幼儿“心理理论”的发展及其与同伴接纳、社会行为的关系研究
|
摘要
本研究对3-5岁幼儿心理理论、同伴接纳和社会行为的发展及其三者之间的关系进行了考察。研究首先采用同伴提名法在三个幼儿园的10个班，按照幼儿不同的同伴地位筛选了123名幼儿，测查了他们的社会偏好和社会影响分，并按其将幼儿分成了四种不同的同伴类型：受欢迎、被拒绝、被忽视和一般型；采用幼儿社会行为教师评估问卷，让教师对参加实验的每个幼儿在园的日常行为表现进行评估；然后采用四种心理理论任务，用现场实验法对幼儿逐个进行心理理论能力测验；考虑到言语对心理理论的潜在影响，采用《儿章心理综合量表》的言语—叙述和素语一词汇两个部分，对幼儿的言语能力逐个进行了评定。本研究主要考察四个方面的问题：一、幼儿心理理论、同伴接纳和社会行为的发展特点。二、幼儿心理理沦与同伴接纳的关系，以及言语被作为控制变量后的关系。三、心理理论与社会行为的相关。四、考察心理理论、言语能力和社会行为这些影响同伴接纳的认知和行为变量，对社会偏好和社会影响的预测作用。研究结果表明：
1、幼儿心理理论的表现，4岁半和5岁幼儿显著好于3岁和4岁；4岁幼儿显著好于3岁。表明：3岁儿童普遍缺乏ToM能力，4岁以后儿童才开始表现出ToM能力。
2、幼儿在不同ToM任务上的表现存在较大差异，他们通过不同任务的时间有先后顺序，表明ToM表现存在任务特异性。而且幼儿在不同ToM任务上的表现，总体存在某种潜在一致性。
3、幼儿心理理论能力和言语之间有密切相关，言语得分高低两组幼儿之间其心理理论表现有显著差异。
4、幼儿同伴接纳的社会偏好分随年龄的增大显著增高，女孩的社会偏好分显著高于男孩；社会影响分3岁幼儿显著高于4-5岁幼儿。
5、幼儿的亲社会行为随着年龄的增长显著增多，女孩的亲社会行为显著多于男孩；攻击行为男孩显著多于女孩。
6、幼儿在心理理论任务上的表现，受欢迎儿章得分最高，其次是一般型儿童，被忽视儿童，被拒绝儿童得分最低。控制言语后的协方差分析表明，言语对心理理论的表现有显著主效应，但同伴地位对心理理论表现的主效应不再显著，两者的交互作用也不显著。相关分析表明，幼儿心理理论的表现与社会偏好存在显著
正相关，控制言语和年龄因素后相关依然显著。
7、受欢迎幼儿的亲社会行为显著高于被拒绝、被忽视和一般幼儿。被拒绝幼
儿的攻击行为显著高于其他三组幼儿。相关分析表明，幼儿亲社会行为与社会偏
好、社会影响呈显著正相关;攻击行为与社会偏好呈显著负相关，与社会影响有
显著正相关;退缩行为与社会偏好有不显著负相关，与社会影响有显著负相关，
控制一言语和年龄因素后，偏相关均显著。
8、幼儿心理理论表现与亲社会行为有显著正相关，与退缩行为有显著负相关，
控制言语和年龄因素后，偏相关仍然显著;心理理论表现与攻击行为存在显著负
相关，控制合‘语和年龄因素后，相关不再显著。
9、对社会偏好、社会影响的逐步回归分析表明，三个变量进入了回归方程。
攻击行为对社会偏好有很好的反向预测作用，心理理论总分、亲社会行为对社会
偏好有较好的预测作用;攻击行为、亲社会行为和错误信念任务对社会影响有较
好的预测作用。
This study probed into the development of ToM and relations among ToM peer acceptance and social behavior of 3- 5 year-old children. In this study, 123 young children who were selected in 10 classes from three kindergartens provided peer nominations that allowed determination of social preference and social impact scores, and classification in one of four peer status groups: popular, rejected, neglected and average. Head teachers in each classroom were asked to complete a Social Behavioural Questionnaire for each child participating in the study, according to their everyday behaviors in kindergartens. Then these children were tested on their ToM ability one by one using four types ToM tasks. That verbal ability has potential influence on ToM ability was taken into account, "language-narration" and "language-vocabulary" of PSSC-CCR were used to evaluate verbal ability of each child. The study focused on three topics as follows: 1.The develepment characteristics of young children's ToM, peer acceptance and soc
ial behavior; 2.The relationships among ToM,peer acceptance and social behavior, as well as their relations after verbal scores were cotrolled ; 3.Investigation into the influence of ToM, verbal ability and social behaviors on peer acceptance in preschoolers, in order to predict social preference and social impact. The results are showed as the following:
1. Young children's performance in ToM of 4.5 and 5 year-old children is better than that of 3 and 4 year-old ones significantly; the performance of 4 year-old children is better than that of 3 year-old ones significantly. The results showed that 3 year-old children lack of ToM ability generally,and 4 year-old children begin to show it.
