儿童心理理论发生与发展:跨文化的视角
Children’s theory of mind development: Cultural perspectives
查看参考文献61篇
|
文摘
|
宏观的文化背景会塑造儿童心理理论的发生与发展进程.通过发现不同文化下儿童发展的相似性和差异性规律,有助于将儿童心理理论发展普遍规律和特定文化背景下的发展现象区分开来.文献回顾表明,儿童心理理论发生与发展既有文化普遍性,又表现出文化特异性.在这种背景下,研究者开始聚焦于儿童心理理论文化特异性的相关因素.当前,研究者主要从亲子交流、家庭教养方式、学校教学模式及执行功能促进心理理论发展的内在机制等方面的跨文化差异,来阐释儿童心理理论发生发展规律的文化特异性.通过整合现有关于儿童心理理论发展跨文化差异的主要研究文献,以及尚未解决的研究问题,本文提出一个儿童心理理论发生与发展的文化模型.最后,文章对未来研究需要深入探讨的关键问题进行了展望. |
|
其他语种文摘
|
We focus our review on the cross-cultural studies on the development of theory of mind. We present evidence that the acquisition and development of theory of mind is cultural-universal as well as cultural-specific. Although children from different cultural backgrounds pass false belief task at about 4 years old, they show significant difference in timing and sequence in understanding of different mental states. To explore influential factors in the development of children’s theory of mind, more researchers begin to focus on the effect of macroscopic cultural backgrounds. This paper review the cultural differences between East and West in parent-child talk, parental rearing pattern, pedagogical experience and development of executive function, and their relations with children’s theory of mind to understand cultural specificity of Eastern children’s theory of mind acquisition and development. In family parenting practices, Western parents talk more about mental-state terms, and tend to adopt authoritative parenting style. In contrast, Eastern parents refer more actions and its consequences in parent-child talking, and tend to adopt authoritarian parenting style. Mental-state talking can promote children's attention and cognition to mental state of themselves and others, and thus directly facilitate theory of mind development of Western children. Action-consequence talking, which needs children to infer themselves or others' mental state, could indirectly facilitate Eastern children’s mental-state understanding. Comparing with authoritarian parents, authoritative parents encourage their children more to question, discuss and argue, which offer more opportunities for Western children to be exposed to mental-state terms, thus promote theory of mind development of Western children. In contrast, authoritarian parenting style chosen by Eastern parents has negative effects on the development of their children’s mental understanding. As for pedagogical experience, Western schools adopt inquiry-teaching model, which characterized by encouraging students to express their views and cooperative learning that facilitated Eastern children’s mental understanding. On the contrary, eastern schools adopt traditional teaching model, which characterized by behavior control and unconditional rule-following that impede the theory of mind development of the Eastern children. Executive function of Oriental children is significantly better than that of the Western peers, but this advantage has not been transformed into the of the theory of mind development. We hypothesize that the combination of executive function and social experience about mental understanding together promote the development of theory of mind. In conclusion, we hold the opinion that “every road leads to Rome”, the Eastern and Western children’s theory of mind may have undergone different development paths. This article, based on the existing literature, presented a cultural model of children’s theory of mind development. Furthermore, some issues arising from this review that we hope will be addressed in future studies. Firstly, there are needs to explore the cross-cultural differences of theory of mind from the developmental perspective. Secondly, we should conduct cross-cultural study to explore the path and effect size of these influential factors of theory of mind. Thirdly, what the impact of cultural exchanges has on the development of children's theory of mind is an issue that is worth studying. Fourthly, there are needs to explore the indirect effects of social changes on children’s ToM development. |
|
来源
|
科学通报
,2019,64(4):384-392 【核心库】
|
|
DOI
|
10.1360/N972018-00763
|
|
关键词
|
心理理论
;
文化特异性
;
亲子交流
;
家庭教养方式
;
执行功能
|
|
地址
|
1.
广西师范学院教育科学学院认知神经科学与教育实验室, 南宁, 530001
2.
中国科学院大学心理学系, 北京, 100049
3.
中国科学院心理研究所毕生人脑连接组学与行为研究团队, 北京, 100101
4.
