Language and theory of mind: meta-analysis of the relation between language ability and false-belief understanding.

By K. Milligan, Janet Wilde Astington, L. A. Dack. Child Development, 2007

1,178 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Developmental and Educational Psychology, Language and Linguistics, Sociology and Political Science

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/4425405af8fbf0fd74b2193ce1fae9191a9b6b87

How researchers see this paper

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

In Developmental and Educational Psychology

In Language and Linguistics

In Sociology and Political Science

Citations in the corpus

The Role of Language Games in Children's Understanding of Mental States: A Training Study (2011, result): “Although the direction of this relationship is still hotly debated (Milligan, Astington, & Dack, 2007 ) and the effect of language on theory of mind seems to be stronger than the other way around, recent findings support the hypothesis of a bidirectional relationship between theory of mind and lang”
The interactive brain hypothesis (2012, background): “Indeed, a large amount of evidence points to the importance of the quantity and quality of linguistic engagements at home and with peers for ToM capacities (Milligan et al., 2007).”
Evaluating large language models in theory of mind tasks (2023, background): “This ability—typically referred to as “theory of mind” (ToM)—is considered central to human social interactions ( 3 ), communication ( 4 ), empathy ( 5 ), self - consciousness ( 6 ), moral judgment ( 7 , 8 ), and even religious beliefs ( 9 ).”
The Role of Language in Theory of Mind Development. (2014, background): “…have argued that mastery of the appropriate linguistic structures gives the child a new ability to reason about the contents of others’ minds, a new format, if you like, for thinking about these abstract events (de Villiers & de Villiers, 2000, 2009; Milligan et al., 2007; Tager-Flusberg, 2000).”
Linguistic cues facilitate children’s understanding of belief-reporting sentences (2021, neutral): “…& Pyers, 2002; Furrow et al., 1992; Gola, 2012; Hale & Tager-Flusberg, 2003 ; Johnston et al., 2001; Karmiloff-Smith, 1992; E. C. Lee & Rescorla, 2007; Miller, 2004, 2006; Moore et al., 1990; Moore & Furrow, 1991; Perner et al., 2003; Shatz et al., 1983; for a review, see Milligan et al., 2007).”
Theory of Mind: a Hidden Factor in Reading Comprehension? (2018, background): “Relatedly, individual differences in ToM are predicted by language (Jenkins and Astington 1996; Lillard and Kavanaugh 2012; Milligan et al. 2007; Watson et al. 2001) and executive function skills (Henning, Spinath, & Aschersleben 2010; Hughes & Ensor 2005; Hughes 1998), both of which are also…”
Individual Differences in Theory of Mind From Preschool to Adolescence: Achievements and Directions (2015, neutral): “differences in language ability (9) and executive function (10).”
Maternal reminiscing, elaborative talk, and children’s theory of mind: An intervention study (2013, background): “Past research has established a clear relation between children’s language abilities and theory-of-mind understanding (Milligan et al., 2007).”
Mindreading in Infancy (2013, background): “(2007) and Neumann et al. (2009). The obvious difference, however, is that in the latter studies the scenarios unfold completely nonverbally, whereas in the former there is an accompanying verbal narrative. In addition, in the latter the signal for anticipatory looking is itself nonverbal, whereas i”