Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Theory of mind mechanism
Theory of mind mechanism
Essays on ‘Theory of Mind and its significance for psychological development’
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Theory of mind mechanism
The study of children’s theory of mind has grown tremendously attractive to many developmental psychologists in the past few decades. The reason for this being because having a theory of mind is one of the quintessential skills that define us as being human and because having this ability plays a major role in our social functioning. To have a theory of mind is to be able to reflect on the categorical contents of one’s own mind, such as dreams, memories, imaginations, and beliefs, which all provide a basic foundation to understand how someone else may think and why they may behave in the manner that they do (Bjorklund, p.199). It is the development of one’s concepts of mental activity; their ability to understand that they think things that others do not and that their thoughts are theirs alone, as well as understanding that other peoples’ minds work in the same way, in which they too, have their own individual thoughts. Our theory of mind grants us ability to navigate our personal and social world by explaining past behavior, and anticipating and predicting future actions (Moore & Frye, 1991).
The skills typically required to development a theory of mind are minimal. It is important that a child first acquires the ability to view oneself and others as intentional agents, or individuals who cause things to happen to reach a desired goal, so that they can then be able to take the perspective of others and understand what their intentions are (Bjorklund, p.200). Now, although infants are not born with these abilities, they do develop them over time. How children come to appreciate that other people have beliefs and desires, often different from their own, that motivate their behavior, is assessed through what is known as the false-b...
... middle of paper ...
... know to be true. It is at this age that a child develops the ability to make a split between peoples minds and the world, and can think about people’s minds and manipulate the world around it so they can come to believe certain things about it. Children younger than the age of four have a hard time understanding that they themselves, as well as other people, act in order to achieve some type of goal, which makes it hard for them to take the perspectives of others. My hypothesis about a theory of mind not beginning to develop in children until about four or five years of age was correct and was supported by the false-belief tests that I performed on three different children as well as evidence found by Charlie Lewis and Amanda Osborne, and Heinz Wimmer and Josef Perner (1983) in their study’s with the false-belief task and children’s acquisition of a theory of mind.
In the magic of the mind author Dr. Elizabeth loftus explains how a witness’s perception of an accident or crime is not always correct because people's memories are often imperfect. “Are we aware of our minds distortions of our past experiences? In most cases, the answer is no.” our minds can change the way we remember what we have seen or heard without realizing it uncertain witnesses “often identify the person who best matches recollection
In the article by, Jeffrey S. Nevid, he mainly focuses on the mind-set of Sigmund Freud’s theory. I found this very helpful as well because it related to the way people think and how the mind develops from an infant to an adult.
Piaget is most commonly recognised for his work in forming a theory explaining how children’s thinking evolves to become more complex with age (Passer & Smith, 2012). For more than fifty years, Piaget researched the area of child thought processes, proposing a step-wise sequence of child mental development involving four distinct stages (Passer & Smith, 2012, p. 422). According to Passer and Smith (2012), a core belief of Piaget’s was that “cognitive development results from an interaction of the brain’s biological maturation and personal experiences” (p. 422). Piaget’s research has since received considerable attention and debate as to its validity. Many assessments of his work detail a greater level of criticism than praise; this criticism presumably being in place to support recent scientific discoveries and assist in the evolution of particular elements of his theories to what is regarded as relevant today (Flavell, 1996). Despite those who doubt his work, many sympathetic theorists (labelled neo-Piagetians) have opted to adopt and
Björklund, D. F. (2000). Children‘s thinking: Developmental function and individual differences (3rd. Ed.). Belmont: Wadsworth.
A mind-independent conception implies that no matter what thoughts a person has on a certain topic, this topic possesses a value on itself. The value is independent of the mind and evaluative attitudes that the person might have.
Russell explains this notion with the example of mother and her thoughts. "We find ourselves believing in them when we first begin to reflect; the thought that Mother may be angry or pleased is one which rises in early infancy" (Russell 90).
Is there a radical conceptual shift in theory of mind between the ages of 3 and 4 years? Explain how research evidence supports your views
Dweck finds that children with a fixed mindset “see challenges, mistakes and even the need to exert effort as threats to their ego.” (Dweck 3). This leads to children focusing too much on other people’s opinions instead
The Extent to Which an Acquisition of a Theory of Mind is Essential for the Typical Development of the Child
The concept of ‘theory of mind’ is a complex one with various considerations. It can basically be defined as, ‘The ability to understand or ‘read’ the mind of another individual; the ability to ‘put oneself in the place of another’,’ (Smith and Stevens 2002). Essentially, ‘theory of mind’ is concerned with the ideal that a person can comprehend what another person in the same situation may be thinking, or the way in which they may be feeling, without the necessity for direct contact and communication to establish that information. The paramount dilemma for psychologists researching this area of evolutionary psychology, is the difficulty in ensuring that it genuinely is the mind of another individual that a person is responding to, rather than their overt behaviour, bearing in mind the impossibility of looking directly into another’s mind.
