Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Click here for FREE ACCESS to this landmark database

SAGETRACK

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
Theory & Psychology
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in Web of Science
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Web of Science (5)
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Costall, A.
Right arrow Articles by Leudar, I.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

Where is the ‘Theory’ in Theory of Mind?

Alan Costall

University of Portsmouthalan.costall{at}port.ac.uk

Ivan Leudar

University of ManchesterI.leudar{at}manchester.ac.uk

Why did ‘Theory of Mind’ take off when it did, and what, if anything, holds this very diverse approach together? The focus of research within developmental psychology since the 1960s had been the examination of Piaget’s claims about cognitive development. The agenda had quickly become to demonstrate, primarily through experiments, that young children could (contrary to Piaget’s claims) succeed on various ‘cognitive’ tasks given the right context. Yet, by the 1980s, the research had still neither undermined Piagetian theory, nor opened up any radical alternative. Theory of Mind was conveniently to hand to provide another ‘grand’ theory to subject to experimental test, and in many ways business continued as usual. However, ‘context’ came to be regarded as no longer an important issue for research but a contaminant, and the experiments became stipulative rather than exploratory. In the attempt to eliminate context in order to test children’s real understanding of other people, the experiments themselves have come to constitute the largely implicit ‘theory’ behind Theory of Mind. The experiments presuppose that making sense of other people is essentially about making indirect inferences from the apparent (observable behaviour) to the real (hidden mental structures). It is this experimental paradigm of signification—of an indirect or ‘round-about’ relation between observations and the object of study—that ultimately holds the Theory of Mind approach together.

Key Words: history of psychology • Piaget • problem of other minds • Theory of Mind

Theory & Psychology, Vol. 14, No. 5, 623-646 (2004)
DOI: 10.1177/0959354304046176


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Theory PsychologyHome page
L. S. Shaffer
Special Section: Religion as a Large-Scale Justification System: Does the Justification Hypothesis Explain Animistic Attribution?
Theory Psychology, December 1, 2008; 18(6): 779 - 799.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Home page
Theory PsychologyHome page
M. A. Forrester
Projective Identification and Intersubjectivity
Theory Psychology, December 1, 2006; 16(6): 783 - 802.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Home page
Theory PsychologyHome page
I. Leudar and A. Costall
On the Persistence of the 'Problem of Other Minds' in Psychology: Chomsky, Grice and Theory of Mind
Theory Psychology, October 1, 2004; 14(5): 601 - 621.
[Abstract] [PDF]