Cited by 1,211Child and Animal Learning DevelopmentAutism Spectrum Disorder ResearchSocial Robot Interaction and HRI

Recognition of Faux Pas by Normally Developing Children and Children with Asperger Syndrome or High-Functioning Autism

Baron-Cohen, Simon, O'Riordan, Michelle, Stone, Valerie, Jones, Rosie, Plaisted, Kate·1999·Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders

Abstract

Most theory of mind (ToM) tests are designed for subjects with a mental age of 4-6 years. There are very few ToM tests for subjects who are older or more able than this. We report a new test of ToM, designed for children 7-11 years old. The task involves recognizing faux pas. Study 1 tested 7-9, and 11-year-old normal children. Results showed that the ability to detect faux pas developed with age and that there was a differential developmental profile between the two sexes (female superiority). Study 2 tested children with Asperger syndrome (AS) or high-functioning autism (HFA), selected for being able to pass traditional 4- to 6-year level (first- and second-order) false belief tests. Results showed that whereas normal 9- to 11-year-old children were skilled at detecting faux pas, children with AS or HFA were impaired on this task. Study 3 reports a refinement in the test, employing control stimuli. This replicated the results from Study 2. Some patients with AS or HFA were able to recognize faux pas but still produced them. Future research should assess faux pas production.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1023/a:1023035012436

Cites

4 of 4 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Baron-Cohen, S., O'Riordan, M., Stone, V., Jones, R., & Plaisted, K.
Affiliations
University of Cambridge (GB)
Venue
Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders
Published
1999-10
Volume
29
Issue
5
Pages
407-418
ISSN
  • 0162-3257 (ISSN-L)
  • 1573-3432
OpenAlex
W1486096542
Cited by
1,211
References
4
Citations by year
2026: 39 · 2025: 58 · 2024: 60 · 2023: 67 · 2022: 57 · 2021: 82 · 2020: 63 · 2019: 67 · 2018: 68 · 2017: 55 · 2016: 67 · 2015: 48 · 2014: 44 · 2013: 61 · 2012: 63
FWCI
19.90
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Child and Animal Learning Development
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Autism Spectrum Disorder Research
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Social Robot Interaction and HRI
Keywords
theory of mind, Asperger syndrome, high-functioning autism, false belief understanding, social cognition development, age differences, sex differences
MeSH terms
Autistic Disorder, Awareness, Child, Child, Preschool, Diagnosis, Differential, Female, Humans, Intelligence, Male, Neuropsychological Tests, Reference Values, Social Behavior, Socialization, Asperger Syndrome

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