Physicalism of the human mind is a doctrine that states that the world is ‘entirely physical’, and can be described in various ways. One way it can be described is that minds, mental properties and mental processes are visibly not physical phenomena. Terms such as “mind,” “thinking,” and “feeling” do not play in the theories of fundamental physics. For example, in this slim sense of “physical,” a lung is not a physical object, inhalation is not a physical property and diffusion is not a physical process; as in the terms “lung,” “inhalation,” and “diffusion” do not have a role in the theories of fundamental physics. Acknowledging that mental phenomena are not physical in this slim sense is not vastly acknowledging. However, certainly there is an open sense of the word “physical” in which a lung, inhalation, and diffusion are certainly physical phenomena. Physicalism of the human mind proclaims that human minds, mental properties and mental processes are physical in this open sense of “physical.” A clear open sense of “physical” is contentious in the philosophy of the mind. A common view is: “An individual item (e.g., object, property-instance, or process) is physical in the broad sense if, and only if, it meets either of two conditions: (1) it’s an item of a kind that can in principle be defined in the distinctive vocabulary of fundamental physics; or (2) it’s a physically realized item of a functional kind.” The first condition is straight forward, but the second condition evidently demands clarification. Accordingly, a “functional” kind of thing is one in which its existence entails in the actuality of “something or other” that encounters a convinced measurement where the structure and functioning of the “something or other” does not matter as long as it encounters the functioning in request. For instance, a lung is a functional kind of object in my sense. Therefore,
The relation between brain and mind is disputed over a long time. The debate is whether mind and brain are separate entities or not and if the mind is a separate entity, then how are mental properties, functions and consciousness in relation with the brain, being things which are non-physical. Consciousness helps to understand the relation between the brain and mind, by contemplating the reason or the source of it, if it’s a manifestation of the mind or just a by-product of brain activity. The existence of mind and mental states can be explained through a more philosophical perspective rather than a scientific one. The core of science is philosophy based on empirical evidence, mind being metaphysical cannot be studied empirically.
For years philosophers have enquired into the nature of the mind, and specifically the mysteries of intelligence and consciousness. (O’Brien 2017) One of these mysteries is how a material object, the brain, can produce thoughts and rational reasoning. The Computational Theory of Mind (CTM) was devised in response to this problem, and suggests that the brain is quite literally a computer, and that thinking is essentially computation. (BOOK) This idea was first theorised by philosopher Hilary Putnam, but was later developed by Jerry Fodor, and continues to be further investigated today as cognitive science, modern computers, and artificial intelligence continue to advance. [REF] Computer processing machines ‘think’ by recognising information
The child has a hard time realizing that though there are many other people and things in their world, none of them are more important than the child himself. The child believes that his point of view is the only point of view of the world. This is caused by his inability to put himself in someone’s else’s shoes (Smith). The concrete operational period, spanning between the ages of 7 and 11, is marked by the onset of logic in the young mind. The child is able to mentally manipulate objects and events.
It is at the beginning of this stage that children start tobecome able to have complex logical thoughts and are able to focus on more than one part of aproblem at a time. These logical thoughts, however, are limited to real world objects and personal experiences or events. This limited thinking makes it very difficult for children in thisstage to understand and logically answer hypothetical situations or abstract ideas.The fourth and final stage of Piaget’s theory, beginning around early teens and continuing on all through adulthood, is the formal operational stage. Unlike the previous stage, adolescentsin this stage are able to logically use symbols related to abstract concepts and think about multiple variables to consider possibilities (WebMD.com). Although formal operational thought starts at the beginning of this stage, it always continues to increase in sophistication as a persongets older. It is for this reason why some people are better at thinking about hypothetical questions and ideas than others.Although Piaget’s theory has been used as a basis for many research studies, there are aspects of it that have been challenged. Some of the most criticized points of the theory is thatPiaget underestimated both the cognitive abilities of young children and the impact that socialenvironments and culture has on cognitive development. It is also