北京大学心理与认知科学学院, 行为与心理健康北京市重点实验室, 北京, 100871
|
|
语种
|
中文 |
|
文献类型
|
综述型 |
|
ISSN
|
0023-074X |
|
学科
|
社会科学总论 |
|
基金
|
国家自然科学基金
;
广西师范学院科研启动基金
;
广西壮族自治区八桂学者专项
|
|
文献收藏号
|
CSCD:6460217
|
参考文献 共
61
共4页
|
|
1.
Carruthers P. Mindreading in infancy.
Mind Lang,2013,28:141-172
|
被引
2
次
|
|
|
|
|
2.
Wellman H M. Meta-analysis of theory-of-mind development: The truth about false belief.
Child Dev,2001,72:655-684
|
被引
35
次
|
|
|
|
|
3.
苏彦捷. 执行功能与心理理论关系的元分析:抑制控制和灵活转换的作用.
心理发展与教育,2015,31:51-61
|
被引
4
次
|
|
|
|
|
4.
吴南. 心理理论和语言发展的关系.
心理科学进展,2007,15:436-442
|
被引
3
次
|
|
|
|
|
5.
Shahaeian A. Towards a better understanding of the relationship between executive control and theory of mind: An intra-cultural comparison of three diverse samples.
Dev Sci,2015,18:671-685
|
被引
1
次
|
|
|
|
|
6.
Ebert S. Links among parents’mental state language, family socioeconomic status, and preschoolers’theory of mind development.
Cogn Dev,2017,44:32-48
|
被引
1
次
|
|
|
|
|
7.
苏彦捷. 亲子交流与儿童心理理论的获得和发展:文化的视角.
心理科学进展,2012,20:317-327
|
被引
4
次
|
|
|
|
|
8.
Lillard A S. The impact of pretend play on children’s development: A review of the evidence.
Psychol Bull,2013,139:1-34
|
被引
4
次
|
|
|
|
|
9.
Fink E. Friendlessness and theory of mind: A prospective longitudinal study.
Br J Dev Psychol,2015,33:1-17
|
被引
1
次
|
|
|
|
|
10.
Bronfenbrenner U. Contexts of child rearing: Problems and prospects.
Am Psychol,1979,34:844-850
|
被引
12
次
|
|
|
|
|
11.
Hughes C. A social perspective on theory of mind.
Handbook of Child Psychology and Developmental Science, Vol 3: Social, Emotional And Personality Development (7th ed),2015:564-609
|
被引
1
次
|
|
|
|
|
12.
Devine R T. Family correlates of false belief understanding in early childhood: A meta-analysis.
Child Dev,2018,89:971-987
|
被引
2
次
|
|
|
|
|
13.
Callaghan T C. Synchrony in the onset of mental-state reasoning evidence from five cultures.
Psychol Sci,2005,16:378-384
|
被引
3
次
|
|
|
|
|
14.
Liu D. Theory of mind development in false-belief understanding Chinese children: A meta-analysis of across cultures and languages.
Dev Psychoc,2008,44:523-531
|
被引
1
次
|
|
|
|
|
15.
Lewis C. Chinese preschoolers’false belief understanding: Is social knowledge underpinned by parental styles, social interactions or executive functions?.
Psychologia,2006,49:252-266
|
被引
1
次
|
|
|
|
|
16.
Moriguchi Y. Japanese children’s difficulty with false belief understanding: Is it real or apparent?.
Psychologia,2010,53:36-43
|
被引
1
次
|
|
|
|
|
17.
Hughes C. Lost in translation? Comparing British, Japanese, and Italian children’s theory-of-mind performance.
Child Dev Res,2015,2014:1-10
|
被引
1
次
|
|
|
|
|
18.
Wang Z. Theory of mind and executive function during middle childhood across cultures.
J Exp Child Psychol,2016,149:6-22
|
被引
1
次
|
|
|
|
|
19.
Wellman H M. Scaling of theory-of-mind tasks.
Child Dev,2004,75:523-541
|
被引
18
次
|
|
|
|
|
20.
Peterson C C. Steps in theory-of-mind development for children with deafness or autism.
Child Dev,2005,76:502-517
|
被引
7
次
|
|
|
|
|
了解气象卫星更多信息，请访问