2. There is great difference of young children's performance in various ToM tasks, they pass various tasks in the sequence of time, which might suggest that their performance is evidently task-specific. Furthmore there is some potential coherence of performance in four tasks.
3. There is a close correlation between children's ToM ability and verbal intelligence, there is a significant difference of ToM ability between the two groups which verbal scores are the highest and the lowest.
4.The children's social preference scores are significantly increasing with their
growth, and the girls' are significantly higher than the boys'; 3 year-old children's social impact scores are greatly higher than 4-5 year-old children's.
5. Young children's prosocial behaviors are becoming significantly more with their growth, and the girls' are much more than the boys', but the boys' aggressive behaviors are much more than the girls'.
6. Popular children are found to score the highest in ToM tasks, the average score secondly, the neglected, the rejected score the lowest. The covariance analysis with verbal scores controlled reveals that verbal ability has a significantly main effect on ToM, but peer status has no independent effect on ToM and interaction between them is insignificant. The correlation analysis shows that there is significantly positive correlation between young children's ToM and social preference, and partial correlation is still significant after verbal scores and age were controlled.
7. Popular children's prosocial behaviors are much more than other groups, but rejected children's aggressive behaviors are more than other groups. The correlation analysis reveals that there is a significantly positive correlation between prosocial behavior and social preference, as well as social impact respectively; there is a significantly negative correlation between aggressive behavior and social preference, but there is a significantly positive correlation between aggressive behavior and social impact; there is a significantly negative correlation between withdrawing behavior and social impact. Partial correlations are still significant even verbal scores and age were controlled.
8. There is a significantly positive correlation between the children's ToM and prosocial behavior, and a significantly negative correla
1、幼儿心理理论的表现，4岁半和5岁幼儿显著好于3岁和4岁；4岁幼儿显著好于3岁。表明：3岁儿童普遍缺乏ToM能力，4岁以后儿童才开始表现出ToM能力。
2、幼儿在不同ToM任务上的表现存在较大差异，他们通过不同任务的时间有先后顺序，表明ToM表现存在任务特异性。而且幼儿在不同ToM任务上的表现，总体存在某种潜在一致性。
3、幼儿心理理论能力和言语之间有密切相关，言语得分高低两组幼儿之间其心理理论表现有显著差异。
4、幼儿同伴接纳的社会偏好分随年龄的增大显著增高，女孩的社会偏好分显著高于男孩；社会影响分3岁幼儿显著高于4-5岁幼儿。
5、幼儿的亲社会行为随着年龄的增长显著增多，女孩的亲社会行为显著多于男孩；攻击行为男孩显著多于女孩。
6、幼儿在心理理论任务上的表现，受欢迎儿章得分最高，其次是一般型儿童，被忽视儿童，被拒绝儿童得分最低。控制言语后的协方差分析表明，言语对心理理论的表现有显著主效应，但同伴地位对心理理论表现的主效应不再显著，两者的交互作用也不显著。相关分析表明，幼儿心理理论的表现与社会偏好存在显著
正相关，控制言语和年龄因素后相关依然显著。
7、受欢迎幼儿的亲社会行为显著高于被拒绝、被忽视和一般幼儿。被拒绝幼
儿的攻击行为显著高于其他三组幼儿。相关分析表明，幼儿亲社会行为与社会偏
好、社会影响呈显著正相关;攻击行为与社会偏好呈显著负相关，与社会影响有
显著正相关;退缩行为与社会偏好有不显著负相关，与社会影响有显著负相关，
控制一言语和年龄因素后，偏相关均显著。
8、幼儿心理理论表现与亲社会行为有显著正相关，与退缩行为有显著负相关，
控制言语和年龄因素后，偏相关仍然显著;心理理论表现与攻击行为存在显著负
相关，控制合‘语和年龄因素后，相关不再显著。
9、对社会偏好、社会影响的逐步回归分析表明，三个变量进入了回归方程。
攻击行为对社会偏好有很好的反向预测作用，心理理论总分、亲社会行为对社会
偏好有较好的预测作用;攻击行为、亲社会行为和错误信念任务对社会影响有较
好的预测作用。
This study probed into the development of ToM and relations among ToM peer acceptance and social behavior of 3- 5 year-old children. In this study, 123 young children who were selected in 10 classes from three kindergartens provided peer nominations that allowed determination of social preference and social impact scores, and classification in one of four peer status groups: popular, rejected, neglected and average. Head teachers in each classroom were asked to complete a Social Behavioural Questionnaire for each child participating in the study, according to their everyday behaviors in kindergartens. Then these children were tested on their ToM ability one by one using four types ToM tasks. That verbal ability has potential influence on ToM ability was taken into account, "language-narration" and "language-vocabulary" of PSSC-CCR were used to evaluate verbal ability of each child. The study focused on three topics as follows: 1.The develepment characteristics of young children's ToM, peer acceptance and soc
