Little is known about what factors are associated with emerging adult theory of mind (ToM). We predicted that childhood fantasy play (CFP), need for cognition (NfC), and fiction reading would be positive predictors due to their deliberative, perspective-taking nature while engagement with media and technology would be a negative predictor due to increased interpersonal distance. The best-fit mixed logit model (N = 369) showed that CFP, texting frequency, and NfC were significant positive predictors while smartphone usage and preference for task switching were significant negative predictors. Email and phone call usage were contributing nonsignificant negative predictors. Our study extends previous findings regarding NfC and highlights the importance of CFP engagement for ToM beyond immediate childhood. Future research should investigate how subtly different media (e.g., texting vs. smartphone use) have differential predictive relationships with social cognition. Data and code are available at doi: 10.17605/OSF.IO/CBD9J.
AchesonD. J.WellsJ. B.MacDonaldM. C. (2008). New and updated tests of print exposure and reading abilities in college students. Behavior Research Methods, 40, 278–289. https://doi.org/10.3758/BRM.40.1.278
2.
ApperlyI. A.CarrollD. J.SamsonD.HumphreysG. W.QureshiA.MoffittG. (2010). Why are there limits on theory of mind use? Evidence from adults’ ability to follow instructions from an ignorant speaker. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 63, 1201–1217. https://doi.org/10.1080/17470210903281582
3.
BalP. M.VeltkampM. (2013). How does fiction reading influence empathy? An experimental investigation on the role of emotional transportation. PLoS ONE, 8, e55341. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0055341
4.
Baron-CohenS.WheelwrightS.HillJ.RasteY.PlumbI. (2001). The “Reading the Mind in the Eyes” Test revised version: A study with normal adults, and adults with Asperger syndrome or high-functioning autism. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 42, 241–252. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0021963001006643
5.
BatesD.MaechlerM.BolkerB.WalkerS. (2015). Fitting linear mixed-effects models using lme4. Journal of Statistical Software, 67, 1–48. https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v067.i01
6.
BennetC. M.BairdA. A. (2006). Anatomical changes in the emerging adult brain: A voxel-based morphometry study. Human Brain Mapping, 27, 766–777. https://doi.org/10.1002/hbm.20218
7.
BodrožaB.JovanovićT. (2016). Validation of the new scale for measuring behaviors of Facebook users: Psycho-social aspects of Facebook use (PSAFU). Computers in Human Behavior, 54, 425–435. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2015.07.032
8.
BoerM.StevensG.FinkenauerC.van den EijndenR. (2019). Attention deficit hyperactivity disorder-symptoms, social media use intensity, and social media use problems in adolescents: Investigating directionality. Child Development. https://doi.org/10.1111/cdev.13334
9.
CabralJ. (2011). Is Generation Y addicted to social media?The Elon Journal of Undergraduate Research in Communications, 2, 59–68.
CacioppoJ. T.PettyR. E.FeinsteinJ. A.JarvisW. B. G. (1996). Dispositional differences in cognitive motivation: The life and times of individuals varying in need for cognition. Psychological Bulletin, 119, 197–253. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.119.2.197
12.
CacioppoJ. T.PettyR. E.KaoC. F. (1984). The efficient assessment of need for cognition. Journal of Personality Assessment, 48, 306–307. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327752jpa4803_13
13.
CamererC. F.DreberA.HolzmeisterF.HoT. H.HuberJ.JohannessonM.KirchlerM.NaveG.NosekB. A.PfeifferT.AltmejdA.ButtrickN.ChanT.ChenY.ForsellE.GampaA.HeikenstenE.HummerL.ImaiT.WuH. (2018). Evaluating the replicability of social science experiments in nature and science between 2010 and 2015. Nature Human Behaviour, 2, 637–644. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-018-0399-z
14.
CarpenterJ. M.GreenM. C.LaFlamJ. (2011). People or profiles: Individual differences in online social networking use. Personality and Individual Differences, 50, 538–541. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2010.11.006
15.
