The DOI matches its Crossref record.
The theory theory
Abstract
This is a book about domain-specific cognition – the proposal that at least some human conceptual abilities are specialized for some types of contents and not for others. In this chapter we address the development of a single domain: everyday understanding of the mind. We suggest that this development is best understood as the formulation of a succession of naive theories. Moreover, this “theory theory” can help to characterize cognitive domains more generally and to explain domain-specific development. Our chapter, therefore, joins company with a number of recent discussions drawing parallels between theory change in science and cognitive development (Carey, 1985, 1988; Gopnik, 1984, 1988; Karmiloff-Smith & Inhelder, 1974; Keil, 1987; Wellman, 1985, 1990). Theory of mind In the past five years there has been an explosion of interest in children's early understanding of the mind (Butterworth, Harris, Leslie & Wellman, 1991; Astington, Harris, & Olson, 1988; Frye & Moore, 1991; Whiten, 1991). The research tackling this question has come to be called “children's theory of mind.” This title reflects a leading explanatory position among investigators in this area. According to this position, our everyday conception of the mind is an implicit naive theory; children's early conceptions of the mind are also implicit theories, and changes in those conceptions are theory changes. We refer to this explanatory position as the “theory theory.” If the theory theory has any content, it should be falsifiable. It should lead to empirical predictions about the course of development, and these predictions should be different from those of alternative accounts.
Overview
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
Verification
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.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Barsalou, L. W. (1999) · Behavioral and Brain Sciences · doi:10.1017/s0140525x99002149 · Cited by 6,887
Meta-Analysis of Theory-of-Mind Development: The Truth about False Belief
Wellman, H. M., Cross, D., & Watson, J. (2001) · Child Development · doi:10.1111/1467-8624.00304 · Cited by 4,476
Self-citationDevelopment and neurophysiology of mentalizing
Frith, U., & Frith, C. D. (2003) · Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences · doi:10.1098/rstb.2002.1218 · Cited by 2,306
Understanding the intentions of others: Re-enactment of intended acts by 18-month-old children.
Meltzoff, A. N. (1995) · Developmental Psychology · doi:10.1037//0012-1649.31.5.838 · Cited by 2,110
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
Metadata
- Authors
- Gopnik, A., & Wellman, H. M.
- Venue
- Mapping the Mind
- Publisher
- Cambridge University Press
- Published
- 1994-04-29
- Pages
- 257-293
- OpenAlex
- W381902449
- Cited by
- 811
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 19.73
- Type
- book chapter
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: The theory theory. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1017/cbo9780511752902.011
- The paper
- Gopnik, A., & Wellman, H. M. (1994). The theory theory. Mapping the Mind. https://doi.org/10.1017/cbo9780511752902.011
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.