ial behavior; 2.The relationships among ToM,peer acceptance and social behavior, as well as their relations after verbal scores were cotrolled ; 3.Investigation into the influence of ToM, verbal ability and social behaviors on peer acceptance in preschoolers, in order to predict social preference and social impact. The results are showed as the following:
1. Young children's performance in ToM of 4.5 and 5 year-old children is better than that of 3 and 4 year-old ones significantly; the performance of 4 year-old children is better than that of 3 year-old ones significantly. The results showed that 3 year-old children lack of ToM ability generally,and 4 year-old children begin to show it.
2. There is great difference of young children's performance in various ToM tasks, they pass various tasks in the sequence of time, which might suggest that their performance is evidently task-specific. Furthmore there is some potential coherence of performance in four tasks.
3. There is a close correlation between children's ToM ability and verbal intelligence, there is a significant difference of ToM ability between the two groups which verbal scores are the highest and the lowest.
4.The children's social preference scores are significantly increasing with their
growth, and the girls' are significantly higher than the boys'; 3 year-old children's social impact scores are greatly higher than 4-5 year-old children's.
5. Young children's prosocial behaviors are becoming significantly more with their growth, and the girls' are much more than the boys', but the boys' aggressive behaviors are much more than the girls'.
6. Popular children are found to score the highest in ToM tasks, the average score secondly, the neglected, the rejected score the lowest. The covariance analysis with verbal scores controlled reveals that verbal ability has a significantly main effect on ToM, but peer status has no independent effect on ToM and interaction between them is insignificant. The correlation analysis shows that there is significantly positive correlation between young children's ToM and social preference, and partial correlation is still significant after verbal scores and age were controlled.
7. Popular children's prosocial behaviors are much more than other groups, but rejected children's aggressive behaviors are more than other groups. The correlation analysis reveals that there is a significantly positive correlation between prosocial behavior and social preference, as well as social impact respectively; there is a significantly negative correlation between aggressive behavior and social preference, but there is a significantly positive correlation between aggressive behavior and social impact; there is a significantly negative correlation between withdrawing behavior and social impact. Partial correlations are still significant even verbal scores and age were controlled.
8. There is a significantly positive correlation between the children's ToM and prosocial behavior, and a significantly negative correla
引文
[1] Anne C. L. Gordon, David R. Olson, The Relation between Acquisition of a Theory of Mind and the Capacity to Hold in Mind, Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 1998(68),70-83.
[2] Bartsch K, Wellman H, Young children's attribution of action to belief and desire Child Development, 1989, 60,946-964.
[3] Carol A. Miller,False belief understanding in children with specific language impairment, Journal of Communication Disorders,2001 (34),73-86.
[4] Carpendale,J.I & Chandler, M.J. On the distinction between false belief and subscribing to an interpretive theory of mind, Child Development, 1996,67.
[5] Chandler M. Fritz & Hala S,Small scale deceit: Deception as a marker for two-,three-, and four-year-olds' early theories of mind,Child Development, 1989,60,1263-1277.
[6] Claire Hughes,Judy Dunn, Understanding mind and emotion:longitudinal associations with mental-state talk between young friends,Developmental Psychology,1998,34.
[7] Deepthi Kamawar, David R. Olson, Children's Representational Theory of Language: The Problem of Opaque Contexts,Cognitive Development, 1999,(14), 531-548.
[8] Drew Nesdale,Developmental Changes in Children's Ethnic Preferences and Social Cognitions,Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology 2000,(4), 501-519.
[9] Dunn J.J.,Brown.C. Young children's understanding of other people's feeling and beliefs: individual differences and their antecedents, Child Development, 1991,62.
