Interpreting the results of explicit and applied theory of mind collectively in autistic children: A solution from Rasch analysis

Abstract

Multidimensional theory of mind assessments should include items assessing both explicit theory of mind (theory of mind knowledge) and applied theory of mind (application of theory of mind knowledge in real-life contexts). However, the two theory of mind scores cannot be interpreted collectively to identify children having mismatched explicit and applied theory of mind due to the lack of links between the two scores. To map the information between two theory of mind scores, data of 221 autistic children aged 3–12 years were extracted. Items of the Theory of Mind Task Battery and Theory of Mind Inventory-2 were used to respectively assess the explicit and applied theory of mind. Rasch analysis and correlation coefficients were used to examine the model fits/dimensionality and relationships. After the removal of misfit items, the remaining 45 items showed satisfactory model fits (infit and outfit mean squares < 1.35). Large correlation (r = 0.63) was found between the Rasch scores of the two theory of mind constructs. The scatter plots highlighted that each applied theory of mind score could reflect multiple explicit ToM scores. Accordingly, the information from each theory of mind measure is unique and irreplaceable. Moreover, cutoff scores for identifying children with mismatched explicit and applied theory of mind were proposed to determine the priority of interventions.

Lay abstract

Theory of mind is an ability to infer others’ mental states, which is a foundation for generating appropriate social responses. Theory of mind can be conceptually divided into two related but distinguishable constructs: explicit theory of mind (conceptual knowledge/information about others’ mental states) and applied theory of mind (the ability to use theory of mind skills in real-life contexts). Although these two theory of mind scores can be described by the percentages of children in the early, basic, and advanced developmental stages, the resulting information may not be sufficient to determine the corresponding relationships between these two theory of mind constructs or identify children with mismatched theory of mind abilities (e.g. children who have difficulty in effectively applying their theory of mind knowledge in real-life contexts). To resolve these limitations, methods for simultaneously interpreting the relationships between the two theory of mind scores are proposed. Based on the findings, each applied theory of mind score can reflect multiple scores of explicit theory of mind. In particular, the results do not take measurement error into consideration, which would make them more ambiguous. Therefore, the scores of applied theory of mind should be interpreted carefully, given that children who have the same applied theory of mind score may actually have high or low explicit theory of mind. Regarding the method for joint interpretation, cutoff scores were selected to identify children who have mismatched theory of mind abilities (high explicit theory of mind with low applied theory of mind or low explicit theory of mind with high applied theory of mind) and determine the priority for interventions.

Keywords

autism spectrum disorder Rasch analysis rehabilitation theory of mind

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Adolphs

(2001). The neurobiology of social cognition. Current Opinion in Neurobiology, 11, 231–239. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0959-4388(00)00202-6

Alkire

Warnell

K. R.

Kirby

L. A.

Moraczewski

Redcay

(2021). Explaining variance in social symptoms of children with autism spectrum disorder. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 51, 1249–1265. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10803-020-04598-x

American Psychiatric Association. (2013). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders (5th ed.). American Psychiatric Publishing. https://dsm.psychiatryonline.org/doi/book/10.1176/appi.books.9780890425596

Baron-Cohen

(2001). Theory of mind and autism: A review. In Glidden

L. M.

(Ed.), International review of research in mental retardation (Vol. 23, pp. 169–184). Academic Press. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0074-7750(00)80010-5

Boone

W. J.

(2016). Rasch analysis for instrument development: Why, when, and how? CBE—Life Sciences Education, 15, Article rm4. https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.16-04-0148

Chen

(2007). Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children: Chinese version manual. Chinese Behavioral Science Corporation.

Chen

(2013). Wechsler Preschool and Primary Scale of Intelligence—Chinese version manual. Chinese Behavioral Science Corporation.

Cheung

P. P.

Brown

M. L.

Siu

A. M.

(2021). The effectiveness of a school-based social cognitive intervention on the social participation of Chinese children with autism. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 51, 1894–1908. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10803-020-04683-1

Chiu

W. T.

Lee

Y. C.

Lin

C. H.

Jiang

D. R.

Chen

C. T.

Chen

K. L.

(2016). A comparison of theory of mind capacity and performance in children with autism spectrum disorder and typical development. Journal of Taiwan Occupational Therapy Association, 34, 198–213. https://doi.org/10.6594/JTOTA.2016.34(2).03

10.

Chung

Y. S.

Barch

Strube

(2014). A meta-analysis of mentalizing impairments in adults with schizophrenia and autism spectrum disorder. Schizophrenia Bulletin, 40, 602–616. https://doi.org/10.1093/schbul/sbt048

11.

Cohen

(1992). A power primer. Psychological Bulletin, 112, 155–159. https://doi.org/10.1037//0033-2909.112.1.155

12.