CohenA. R.StotlandE.WolfeD. M. (1955). An experimental investigation of need for cognition. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 51, 291–294. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0042761
16.
DerksenD. G.HunschM. C.GirouxM. E.ConnollyD. A.BernsteinD. M. (2018). A systematic review of theory of mind’s precursors and functions. Zeitschrift fur Psychologie, 226(2), 87–97. https://doi.org/10.1027/2151-2604/a000325
17.
DoreR. A.LillardA. (2015). Theory of mind and children’s engagement in fantasy worlds. Imagination, Cognition and Personality, 34(3), 230–242. https://doi.org/10.1177/0276236614568631
18.
DumontheilI.ApperlyI. A.BlakemoreS.-J. (2010). Online usage of theory of mind continues to develop in late adolescence. Developmental Science, 13, 331–338. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-7687.2009.00888.x
19.
EchterhoffG. (2013). How communication on the internet affects memory and shared reality: Talking heads online. Psychological Inquiry, 24, 297–300. https://doi.org/10.1080/1047840X.2013.842878
20.
ForsellE.ViganolaD.PfeifferT.AlmenbergJ.WilsonB.ChenY.NosekB. A.JohannessonM.DreberA. (2019). Predicting replication outcomes in the many labs 2 study. Journal of Economic Psychology, 75, 102117. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joep.2018.10.009
21.
GarryM.ManningC. G.LoftusE.ShermanS. J. (1996). Imagination inflation: Imagining a childhood event inflates confidence that it occurred. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 3(2), 208–214.
GoldsteinT. R.WuK.WinnerE. (2009). Actors are skilled in theory of mind but not empathy. Imagination, Cognition and Personality, 29(2), 115–133. https://doi.org/10.2190/IC.29.2.c
24.
HappeF. G. E.WinnerE.BrownellH. (1998). The getting of wisdom: Theory of mind in old age. Developmental Psychology, 34, 358–362.
25.
HarrisP. L. (1992). From simulation to folk psychology: The case for development. Mind & Language, 2(7), 120–144.
HoltgravesT. (1997). Styles of language use: Individual and cultural variability in conversational indirectness. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 73, 624–637. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.73.3.624
28.
JaegerT. F. (2008). Categorical data analysis: Away from ANOVAs (transformation or not) and towards logit mixed models. Journal of Memory and Language, 59, 434–446. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2007.11.007
29.
KarmakarA.DograA. K. (2019). Assessment of theory of mind in adults: Beyond false belief tasks. Activita Nervosa Superior, 61, 142–146. https://doi.org/10.1007/s41470-019-00028-1
KiddD. C.OngisM.CastanoE. (2016). On literary fiction and its effects on theory of mind. Scientific Study of Literature, 6, 42–58. https://doi.org/10.1075/ssol.6.1.04kid
KirkhamJ. A.KiddE. (2015). The effect of Steiner, Montessori and national curriculum education upon children’s pretence and creativity. The Journal of Creative Behaviour, 51(1), 20–34. https://doi.org/10.1002/jocb.83
35.
KirkhamJ. A.LloydJ.StocktonH. (2019). Development and validation of the Retrospective Childhood Fantasy Play Scale. Imagination, Cognition and Personality, 38, 315–344. https://doi.org/10.1177/0276236618794880
36.
KlindtD.DevaineM.DaunizeauJ. (2017). Does the way we read others’ mind change over the lifespan? Insights from a massive web poll of cognitive skills from childhood to late adulthood. Cortex, 86, 205–215. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cortex.2016.09.009
37.
LeeS. A.GuajardoN. R.ShortS. D.KingW. (2010). Individual differences in ocular level empathic accuracy ability: The predictive power of fantasy empathy. Personality and Individual Differences, 49, 68–71. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2010.03.016
38.