[10] Francesca Happe' a, Hiram Brownellb, Ellen Winnerc, Acquired 'theory of mind' impairments following stroke, Cognition, 1999 (70),211-240.
[11] Freeman, N.H.,Lacohee, H, Making explicit 3-year-olds'implicit competence with their own false beliefs,Cognition,1995,56.
[12] Gary W. Ladd, Peer Relationships and Social Competence During Early and Middle Childhood, Annu, Rev. Psychol. 1999, 50,333.59.
[13] Gordon G. Gallup Jr.,Self-awareness and the evolution of social intelligence,
Behavioural Processes, 1998(42),239-247.
[14] Hala, S, Chandler, M, J, The role of strategic planning in accessing false-belief under standing,Child Development, 1997,62.
[15] Happe,F.,The role of age and verbal ability in the Theory of Mind task performance of subjects with autism,Child Development, 1995,66.
[16] Heather A. Holmes, Cherice Black, Scotta. Miller, A Cross-Task Comparison of False Belief Understanding in a Head Start Population, Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 1996,63,263-285.
[17] Hughes C,,Finding your marbles: does preschoolers' trategic behavior predict later understanding of mind? Development Psychology, 1998,34.
[18] Jekins J M.,Astington J W.,Cognitive factors and family structure associated with theory of mind development in young children, Developmental Psychology, 1996,32.
[19] Jennifer A. Richesona, Nalini Ambady, Effects of situational power on automatic racial prejudice, Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 2003 (39), 177-183.
[20] Jina S. Yoon,Jan N. Hughes,Timothy A. Cavell, Bruce Thompson, Social Cognitive Differences Between Aggressive-Rejected and Aggressive-rejected Children, Journal of School Psychology,2000,Vol.38,No. 6,551-570.
[21] John H. Flavell,Cognitive Development: Children's Knowledge About the Mind, Annu.Rev. Psychol, 1999,(50),21-45.
[22] John H. Flavell, Development of children's knowledge about the mental world, International Journal of B ahavioral Development,2000,24,(1), 15-23.
[23] Josef Perner,Birgit Lang, Development of theory of mind and executive control, Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 1999,Vol.3,No.9.
[24] Kamawar, D.& Olson,D.R. Children's Representational Theory of Language: The Problem of Opaque Contexts,Cognitive Development, 1999,14.
[25] Leslie A. Pretense and representation in infancy: The origin of "theory of mind", Psychology Review, 1987,94.
[26] Lillard AS.,Body or mind: Children's categorizing of pretense,Child Development, 1996,67.
[27] Lillard A S, Ethnopsychologies: Cultural variations in theories of mind, Psychological Bulletin, 1998,123.
[28] Michael Siegal, Rosemary Varley, Stephen C.Want, Mind over grammar: reasoning in aphasia and development, Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 2001,Vol.5, No.7 July.
[29] Mitchell P, Robinson EJ, Issacs JE, &Nye RM, Contamination in reasoning about false belief: An instance of realist bias in adults but not children,Cognition, 1996,59.
[30] Moore C,Pure K,Furrow D.,Children's understanding of modal expression of speaker certainty and uncertainty and its relation to the development of a representational theory of mind, Child Development, 1990,61.
[31] Norman H. Freeman, Cristina Antonuccia, Charlie Lewis,Representation of the cardinality principle: early conception of error in a counterfactual test,Cognition, 2000(74), 71-89.
[32] P. A. Russell,J. A. Hosie, C. D. Gray,C. Scott, N. Hunter,J. S. Banks, M. C. Macaulay, The Development of Theory of Mind in Deaf Children,Child Psychol. Psychiat. 1998,Vol. 39,No. 6,903-910.
[33] Paul Blooma, Tim P. German, Two reasons to abandon the false belief task as a test of theory of mind, Cognition, 2000,(77),B25-B31.
[34] Perner J, Ruffman T, Leekam S R, Theory of mind is contagious: you catch it from your sibs, Child Development,1994,65.
[35] Pillow, B.H.,Henrinchon, A.J. There's more to the picture than meets the eye: Young children's difficulty understanding biased interpretation,Child Development,1996,67.
[36] Rebecca Saltmarsh,Young Children's Difficulty Acknowledging False Belief: Realism and Deception, Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 1998,(69),3-21.
[37] Robin J. Harvey, Janet Fletcher, Davina J. French, Social Reasoning: A Source of Influence on Aggression, Clinical Psychology Review, 2001,Vol.21,No.3,447-469.
[38] Rosemary Varley, Michael Siegal, Evidence for cognition without grammar from causal reasoning and 'theory of mind' in an agrammatic aphasic patient, Brief Communication, 723.
