CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 86

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 6 of the 6 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Theory of mind in emerging reading comprehension: A longitudinal study of early indirect and direct effects

Atkinson, Lynette, Slade, Lance, Powell, Daisy, Levy, Joseph P.·2017·Journal of Experimental Child Psychology
DOI 10.1016/j.jecp.2017.04.007
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

The relation between children's theory of mind (ToM) and emerging reading comprehension was investigated in a longitudinal study over 2.5years. A total of 80 children were tested for ToM, decoding, language skills, and executive function (EF) at Time 1 (mean age=3;10 [years;months]). At Time 2 (mean age=6;03), children's word reading efficiency, language skills, and reading comprehension were measured. Mediation analysis showed that ToM at Time 1, when children were around 4years old, indirectly predicted Time 2 reading comprehension, when children were 6years old, via language ability after controlling for age, nonverbal ability, decoding, EF, and earlier language ability. Importantly, ToM at 4years also directly predicted reading comprehension 2.5years later at 6years. This is the first longitudinal study to show a direct contribution of ToM to reading comprehension in typical development. Findings are discussed in terms of the simple view of reading (SVR); ToM not only supports reading comprehension indirectly by facilitating language but also contributes to it directly over and above the SVR. The potential role of metacognition is considered when accounting for the direct contribution of early ToM to later reading comprehension.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.jecp.2017.04.007

