Assessing Deictic Relational Responding in Social Anhedonia: A Functional Approach to the Development of Theory of Mind Impairments.

Premack and Woodruff (1978) have proposed the term "Theory of Mind" (ToM) to refer to one's ability to infer the beliefs, intentions and thoughts of others in order to explain and predict their behavior. Understanding how ToM operates has been the subject of debate for more than twenty years in cognitive psychology, but has only recently been studied in behavior analysis. Although the concepts of ToM do not lend themselves readily to a functional interpretation, some behavioral researchers working under the rubric of Relational Frame Theory (RFT) have attempted to develop a behavioral interpretation of the types of repertoires that constitute a ToM (McHugh, Barnes-Holmes, & Barnes-Holmes, 2004a). Relational Frame Theory is a modern behavioranalytic approach to the study of human language and cognition. At its core, this approach embraces the simple idea that language and cognition involve a number of limited but powerful behavioral processes, that allow individuals to relate stimuli or events in the world in new and untrained ways (as in generative language). A range of behavioral patterns emerge as a result of these relations between stimuli and these patterns are referred to as relational frames (see Hayes, Barnes-Holmes, & Roche, 2001). The simplest form of such relating can be referred to as coordination framing. An example of this type of framing might go as follows: a child could learn that the written word "DOG" is the same as the spoken word "DOG" according to the non-physical characteristics of these two stimuli while their physical form is very different. According to RFT, it is the uniquely human ability to learn to relate objects and events not based on their physical form but on external cues that allows for the generativity of human language. Among the different ways in which two stimuli can be related, Barnes-Holmes, Hayes, and Dymond (2001; see also Barnes-Holmes, McHugh, & Barnes-Holmes, 2004) have underlined the role of a specific class of relational responding termed deictic framing, which is assumed to underpin perspective-taking and, thus to be critically important with respect to the ability to infer the mental states of others. The three deictic frames involved in the acquisition of perspective-taking skills are the frames of I and YOU, HERE and THERE, and NOW and THEN, corresponding to interpersonal, spatial, and temporal dimensions, respectively. According to this view, perspective-taking skills emerge through a history of responding to questions such as > or >. Many phrases during daily discourse include these relational frames, even if substituted words such as the names of places, people and time are frequently used instead of the actual terms of I and YOU, HERE and THERE and NOW and THEN. Following the RFT approach to ToM, McHugh et al. (2004a) have proposed an RFT interpretation of the developmental levels of ToM described by Howlin, Baron-Cohen, and Hadwin (1999). That is, the authors suggested that levels from simple visual perspective-taking to the understanding of false-beliefs involve the ability to respond in accordance with deictic relational frames. Consider the following example of a well known false-belief task (Gopnick & Astington, 1988), in which a participant is asked what is inside a closed candy box. After responding, the candy box is opened and the participant discovers that the candy box did not contain candy but actually contained pencils. Then s/he is asked >. The RFT view of this task is that a correct response coming from the participant is underpinned by relational frames as follows: >. In order to study this interpretation, McHugh et al. …

[1]  R. Heinrichs,et al.  Neurocognitive deficit in schizophrenia: a quantitative review of the evidence. , 1998, Neuropsychology.

[2]  Y. Sarfati,et al.  How do people with schizophrenia explain the behaviour of others? A study of theory of mind and its relationship to thought and speech disorganization in schizophrenia , 1999, Psychological Medicine.

[3]  K. Tallent,et al.  Wisconsin Card Sorting Test deficits in schizotypic individuals , 1999, Schizophrenia Research.

[4]  M. Brüne "Theory of mind" in schizophrenia: a review of the literature. , 2005, Schizophrenia bulletin.

[5]  Ruben C. Gur,et al.  Self-face recognition and theory of mind in patients with schizophrenia and first-degree relatives , 2006, Schizophrenia Research.

[6]  M. Coltheart,et al.  Defective Self and/or Other Mentalising in Schizophrenia: A Cognitive Neuropsychological Approach. , 1997, Cognitive neuropsychiatry.

[7]  C. Frith,et al.  Schizophrenia, symptomatology and social inference: Investigating “theory of mind” in people with schizophrenia , 1995, Schizophrenia Research.

[8]  K. Tallent,et al.  Spatial, object, and affective working memory in social anhedonia: an exploratory study , 2003, Schizophrenia Research.

[9]  M. Brüne,et al.  Proverb comprehension reconsidered—‘theory of mind’ and the pragmatic use of language in schizophrenia , 2005, Schizophrenia Research.

[10]  B. Roche,et al.  Relational frame theory: a post-Skinnerian account of human language and cognition. , 2013, Advances in child development and behavior.

