Comments on: A Critique of the Theory of Mind (ToM) Test

By: Rachel

Rachel — Thu, 30 Jun 2011 14:59:58 +0000

I have the same question about whether the children were ever asked why they made one choice or another. Young children might find it difficult to articulate their reasons, but certainly, one could ask the children a number of questions about possible reasons and see which ones reflect their experience. Of course, that would mean asking actual autistic people how we might respond to such a test, which the professionals seem very reluctant to do.

One of the biggest flaws in the Theory of Mind idea is that it ignores one crucial fact: many autistic people arrive at an understanding of the differing perspectives of others by listening to their words. Perhaps it’s just the culture I grew up in, but in my Jewish family, nearly every thought and feeling was verbally articulated, and I rarely needed to guess. I learned to read energy very well, of course, because in an abusive situation, I had to keep myself safe, but in terms of recognizing that other people have thoughts different from my own? I figured that one out very early. The other members of my family did not perceive the world as I did, did not have the values I did, and did not think about their lives as I thought about mine. In fact, feeling alone in how I thought about things was one of the most painful things about my early life.

By: Autism and Empathy at Questioning Transphobia

Autism and Empathy at Questioning Transphobia — Thu, 30 Jun 2011 00:00:26 +0000

[...] been one of his most articulate critics from this camp and you can read her views here: [1], [2], [3], [...]

By: Nicole Nicholson

Nicole Nicholson — Wed, 29 Jun 2011 18:29:07 +0000

I have to wonder one thing about the Sally-Anne test: did the researchers ever ask the children why they would answer either the box or the basket? The test is quite simplistic and I think much more research is needed to figure out the whole theory of mind thing.

And when it comes to Theory of Mind and empathy, something occurred to me now that it didn’t when I wrote my first post about empathy. I think a good deal of assumptions are made, partially based on the culture one grew up in, and maybe individual preferences and responses aren’t being accounted for, and I don’t think that it’s true that an autistic would not be aware of someone else’s thoughts/feelings/desires etc. being different (another problem in the current assumption of Theoory of Mind). I think it’s more true that at earlier points in our lives, we haven’t figured out what the “rules” are which govern such interactions. Not only that, fouling up in figuring out what another person would want is not the sole domain of autistics.

-Nicole

By: Alan

Alan — Tue, 27 Oct 2009 23:21:55 +0000

I also am studying this in AICE psychology, and happen to be in Daniel’s class. I myself have Asperger’s syndrome, and I too disagree with the Sally-Anne Test. As many people have pointed out, mainly the author, one test doesn’t indicate the presence or absence of a ToM. Many different reason could factor in to the answers given by the children, and to generalize that all autistic children must be lacking a ToM is a foolish mistake. I know that as a child i would have failed this test as well. I have an exceptionally high IQ, however i do not understand matters in the same manner that a non-Aspie would, namely, emotions. I cannot read emotions like most people, as is a common trait for Aspies, and therefore i would have been totaly confused on Anne’s reasons for moving the marble in the first place. I would have seen it that Anne must have been a spiteful person, and therfore Sally would expect that Anne would have moved her marble. I think my main point is one that Danny made, and it is simply that to say that the autistic lack a ToM is unfair, i think that they simply have a different and unique ToM.

By: Daniel

Daniel — Mon, 12 Oct 2009 23:43:29 +0000

We are studying this in my AICE psychology class, i think that the study done by Simon Baron-Cohen is definitely flawed in the respect that it does not go as far as to attempt to understand that ToM can differ fundamentally in Autistic children contrary to them not having one at all. Why is it that just because the children got the question wrong make it as though they don’t assume other people think? You sir raise a good point, as children we grow up noticing, or at least seeming to think that everyone thinks the same and has similar ideas. If most Autistic children see the world as chaotic and constantly changing then it is fair to say that they probably think everyone sees the world like that the same way a color blind child assumes that everyone sees the same as they do.
Because we can’t actually pry into other people heads who is to say that we as scientist studying perception and cognition are ever truly right or wrong? Autistic children definitely lack social ability next to a “normal” child, but it is not fair to say it is do to a complete absence of ToM, just presence of a different one perhaps.

By: Rachel

Rachel — Mon, 06 Apr 2009 17:05:14 +0000

Catana, you make an excellent point. I overstated. What I should have said was that Temple Grandin was autistic as a child and is autistic as an adult. Nothing can change that. However, she moved along the spectrum because she learned as she grew, as most of us do.

By: Catana

Catana — Mon, 06 Apr 2009 13:28:16 +0000

“Nothing about Dr. Grandin’s neurology changed between childhood and adulthood” That’s not true. Neurological development goes on until adolescence and even later. In addition, new research is showing that the brain is always in a process of being rewired by experience and the environment.

People tend to forget that the core of autism and Asperger’s is *developmental delays.* Children (and adults) develop at different rates, so tests like the Sally Ann test only show the current developmental stage. They say nothing about the future.

By: StatMama

StatMama — Sun, 05 Apr 2009 12:06:22 +0000

I think that ToM exercise fails to demonstrate what clinicians are hoping for. Like you mentioned about being clever, sometimes my reasons for choosing any given option doesn’t necessarily have a thing to do with theory of mind!

By: Rachel

Rachel — Sat, 04 Apr 2009 21:14:46 +0000

You know, I’m thinking that I probably wouldn’t have passed the ToM test as a kid. In my early years of grammar school, whenever the teacher asked a simple question, I’d assume it had to be a trick question, because the answer was so obvious to me. It took me forever to realize that the questions really were as simple as they appeared.

So if someone had said to me, “Where will Sally look for the marble?” I’d assume that the answer couldn’t be the simplest one. I’d say “the box,” just to show how clever I was. I guess that would have shown a pretty poor ToM concerning the clinician’s motives, but somehow, I don’t think he’d have had the requisite ToM to pick up on it….

By: John Dale Lyons

John Dale Lyons — Fri, 03 Apr 2009 21:14:38 +0000

Nothing about Dr. Grandin’s neurology changed between childhood and adulthood. She just learned more about the world of other people as she got older.

Same for me, and all of us. Maybe Asperger’s should be called: Late Bloomer’s Syndrome. Even NT’s, strange as they are, tend to learn more about other people as they gain life experience. There’s hope they may even understand us normal Aspies.