Relations between theory of mind and executive function in middle childhood: A short-term longitudinal study
Open accessAbstract
Studies with preschool children have shown significant links between children's executive function (EF) and theory of mind (ToM), but few studies have examined these associations in primary school children. To address this gap, we designed a three-wave cross-lagged longitudinal study in which we followed a group of 113 children (61 boys) across three time points from age 9.5-10.5years (mean age at Time 1=112.3months, SD=4.18; mean age at Time 2=118.3months, SD=4.15; mean age at Time 3=124.7months, SD=4.06). At each time point, we measured EF (working memory and inhibitory control), ToM, and language. Our analyses showed (a) moderate rank-order stability of individual differences in both EF and ToM and (b) growth in ToM task performance across time. Cross-lagged longitudinal analyses revealed an asymmetric developmental relation between ToM and working memory. Early working memory predicted later ToM but not vice versa. Our results suggest a specific role for working memory in the ongoing development of ToM in middle childhood.
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
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?
Two short-term longitudinal studies in 9.5-year-olds and 13- and 16-year-olds showed small within-person changes in theory of mind performance over 12 and 18 months respectively.
“Additionally, two short-term longitudinal studies in 9.5(Lecce et al., 2017) and 13- and 16-year-olds (St ę pie ń -Nycz et al., 2021) showed small within-person changes in ToM performance over 12 and 18 months respectively.”
From Longitudinal development of theory of mind in adolescence and its associations with fiction reading experience. (2025) · cites this paper as Lecce et al., 2017
The study summary in passage [1] (no page given) describes a three-wave study following children from about age 9.5 to 10.5 and reports growth in ToM task performance. It does not characterize the changes as small or specifically as within-person changes. The citation to Lecce et al. is attached to the 9.5-year-old, 12-month study, not the separate study of older children. (LLM, conf=0.83)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredStudies have found links between theory of mind and reading comprehension in early and middle childhood, after controlling for verbal ability and parent education.
“Indeed, studies have found links between ToM and reading comprehension in early (Kim, 2016) and middle childhood (Lecce et al., 2017, 2021), after controlling for verbal ability and parent education.”
From Longitudinal development of theory of mind in adolescence and its associations with fiction reading experience. (2025) · cites this paper as Lecce et al., 2017
The available study summary (section and page not given) reports a relationship between theory of mind and executive function in middle childhood, not reading comprehension. Searches for reading comprehension, literacy, verbal ability, and parent education found no passage addressing the claimed association or controls; the accessible copy appears to contain repository metadata and a study summary rather than the article’s full text. (LLM, conf=0.72)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Cites
Miyake, A., Friedman, N. P., Emerson, M. J., Witzki, A. H., Howerter, A., & Wager, T. D. (2000) · Cognitive Psychology · doi:10.1006/cogp.1999.0734 · Cited by 15,798 · see citing works
Miyake, A., & Friedman, N. P. (2012) · Current Directions in Psychological Science · doi:10.1177/0963721411429458 · Cited by 3,944 · see citing works
Blair, C., & Razza, R. P. (2007) · Child Development · doi:10.1111/j.1467-8624.2007.01019.x · Cited by 3,140 · see citing works
Individual Differences in Inhibitory Control and Children's Theory of Mind
Carlson, S. M., & Moses, L. J. (2001) · Child Development · doi:10.1111/1467-8624.00333 · Cited by 2,072 · see citing works
Theory of mind and prosocial behavior in childhood: A meta-analytic review.
Imuta, K., Henry, J. D., Slaughter, V., Selcuk, B., & Ruffman, T. (2016) · Developmental Psychology · doi:10.1037/dev0000140 · Cited by 474 · see citing works
Longitudinal Structural Equation Modeling
Newsom, J. T. (2015) · doi:10.4324/9781315871318 · Cited by 446 · see citing works
Meta-Analysis of Theory of Mind and Peer Popularity in the Preschool and Early School Years
Slaughter, V., Imuta, K., Peterson, C. C., & Henry, J. D. (2015) · Child Development · doi:10.1111/cdev.12372 · Cited by 324 · see citing works
Lamm, C., Zelazo, P. D., & Lewis, M. D. (2006) · Neuropsychologia · doi:10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2005.10.013 · Cited by 254 · see citing works
Memory Maintenance and Inhibitory Control Differentiate from Early Childhood to Adolescence
Shing, Y. L., Lindenberger, U., Diamond, A., Li, S.-C., & Davidson, M. C. (2010) · Developmental Neuropsychology · doi:10.1080/87565641.2010.508546 · Cited by 239 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
van der Kleij, S. W., Devine, R. T., Shapiro, L. R., Ricketts, J., & Apperly, I. (2025) · Developmental Psychology · doi:10.1037/dev0001965 · Cited by 7 · see citing works
Self-citation
- Authors
- Lecce, S., Bianco, F., Devine, R. T., & Hughes, C.
- Affiliations
- University of Pavia (IT)
- University of Cambridge (GB)
- Corresponding author
- Lecce, Serena
- Venue
- Journal of Experimental Child Psychology
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2017-11
- Volume
- 163
- Pages
- 69-86
- ISSN
- 0022-0965 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2737959090
- Cited by
- 126
- References
- 9
- Citations by year
- 2026: 8 · 2025: 15 · 2024: 13 · 2023: 13 · 2022: 29 · 2021: 20 · 2020: 7 · 2019: 12 · 2018: 8 · 2016: 1
- FWCI
- 14.95
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- hdl.handle.net
- Licence
- cc-by-nc-nd
- www.elsevier.com/tdm/userlicense/1.0/ (tdm)
- Locations
- Journal of Experimental Child Psychology (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Aisberg (University of Bergamo) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
- University of Birmingham Research Portal (University of Birmingham) (submittedVersion)
- University of Birmingham Research Portal (University of Birmingham) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
- Apollo (University of Cambridge) (submittedVersion)
- Apollo
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Child and Animal Learning Development
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Neuropsychology and Physiological Psychology › Developmental and Educational Neuropsychology
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Cognitive Abilities and Testing
- Keywords
- theory of mind, executive function, working memory, inhibitory control, middle childhood, elementary school students, language development, individual differences, developmental stability
- MeSH terms
- Child Development, Child, Preschool, Female, Humans, Individuality, Longitudinal Studies, Male, Memory, Short-Term, Executive Function, Theory of Mind
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