Constantino

Gruber

C. P.

(2005). The Social Responsiveness Scale (SRS) manual. Western Psychological Services.

13.

Cotter

Granger

Backx

Hobbs

Looi

C. Y.

Barnett

J. H.

(2018). Social cognitive dysfunction as a clinical marker: A systematic review of meta-analyses across 30 clinical conditions. Neuroscience and Biobehavioral Reviews, 84, 92–99. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neubiorev.2017.11.014

14.

Deonovic

Bolsinova

Bechger

Maris

(2020). A Rasch model and rating system for continuous responses collected in large-scale learning systems. Frontiers in Psychology, 11, Article 500039. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.500039

15.

Fletcher-Watson

McConnell

Manola

McConachie

(2014). Interventions based on the theory of mind cognitive model for autism spectrum disorder (ASD). Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, 2014, Article CD008785. https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD008785.pub2

16.

Gau

S. S. F.

Liu

L. T.

Y. Y.

Chiu

Y. N.

Tsai

W. C.

(2013). Psychometric properties of the Chinese version of the Social Responsiveness Scale. Research in Autism Spectrum Disorders, 7, 349–360. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rasd.2012.10.004

17.

Green

M. F.

Penn

D. L.

Bentall

Carpenter

W. T.

Gaebel

Gur

R. C.

Kring

A. M.

Park

Silverstein

S. M.

Heinssen

(2008). Social cognition in schizophrenia: An NIMH workshop on definitions, assessment, and research opportunities. Schizophrenia Bulletin, 34, 1211–1220. https://doi.org/10.1093/schbul/sbm145

18.

Hagell

Westergren

(2016). Sample size and statistical conclusions from tests of fit to the Rasch model according to the Rasch unidimensional measurement model (RUMM) program in health outcome measurement. Journal of Applied Measurement, 17, 416–431. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28009589

19.

Hays

R. D.

Morales

L. S.

Reise

S. P.

(2000). Item response theory and health outcomes measurement in the 21st century. Medical Care, 38, II28–II42. https://doi.org/10.1097/00005650-200009002-00007

20.

Healey

M. L.

Grossman

(2018). Cognitive and affective perspective-taking: Evidence for shared and dissociable anatomical substrates. Frontiers in Neurology, 9, Article 491. https://doi.org/10.3389/fneur.2018.00491

21.

Holopainen

de Veld

D. M.

Hoddenbach

Begeer

(2019). Does theory of mind training enhance empathy in autism? Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 49, 3965–3972. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10803-018-3671-1

22.

Hsiao

P. C.

Wang

Y. C.

Huang

Y. J.

Hsueh

I. P.

Chen

M. H.

Hsieh

C. L.

(2021). Correlations between subjective rating and objective assessment of balance function in individuals with stroke. Disability and Rehabilitation, 43, 3757–3763. https://doi.org/10.1080/09638288.2020.1751313

23.

Hutchins

T. L.

Prelock

P. A.

Bonazinga

(2012). Psychometric evaluation of the Theory of Mind Inventory (ToMI): A study of typically developing children and children with autism spectrum disorder. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 42, 327–341. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10803-011-1244-7

24.

Hutchins

T. L.

Prelock

P. A.

Bouyea

L. B.

(2014). Theory of mind inventory & theory of mind task battery. http://www.theoryofmindinventory.com/task-battery

25.

Hutchins

T. L.

Prelock

P. A.

Morris

Benner

LaVigne

Hoza

(2016). Explicit vs. Applied theory of mind competence: A comparison of typically developing males, males with ASD, and males with ADHD. Research in Autism Spectrum Disorders, 21, 94–108. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rasd.2015.10.004

26.

IBM Corporation. (2011). IBM SPSS statistics for Windows (Version 20.0) [Computer software].

27.

Jiang

D. R.

(2016). Development and psychometric evaluation of the Chinese version of the Theory of Mind Inventory-2 (ToMI-2) for children with autism spectrum disorders. National Cheng Kung University.

28.

Jones

C. R. G.

Simonoff

Baird

Pickles

Marsden

A. J. S.

Tregay

Happe

Charman

(2018). The association between theory of mind, executive function, and the symptoms of autism spectrum disorder. Autism Research, 11, 95–109. https://doi.org/10.1002/aur.1873

29.

Lai

S. S.

Tsai

C. H.

C. C.

Chen

C. T.

H. J.

Chen

K. L.

(2020). Identifying the cognitive correlates of reciprocity in children with autism spectrum disorder. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 50, 2007–2018. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10803-019-03957-7

30.

Lampic

Sjödén

P.-O.

(2000). Patient and staff perceptions of cancer patients’ psychological concerns and needs. Acta Oncologica, 39, 9–22. https://doi.org/10.1080/028418600430923

31.