[39] Ruffman,T.Olson DR,Ash T,&Keenan T,The ABC's of deception: Do young child understand deception in the same way as adults, Developmental Psychology, 1993, 29, 74-87.
[40] Sabbagh ,M. A.,Balkwin,D. A.Learning words from knowledge versus ignorant speakers: Links between preschoolers' Theory of mind, Child Development, 2001,72.
[41] Sabbagh M A, Callanan M A, Metarepresentation in action: three-, four-,and five-year-olds developing theories of mind in parent conversations, Development Psychology,1998,34,491-502.
[42] Saltmarsh, R. Mitchell,E, Robinson, E.J. Realism and children's early grasp of mental representation: Belief-based judgements in the state change task Cognition,1995,57.
[43] Shinobu Kitayama, Yukiko Uchida, Explicit self-criticism and implicit self-regard: Evaluating self and friend in two cultures, Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 2003 (39), 476-482.
[44] Sullivan K, Zaitchik D, Tager-Flusberg H, Preschoolers can attribute second-order beliefs, Developmental Psychology, 1994,30.
[45] Varley, R. Siegal, M. Evidence for cognition without grammar from causal reasoning and 'theory of mind' in an agrammatic aphasic patient, Current Biology, 2000,10.
[46] Virginia Slaughter, Michelle J. Dennis and Michelle Pritchard, Theory of mind and peer acceptance in preschool children, British Journal of Developmental Psychology, 2002, (20), 545-564.
[47] Welch R M K, Mother-child participation in conversation about the past: relations to preschoolers' theory of mind, Development Psychology, 1997, 33.
[48] Youngblade L M, Dunn J, Individual differences in young children's pretend play
with mother and sibling: Links to relationships and understanding of other people's feelings and beliefs, Child Development, 1995,66.
[49] Yuill, N., Pearson, A., The development of bases for trait attribution: Children's understanding of traits as causal mechanisms based on desire, Developmental Psychology, 1998, 34,574-586.
[50] 菜蓓瑛，孔克勤，自闭症儿章行为评定与社会认知发展的研究，心理科学，2000，23(3)，269-274．
[51] 陈满琪，李春，儿童心理理论研究现状与发展趋势，江西教育学院学报，2003，24(2)，23-26．
[52] 陈英和，姚端维，郭向和，儿童心理理论的发展及其影响因素的研究进展，心理发展与教育，2001，3，56-59．
[53] 邓赐平，幼儿心理理论表现的任务特异性分析，心理发展与教育，2003，3，23-28．
[54] 邓赐平，戴晶斌，儿章社会认知结构发展研究述评，心理科学，1999，22，160．163．
[55] 邓赐平，桑标，不同任务情境对幼儿心理理论表现的影响，心理科学，2003，2，272-275．
[56] 邓赐平，桑标，缪小春，程式知识与幼儿心理理论的发展关系，心理学报，2002，34(6)，596-603．
[57] 邓赐平，桑标，缪小春，儿童早期“心理理论”发展研究中的几个基本问题，心理科学，2000，23(4)，399-403．
[58] 邓赐平，桑标，缪小春，幼儿心理理论发展的一般认知基础，心理科学，2002，25(5)，531-534．
[59] 丁芳，儿童心理理论研究的皮亚杰理论基础，山东教育学院学报，2002，6，18-22．
[60] 丁芳，刘大文，儿章心理理论的发展，烟台师范学院学报(哲社版)，2003，20(2)，70-74．
[61] 丁芳，熊哲宏，儿童心理理论研究的一个新方向——执行性功能与心理理论之
间的关系，心理科学，2003，26(5)，896-897．
[62] 郭力平，冯君萍，早期儿童的游戏与心理理论的发展，心理科学，2003，26(5)，804-807．
[63] 黄天元，林崇德，关于儿童特质理解的心理理论研究，心理科学进展，2003，11(2)，184-190．
[64] J.H．弗拉维尔，R.H．米勒，S.A．米勒著，邓赐平，刘明译，《认知发展》，华东师范大学出版社，2002年7月，250-291．
[65] 李燕燕，桑标，影响儿童心理理论发展的家庭因素，心理科学，2003，26(6)，1108-1109．
[66] 刘吉林，认知发展研究的新领域：儿童“心理理论”研究，山东教育科研，2002，1，44-49．
[67] 刘明，邓赐平，桑标，幼儿心理理论与社会行为发展关系的初步研究，心理发展与教育，2002，2，39-43．
[68] 莫书亮，苏彦捷，心理理论和语言能力的关系，心理发展与教育，2002，2，85-91．
[69] 隋晓爽，苏彦捷，对心理理论两成分认知模型的验证，心理学报，2003，35(1)，56-62．
[70] 隋晓爽，苏彦捷，心理理论社会知觉成分与语言的关系，心理科学，2003，26(5)，930-931．
[71] 王桂琴，方格，毕鸿燕，杨小冬，儿童心理理论的研究进展，心理学动态，2001，2，129-135．
[72] 王美芳，陈会昌，错误信念理解后儿童心理理论的发展，心理发展与教育，2001，2，45-49．
[73] 王益文，3-4岁儿童攻击行为的多方法测评及其与“心理理论”的关系，山东师范大学硕士学位论文，2002，4，29．