[11]  P. Silvia,et al.  When the Need to Belong Goes Wrong , 2007, Psychological science.

[12]  Ellen Vos,et al.  Theory of mind in schizophrenia: meta-analysis. , 2007, The British journal of psychiatry : the journal of mental science.

[13]  M. Casacchia,et al.  Selective impairments of theory of mind in people with schizophrenia , 2001, Schizophrenia Research.

[14]  L. J. Chapman,et al.  Schizotypal Personality: Scales for the measurement of schizotypy , 1995 .

[15]  L. McHugh,et al.  Understanding Perspective-taking, False Belief, and Deception from a Behavioural Perspective , 2004 .

[16]  A. Gopnik,et al.  Children's understanding of representational change and its relation to the understanding of false belief and the appearance-reality distinction. , 1988, Child development.

[17]  M. Tomasello,et al.  Does the chimpanzee have a theory of mind? 30 years later , 2008, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[18]  L. J. Chapman,et al.  Putatively psychosis-prone subjects 10 years later. , 1994, Journal of abnormal psychology.

[19]  Dermot Barnes-Holmes,et al.  Perspective-Taking and Theory of Mind: A Relational Frame Account. , 2004 .

[20]  Udi Bonshtein,et al.  [Theory of mind in schizophrenia]. , 2006, Harefuah.

[21]  Steven C. Hayes,et al.  Self and Self-directed Rules , 2002 .

[22]  Konstantine K. Zakzanis,et al.  Neurocognitive Deficit in Schizophrenia: A Quantitative Review of the Evidence , 1998 .

[23]  Ian Stewart,et al.  Understanding False Belief as Generalized Operant Behavior , 2006 .

[24]  Max Coltheart,et al.  Mentalising, schizotypy, and schizophrenia , 1999, Cognition.

[25]  Thomas E. Myers,et al.  Contagious yawning: the role of self-awareness and mental state attribution. , 2003, Brain research. Cognitive brain research.

[26]  M. Coltheart,et al.  Visual and cognitive perspective-taking impairments in schizophrenia: A failure of allocentric simulation ? , 2001 .

[27]  M. Coltheart,et al.  Recognition of metaphor and irony in young adults: the impact of schizotypal personality traits , 2004, Psychiatry Research.

[28]  K. Bartsch The role of experience in children's developing folk epistemology: review and analysis from the theory–theory perspective , 2002 .

[29]  Uta Frith,et al.  Theory of mind , 2001, Current Biology.

[30]  C. Frith,et al.  The appreciation of visual jokes in people with schizophrenia: a study of ‘mentalizing’ ability , 1997, Schizophrenia Research.

[31]  P. Venables,et al.  A scale for the measurement of schizotypy , 1990 .

[32]  K. Tallent,et al.  Clinical status of at-risk individuals 5 years later: further validation of the psychometric high-risk strategy. , 2005, Journal of abnormal psychology.

[33]  J. Blanchard,et al.  Behavioral signs of schizoidia and schizotypy in social anhedonics , 2005, Schizophrenia Research.

[34]  Dermot Barnes-Holmes,et al.  Perspective-Taking as Relational Responding: A Developmental Profile , 2004 .

[35]  Simon Baron-Cohen,et al.  Teaching Children with Autism to Mind-read: A Practical Guide , 1999 .

[36]  T. Kwapil Social anhedonia as a predictor of the development of schizophrenia-spectrum disorders. , 1998, Journal of abnormal psychology.

[37]  C. Jahshan,et al.  Theory of mind, neurocognition, and functional status in schizotypy , 2007, Schizophrenia Research.

[38]  Marjorie Taylor,et al.  The relation between individual differences in fantasy and theory of mind. , 1997, Child development.

[39]  C. Frith,et al.  Exploring ‘theory of mind’ in people with schizophrenia , 1996, Psychological Medicine.

[40]  Max Coltheart,et al.  Visual perspective-taking and schizotypy: evidence for a simulation-based account of mentalizing in normal adults , 2001, Cognition.

[41]  Rhonda K. Kowalchuk,et al.  Assessing Relational Learning Deficits in Perspective-Taking in Children With High-Functioning Autism Spectrum Disorder , 2007 .

[42]  William P. Horan,et al.  Social anhedonia and schizotypy: The contribution of individual differences in affective traits, stress, and coping , 2007, Psychiatry Research.

[43]  Bayta L. Maring,et al.  The characteristics and correlates of fantasy in school-age children: imaginary companions, impersonation, and social understanding. , 2004, Developmental psychology.

[44]  N. Yirmiya,et al.  Meta-analyses comparing theory of mind abilities of individuals with autism, individuals with mental retardation, and normally developing individuals , 1998 .