Lee

S. C.

Tsai

C. H.

Lin

Y. C.

H. J.

Jiang

D. R.

I. N.

Chen

K. L.

(2021). Factorial validity of the Theory of Mind Inventory-2 in children with autism spectrum disorder. Autism Research, 14, 2424–2431. https://doi.org/10.1002/aur.2581

32.

Lee

Y. C.

Lin

C. H.

Tsai

C. H.

H. J.

Lin

S. K.

Chen

K. L.

(2019). Association between executing theory of mind in a limited experimental context and executing it in daily contexts in children with autism spectrum disorder: A cross-sectional study. American Journal of Occupational Therapy, 73, Article 205150p1. https://doi.org/10.5014/ajot.2019.031773

33.

Leppanen

Sedgewick

Treasure

Tchanturia

(2018). Differences in the theory of mind profiles of patients with anorexia nervosa and individuals on the autism spectrum: A meta-analytic review. Neuroscience and Biobehavioral Reviews, 90, 146–163. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neubiorev.2018.04.009

34.

Lin

S. K.

Tsai

C. H.

H. J.

Huang

C. Y.

Chen

K. L.

(2017). Theory of mind predominantly associated with the quality, not quantity, of pretend play in children with autism spectrum disorder. European Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, 26, 1187–1196.

35.

Linacre

J. M.

(2008). Variance in data explained by Rasch measures. Rasch Measurement Transactions, 22, Article 1164. https://www.rasch.org/rmt/rmt1221j.htm

36.

Long

J. S.

(1983). Confirmatory factor analysis: A preface to LISREL. SAGE.

37.

Masters

G. N.

(1982). A Rasch model for partial credit scoring. Psychometrika, 47, 149–174. https://doi.org/10.1007/Bf02296272

38.

MATLAB. (2015). Version 8.5.0.197613 (R2015a). The MathWorks.

39.

Mazza

Mariano

Peretti

Masedu

Pino

M. C.

Valenti

(2017). The role of theory of mind on social information processing in children with autism spectrum disorders: A mediation analysis. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 47, 1369–1379. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10803-017-3069-5

40.

Rasch

(1993). Probabilistic models for some intelligence and attainment tests. Education Resources Information Center. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED419814

41.

Roberts

T. P.

Khan

S. Y.

Rey

Monroe

J. F.

Cannon

Blaskey

Woldoff

Qasmieh

Gandal

Schmidt

G. L.

Zarnow

D. M.

Levy

S. E.

Edgar

J. C.

(2010). MEG detection of delayed auditory evoked responses in autism spectrum disorders: Towards an imaging biomarker for autism. Autism Research, 3, 8–18. https://doi.org/10.1002/aur.111

42.

Rødgaard

E. M.

Jensen

Vergnes

J. N.

Soulières

Mottron

(2019). Temporal changes in effect sizes of studies comparing individuals with and without autism: A meta-analysis. JAMA Psychiatry, 76, 1124–1132. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamapsychiatry.2019.1956

43.

Salter

Jutai

J. W.

Teasell

Foley

N. C.

Bitensky

Bayley

(2005). Issues for selection of outcome measures in stroke rehabilitation: ICF activity. Disability and Rehabilitation, 27, 315–340. https://doi.org/10.1080/09638280400008545

44.

Tennant

Conaghan

P. G.

(2007). The Rasch measurement model in rheumatology: What is it and why use it? When should it be applied, and what should one look for in a Rasch paper? Arthritis and Rheumatism, 57, 1358–1362. https://doi.org/10.1002/art.23108

45.

Wang

W. C.

Chen

P. H.

(2016). Implementation and measurement efficiency of multidimensional computerized adaptive testing. Applied Psychological Measurement, 28, 295–316. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146621604265938

46.

Wang

W. C.

Chen

P. H.

Cheng

Y. Y.

(2004). Improving measurement precision of test batteries using multidimensional item response models. Psychological Methods, 9, Article 116. https://doi.org/10.1037/1082-989X.9.1.116

47.

Wright

B. D.

(1994). Reasonable mean-square fit values. Rasch Measurement Transactions, 8, Article 370. https://www.rasch.org/rmt/rmt383b.htm

48.

Wright

B. D.

(1996). Reliability and separation. Rasch Measurement Transactions, 9, Article 472. https://www.winsteps.com/winman/reliability.htm

49.

M. L.

Adams

R. J.

Wilson

M. R.

Haldane

S. A.

(2007). ACER ConQuest version 2.0: Generalised item response modelling software. ACER Press.

50.

Zakaria

(2019). Effect of measurement scales on results of item response theory models and multivariate statistical techniques. Journal of Informatics and Mathematical Sciences, 11, 51–79. https://doi.org/10.26713/jims.v11i1.951

Supplementary Material

Please find the following supplemental material available below.

For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.

For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.

0.00 MB

0.06 MB