[74] 王益文，林崇德，张文新，外表真实区别、表征变化和错误信念的任务分析，心理科学，2003，26(3)，390-392．
[75] 王益文，张文新，3—6岁儿童“心理理论”的发展，心理发展与教育，2002，1，11-15．
[76] 熊哲宏，儿章“心理理论”发展的“理论论”(The theory-theory)述评，心理科学，2001，24(3)，334-337．
[77] 徐芬，包雪华，儿童“心理理论”及其有关欺骗研究的新进展，心理发展与教育，2000，2，53-56．
[78] 许有云，儿章心理理论与儿童道德发展研究，安徽师范大学学报(人文社科版)，31(4)，474-477．
[79] 张文新著，《儿童社会性发展》，北京师范大学出版社，1999年8月，258-267．
[80] 周念丽，自闭症儿章认知发展研究的回溯与探索，中国特殊教育，2002，1，60-64
[2] Bartsch K, Wellman H, Young children's attribution of action to belief and desire Child Development, 1989, 60,946-964.
[3] Carol A. Miller,False belief understanding in children with specific language impairment, Journal of Communication Disorders,2001 (34),73-86.
[4] Carpendale,J.I & Chandler, M.J. On the distinction between false belief and subscribing to an interpretive theory of mind, Child Development, 1996,67.
[5] Chandler M. Fritz & Hala S,Small scale deceit: Deception as a marker for two-,three-, and four-year-olds' early theories of mind,Child Development, 1989,60,1263-1277.
[6] Claire Hughes,Judy Dunn, Understanding mind and emotion:longitudinal associations with mental-state talk between young friends,Developmental Psychology,1998,34.
[7] Deepthi Kamawar, David R. Olson, Children's Representational Theory of Language: The Problem of Opaque Contexts,Cognitive Development, 1999,(14), 531-548.
[8] Drew Nesdale,Developmental Changes in Children's Ethnic Preferences and Social Cognitions,Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology 2000,(4), 501-519.
[9] Dunn J.J.,Brown.C. Young children's understanding of other people's feeling and beliefs: individual differences and their antecedents, Child Development, 1991,62.
[10] Francesca Happe' a, Hiram Brownellb, Ellen Winnerc, Acquired 'theory of mind' impairments following stroke, Cognition, 1999 (70),211-240.
[11] Freeman, N.H.,Lacohee, H, Making explicit 3-year-olds'implicit competence with their own false beliefs,Cognition,1995,56.
[12] Gary W. Ladd, Peer Relationships and Social Competence During Early and Middle Childhood, Annu, Rev. Psychol. 1999, 50,333.59.
[13] Gordon G. Gallup Jr.,Self-awareness and the evolution of social intelligence,
Behavioural Processes, 1998(42),239-247.
[14] Hala, S, Chandler, M, J, The role of strategic planning in accessing false-belief under standing,Child Development, 1997,62.
[15] Happe,F.,The role of age and verbal ability in the Theory of Mind task performance of subjects with autism,Child Development, 1995,66.
[16] Heather A. Holmes, Cherice Black, Scotta. Miller, A Cross-Task Comparison of False Belief Understanding in a Head Start Population, Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 1996,63,263-285.
[17] Hughes C,,Finding your marbles: does preschoolers' trategic behavior predict later understanding of mind? Development Psychology, 1998,34.
[18] Jekins J M.,Astington J W.,Cognitive factors and family structure associated with theory of mind development in young children, Developmental Psychology, 1996,32.
[19] Jennifer A. Richesona, Nalini Ambady, Effects of situational power on automatic racial prejudice, Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 2003 (39), 177-183.
[20] Jina S. Yoon,Jan N. Hughes,Timothy A. Cavell, Bruce Thompson, Social Cognitive Differences Between Aggressive-Rejected and Aggressive-rejected Children, Journal of School Psychology,2000,Vol.38,No. 6,551-570.
