theory of mind development (2013, background): “In fact, longitudinal studies have shown that mastery of specific syntactic skills is associated with performance in false-belief tasks (Astington & Jenkins, 1999; de Villiers & Pyers, 2002).”
Relating developments in children's counterfactual thinking and executive functions (2009, background): “Future research should investigate whether specific linguistic developments might predict children's counterfactual thinking (as is the case with theory of mind, see de Villiers & Pyers, 2002 ; Smith, Apperly, & White, 2003 ) or whether general language development enables children to create more ”