Cites

6 of 6 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Citations

Cites

Show all 6 references

Research works printed but not linked: 48

  1. Adlof, 2010, Kindergarten predictors of second versus eighth grade reading comprehension impairments, Journal of Learning Disabilities, 43, 332, 10.1177/0022219410369067 · DOI
  2. Adlof, 2006, Should the simple view of reading include a fluency component?, Reading and Writing, 19, 933, 10.1007/s11145-006-9024-z · DOI
  3. Bartsch, 1996, Individual differences in children’s developing theory of mind and implications for metacognition, Learning and Individual Differences, 8, 281, 10.1016/S1041-6080(96)90020-5 · DOI
  4. Bright-Paul, 2008, Theory-of-mind development influences suggestibility and source monitoring, Developmental Psychology, 44, 1055, 10.1037/0012-1649.44.4.1055 · DOI
  5. Cain, 2004, Children’s reading comprehension ability: Concurrent prediction by working memory, verbal ability, and component skills, Journal of Educational Psychology, 96, 31, 10.1037/0022-0663.96.1.31 · DOI · Paper page
  6. Conners, 2009, Attentional control and the simple view of reading, Reading and Writing, 22, 591, 10.1007/s11145-008-9126-x · DOI
  7. Courtin, 2005, Metacognitive development of deaf children: Lessons from the appearance–reality and false belief tasks, Developmental Science, 8, 16, 10.1111/j.1467-7687.2005.00389.x · DOI
  8. Devine, 2014, Relations between false belief understanding and executive function in early childhood: A meta-analysis, Child Development, 85, 1777, 10.1111/cdev.12237 · DOI
  9. Diamond, 2007, Preschool program improves cognitive control, Science, 318, 1387, 10.1126/science.1151148 · DOI · Paper page
  10. Durand, 2005, The cognitive foundations of reading and arithmetic skills in 7- to 10-year-olds, Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 91, 113, 10.1016/j.jecp.2005.01.003 · DOI
  11. Emery, 1996, Helping readers comprehend stories from the characters’ perspective, Reading Teacher, 49, 534
  12. Flavell, 2000, Development of children’s awareness of their own thoughts, Journal of Cognition and Development, 1, 97, 10.1207/S15327647JCD0101N_10 · DOI
  13. Guajardo, 2016, The contribution of theory of mind, counterfactual reasoning, and executive function to pre-reader language comprehension and later reading awareness and comprehension in elementary school, Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 144, 27, 10.1016/j.jecp.2015.11.004 · DOI
  14. He, 2011, False-belief understanding in 2.5-year-olds: Evidence from violation-of-expectation change-of-location and unexpected contents tasks, Developmental Science, 14, 292, 10.1111/j.1467-7687.2010.00980.x · DOI
  15. Hogrefe, 1986, Ignorance versus false belief: A developmental lag in attribution of epistemic states, Child Development, 57, 567, 10.2307/1130337 · DOI
  16. Hood, 2008, Preschool home literacy practices and children’s literacy development: A longitudinal analysis, Journal of Educational Psychology, 100, 252, 10.1037/0022-0663.100.2.252 · DOI
  17. Hughes, 2010, Individual differences in false belief understanding are stable from 3 to 6years of age and predict children’s mental state talk with school friends, Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 108, 96, 10.1016/j.jecp.2010.07.012 · DOI
  18. Iao, 2011, Further evidence for nonspecificity of theory of mind in preschoolers: Training and transferability in the understanding of false beliefs and false signs, Journal of Cognition and Development, 12, 56, 10.1080/15248372.2011.539523 · DOI
  19. Johnson, 2005, Analyzing components of reading on performance assessments: An expanded simple view, Reading Psychology, 26, 267, 10.1080/02702710590962587 · DOI
  20. Johnston, 2006, The contribution of naming speed to the simple view of reading, Reading and Writing, 19, 339, 10.1007/s11145-005-4644-2 · DOI
  21. Joshi, 2000, The component model of reading: Simple view of reading made a little more complex, Reading Psychology, 21, 85, 10.1080/02702710050084428 · DOI
  22. Kendeou, 2009, Predicting reading comprehension in early elementary school: The independent contributions of oral language and decoding skills, Journal of Educational Psychology, 101, 765, 10.1037/a0015956 · DOI
  23. Kim, 2015, Language and cognitive predictors of text comprehension: Evidence from multivariate analysis, Child Development, 86, 128, 10.1111/cdev.12293 · DOI
  24. Kirby, 2008, Can the simple view deal with the complexities of reading?, Literacy, 42, 75, 10.1111/j.1741-4369.2008.00487.x · DOI
  25. Kloo, 2003, Training transfer between card sorting and false belief understanding: Helping children apply conflicting descriptions, Child Development, 74, 1823, 10.1046/j.1467-8624.2003.00640.x · DOI
  26. Lecce, 2014, Training preschoolers on first-order false belief understanding: Transfer on advanced ToM skills and metamemory, Child Development, 85, 2404, 10.1111/cdev.12267 · DOI
  27. Lecce, 2011, Does sensitivity to criticism mediate the relationship between theory of mind and academic achievement?, Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 110, 313, 10.1016/j.jecp.2011.04.011 · DOI
  28. Lecce, 2010, Reading minds: The relation between children’s mental state knowledge and their metaknowledge about reading, Child Development, 81, 1876, 10.1111/j.1467-8624.2010.01516.x · DOI
  29. Lockl, 2007, Knowledge about the mind: Links between theory of mind and later metamemory, Child Development, 78, 148, 10.1111/j.1467-8624.2007.00990.x · DOI
  30. Milligan, 2007, Language and theory of mind: Meta-analysis of the relation between language ability and false-belief understanding, Child Development, 78, 622, 10.1111/j.1467-8624.2007.01018.x · DOI · Paper page
  31. Oakhill, 2012, The precursors of reading ability in young readers: Evidence from a four-year longitudinal study, Scientific Studies of Reading, 16, 91, 10.1080/10888438.2010.529219 · DOI
  32. Ouellette, 2010, A not-so-simple view of reading: How oral vocabulary and visual-word recognition complicate the story, Reading and Writing, 23, 189, 10.1007/s11145-008-9159-1 · DOI
  33. Paris, 2003, Assessing narrative comprehension in young children, Reading Research Quarterly, 38, 36, 10.1598/RRQ.38.1.3 · DOI
  34. Pelletier, 2004, Action, consciousness, and theory of mind: Children’s ability to coordinate story characters’ actions and thoughts, Early Education and Development, 15, 5, 10.1207/s15566935eed1501_1 · DOI
  35. Perfetti, 2014, Word knowledge in a theory of reading comprehension, Scientific Studies of Reading, 18, 22, 10.1080/10888438.2013.827687 · DOI · Paper page
  36. Perner, 2002, Theory of mind finds its Piagetian perspective: Why alternative naming comes with understanding belief, Cognitive Development, 17, 1451, 10.1016/S0885-2014(02)00127-2 · DOI
  37. Preacher, 2008, Asymptotic and resampling strategies for assessing and comparing indirect effects in multiple mediator models, Behavior Research Methods, 40, 879, 10.3758/BRM.40.3.879 · DOI · Paper page
  38. Ricketts, 2013, Reading comprehension in autism spectrum disorders: The role of oral language and social functioning, Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 43, 807, 10.1007/s10803-012-1619-4 · DOI
  39. Sesma, 2009, The contribution of executive skills to reading comprehension, Child Neuropsychology, 15, 232, 10.1080/09297040802220029 · DOI
  40. Shahaeian, 2015, Towards a better understanding of the relationship between executive control and theory of mind: An intra-cultural comparison of three diverse samples, Developmental Science, 18, 671, 10.1111/desc.12243 · DOI
  41. Slade, 2005, How language does (and does not) relate to theory of mind: A longitudinal study of syntax, semantics, working memory, and false belief, British Journal of Developmental Psychology, 23, 117, 10.1348/026151004X21332 · DOI
  42. Symons, 2004, Mental state discourse, theory of mind, and the internalization of self–other understanding, Developmental Review, 24, 159, 10.1016/j.dr.2004.03.001 · DOI
  43. Symons, 2005, Theory of mind and mental state discourse during book reading and story-telling tasks, British Journal of Developmental Psychology, 23, 81, 10.1348/026151004X21080 · DOI
  44. Vellutino, 2007, Components of reading ability: Multivariate evidence for a convergent skills model of reading development, Scientific Studies of Reading, 11, 3, 10.1080/10888430709336632 · DOI
  45. Wellman, 2001, Meta-analysis of theory-of-mind development: The truth about false belief, Child Development, 72, 655, 10.1111/1467-8624.00304 · DOI · Paper page
  46. Wimmer, 1983, Beliefs about beliefs: Representation and constraining function of wrong beliefs in young children’s understanding of deception, Cognition, 13, 103, 10.1016/0010-0277(83)90004-5 · DOI · Paper page
  47. Woolley, 2007, Development of beliefs about storybook reality, Developmental Science, 10, 681, 10.1111/j.1467-7687.2007.00612.x · DOI
  48. Yuill, 2009, The relation between ambiguity understanding and metalinguistic discussion of joking riddles in good and poor comprehenders: Potential for intervention and possible processes of change, First Language, 29, 65, 10.1177/0142723708097561 · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Atkinson, L., Slade, L., Powell, D., & Levy, J. P.
ORCID
Venue
Journal of Experimental Child Psychology
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2017-12
Volume
164
Pages
225-238
ISSN
0022-0965
DOI
10.1016/j.jecp.2017.04.007
Cited by
86
References
6
Language
en
Licence
www.elsevier.com/tdm/userlicense/1.0/ (tdm)

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review