[21] John H. Flavell,Cognitive Development: Children's Knowledge About the Mind, Annu.Rev. Psychol, 1999,(50),21-45.
[22] John H. Flavell, Development of children's knowledge about the mental world, International Journal of B ahavioral Development,2000,24,(1), 15-23.
[23] Josef Perner,Birgit Lang, Development of theory of mind and executive control, Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 1999,Vol.3,No.9.
[24] Kamawar, D.& Olson,D.R. Children's Representational Theory of Language: The Problem of Opaque Contexts,Cognitive Development, 1999,14.
[25] Leslie A. Pretense and representation in infancy: The origin of "theory of mind", Psychology Review, 1987,94.
[26] Lillard AS.,Body or mind: Children's categorizing of pretense,Child Development, 1996,67.
[27] Lillard A S, Ethnopsychologies: Cultural variations in theories of mind, Psychological Bulletin, 1998,123.
[28] Michael Siegal, Rosemary Varley, Stephen C.Want, Mind over grammar: reasoning in aphasia and development, Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 2001,Vol.5, No.7 July.
[29] Mitchell P, Robinson EJ, Issacs JE, &Nye RM, Contamination in reasoning about false belief: An instance of realist bias in adults but not children,Cognition, 1996,59.
[30] Moore C,Pure K,Furrow D.,Children's understanding of modal expression of speaker certainty and uncertainty and its relation to the development of a representational theory of mind, Child Development, 1990,61.
[31] Norman H. Freeman, Cristina Antonuccia, Charlie Lewis,Representation of the cardinality principle: early conception of error in a counterfactual test,Cognition, 2000(74), 71-89.
[32] P. A. Russell,J. A. Hosie, C. D. Gray,C. Scott, N. Hunter,J. S. Banks, M. C. Macaulay, The Development of Theory of Mind in Deaf Children,Child Psychol. Psychiat. 1998,Vol. 39,No. 6,903-910.
[33] Paul Blooma, Tim P. German, Two reasons to abandon the false belief task as a test of theory of mind, Cognition, 2000,(77),B25-B31.
[34] Perner J, Ruffman T, Leekam S R, Theory of mind is contagious: you catch it from your sibs, Child Development,1994,65.
[35] Pillow, B.H.,Henrinchon, A.J. There's more to the picture than meets the eye: Young children's difficulty understanding biased interpretation,Child Development,1996,67.
[36] Rebecca Saltmarsh,Young Children's Difficulty Acknowledging False Belief: Realism and Deception, Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 1998,(69),3-21.
[37] Robin J. Harvey, Janet Fletcher, Davina J. French, Social Reasoning: A Source of Influence on Aggression, Clinical Psychology Review, 2001,Vol.21,No.3,447-469.
[38] Rosemary Varley, Michael Siegal, Evidence for cognition without grammar from causal reasoning and 'theory of mind' in an agrammatic aphasic patient, Brief Communication, 723.
[39] Ruffman,T.Olson DR,Ash T,&Keenan T,The ABC's of deception: Do young child understand deception in the same way as adults, Developmental Psychology, 1993, 29, 74-87.
[40] Sabbagh ,M. A.,Balkwin,D. A.Learning words from knowledge versus ignorant speakers: Links between preschoolers' Theory of mind, Child Development, 2001,72.
[41] Sabbagh M A, Callanan M A, Metarepresentation in action: three-, four-,and five-year-olds developing theories of mind in parent conversations, Development Psychology,1998,34,491-502.
[42] Saltmarsh, R. Mitchell,E, Robinson, E.J. Realism and children's early grasp of mental representation: Belief-based judgements in the state change task Cognition,1995,57.
[43] Shinobu Kitayama, Yukiko Uchida, Explicit self-criticism and implicit self-regard: Evaluating self and friend in two cultures, Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 2003 (39), 476-482.
[44] Sullivan K, Zaitchik D, Tager-Flusberg H, Preschoolers can attribute second-order beliefs, Developmental Psychology, 1994,30.
[45] Varley, R. Siegal, M. Evidence for cognition without grammar from causal reasoning and 'theory of mind' in an agrammatic aphasic patient, Current Biology, 2000,10.
[46] Virginia Slaughter, Michelle J. Dennis and Michelle Pritchard, Theory of mind and peer acceptance in preschool children, British Journal of Developmental Psychology, 2002, (20), 545-564.
[47] Welch R M K, Mother-child participation in conversation about the past: relations to preschoolers' theory of mind, Development Psychology, 1997, 33.
[48] Youngblade L M, Dunn J, Individual differences in young children's pretend play
with mother and sibling: Links to relationships and understanding of other people's feelings and beliefs, Child Development, 1995,66.
[49] Yuill, N., Pearson, A., The development of bases for trait attribution: Children's understanding of traits as causal mechanisms based on desire, Developmental Psychology, 1998, 34,574-586.
[50] 菜蓓瑛，孔克勤，自闭症儿章行为评定与社会认知发展的研究，心理科学，2000，23(3)，269-274．
[51] 陈满琪，李春，儿童心理理论研究现状与发展趋势，江西教育学院学报，2003，24(2)，23-26．
[52] 陈英和，姚端维，郭向和，儿童心理理论的发展及其影响因素的研究进展，心理发展与教育，2001，3，56-59．
[53] 邓赐平，幼儿心理理论表现的任务特异性分析，心理发展与教育，2003，3，23-28．
[54] 邓赐平，戴晶斌，儿章社会认知结构发展研究述评，心理科学，1999，22，160．163．
[55] 邓赐平，桑标，不同任务情境对幼儿心理理论表现的影响，心理科学，2003，2，272-275．
[56] 邓赐平，桑标，缪小春，程式知识与幼儿心理理论的发展关系，心理学报，2002，34(6)，596-603．
[57] 邓赐平，桑标，缪小春，儿童早期“心理理论”发展研究中的几个基本问题，心理科学，2000，23(4)，399-403．
[58] 邓赐平，桑标，缪小春，幼儿心理理论发展的一般认知基础，心理科学，2002，25(5)，531-534．
[59] 丁芳，儿童心理理论研究的皮亚杰理论基础，山东教育学院学报，2002，6，18-22．
[60] 丁芳，刘大文，儿章心理理论的发展，烟台师范学院学报(哲社版)，2003，20(2)，70-74．
[61] 丁芳，熊哲宏，儿童心理理论研究的一个新方向——执行性功能与心理理论之
间的关系，心理科学，2003，26(5)，896-897．
[62] 郭力平，冯君萍，早期儿童的游戏与心理理论的发展，心理科学，2003，26(5)，804-807．
[63] 黄天元，林崇德，关于儿童特质理解的心理理论研究，心理科学进展，2003，11(2)，184-190．
[64] J.H．弗拉维尔，R.H．米勒，S.A．米勒著，邓赐平，刘明译，《认知发展》，华东师范大学出版社，2002年7月，250-291．
[65] 李燕燕，桑标，影响儿童心理理论发展的家庭因素，心理科学，2003，26(6)，1108-1109．
[66] 刘吉林，认知发展研究的新领域：儿童“心理理论”研究，山东教育科研，2002，1，44-49．
[67] 刘明，邓赐平，桑标，幼儿心理理论与社会行为发展关系的初步研究，心理发展与教育，2002，2，39-43．
[68] 莫书亮，苏彦捷，心理理论和语言能力的关系，心理发展与教育，2002，2，85-91．
[69] 隋晓爽，苏彦捷，对心理理论两成分认知模型的验证，心理学报，2003，35(1)，56-62．
[70] 隋晓爽，苏彦捷，心理理论社会知觉成分与语言的关系，心理科学，2003，26(5)，930-931．
[71] 王桂琴，方格，毕鸿燕，杨小冬，儿童心理理论的研究进展，心理学动态，2001，2，129-135．
[72] 王美芳，陈会昌，错误信念理解后儿童心理理论的发展，心理发展与教育，2001，2，45-49．
[73] 王益文，3-4岁儿童攻击行为的多方法测评及其与“心理理论”的关系，山东师范大学硕士学位论文，2002，4，29．
[74] 王益文，林崇德，张文新，外表真实区别、表征变化和错误信念的任务分析，心理科学，2003，26(3)，390-392．
[75] 王益文，张文新，3—6岁儿童“心理理论”的发展，心理发展与教育，2002，1，11-15．
[76] 熊哲宏，儿章“心理理论”发展的“理论论”(The theory-theory)述评，心理科学，2001，24(3)，334-337．
[77] 徐芬，包雪华，儿童“心理理论”及其有关欺骗研究的新进展，心理发展与教育，2000，2，53-56．
[78] 许有云，儿章心理理论与儿童道德发展研究，安徽师范大学学报(人文社科版)，31(4)，474-477．
[79] 张文新著，《儿童社会性发展》，北京师范大学出版社，1999年8月，258-267．
[80] 周念丽，自闭症儿章认知发展研究的回溯与探索，中国特殊教育，2002，1，60-64