LevineL. E.WaiteB. M.BowmanL. L. (2007). Electronic media use, reading, and academic distractibility in college youth. Cyberpsychology and Behaviour, 10, 560–566. https://doi.org/10.1089/cpb.2007.9990
39.
LillardA. S. (2002). Pretend play and cognitive development. In GoswamiU. (Ed.), Handbook of cognitive development (pp. 188–205). Blackwell.
40.
LillardA. S.LernerM. D.HopkinsE. J.DoreR. A.SmithE. D.PalmquistX. M. (2013). The impact of pretend play on children’s development: A review of the evidence. Psychological Bulletin, 139 (1), 1–34. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0029321
41.
Ma-KellamsC.LernerJ. (2016). Trust your gut or think carefully? Examining whether an intuitive, versus a systematic, mode of thought produces greater empathic accuracy. Interpersonal Relations and Group Processes, 111, 674–685. https://doi.org/10.1037/pspi0000063
42.
MarR. A.OatleyK.HirshJ.de la PazJ.PetersonJ. B. (2006). Bookworms versus nerds: Exposure to fiction versus non-fiction, divergent associations with social ability, and the simulation of fictional social worlds. Journal of Research in Personality, 40, 694–712. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrp.2005.08.002
43.
MarR. A.OatleyK.PetersonJ. B. (2009). Exploring the link between reading fiction and empathy: Ruling out individual differences and examining outcomes. Communications, 34, 407–428. https://doi.org/10.1515/COMM.2009.025
44.
MastersonJ.HayesM. (2007). Development and data for UK versions of an author and title recognition test for adults. Journal of Research in Reading, 30, 212–219. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9817.2006.00320.x
45.
MerckelbachH. (2004). Telling a good story: Fantasy proneness and the quality of fabricated memories. Personality and Individual differences, 37, 1371–1382. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2004.01.007
46.
MullineauxP. Y.DilallaL. F. (2009). Preschool pretend play behaviours and early adolescent creativity. The Journal of Creative Behaviour, 43, 41–57.
47.
MumperM. L.GerrigR. J. (2017). Leisure reading and social cognition: A meta-analysis. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 11, 109–120. https://doi.org/10.1037/aca0000089
48.
NielsenM.DissanayakeC. (2000). An investigation of pretend play, mental state terms and false belief understanding: In search of a meta-representational link. British Journal of Developmental Psychology, 18, 609–624. https://doi.org/10.1348/026151000165887
49.
NijhofA. D.WillemsR. M. (2015). Simulating fiction: Individual differences in literature comprehension revealed with fMRI. PLoS ONE, 10, e0116492. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0116492
50.
OakleyB. F. M.BrewerR.BirdG.CatmurC. (2016). Theory of mind is not theory of emotion: A cautionary note on the reading the mind in the eyes task. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 125(6), 818–823. https://doi.org/10.1037/abn0000182.supp
51.
OlkoniemiH.RantaH.KaakinenJ. K. (2016). Individual differences in the processing of written sarcasm and metaphor: Evidence from eye movements. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 42, 433–450. https://doi.org/10.1037/xlm0000176
52.
PaneroM. E.WeisbergD. S.BlackJ.GoldsteinT. R.BarnesJ. L.BrownellH.WinnerE. (2016). Does reading a single passage of literary fiction really improve theory of mind? An attempt at replication. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 111, e46–e54. https://doi.org/10.1037/pspa0000064
R Core Team. (2018). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. Vienna: R foundation for statistical computing. https://www.R-project.org/
56.
RaackeJ.Bonds-RaackeJ. (2015). Are students really connected? Predicting college adjustment from social network usage. Educational Psychology, 35, 819–834. https://doi.org/10.1080/01443410.2013.814195
57.
RafteryA. E. (1995). Bayesian model selection in social research. Sociological Methodology, 25, 111–163. https://doi.org/10.2307/271063
58.
RosenL. D.WhalingK.CarrierL. M.CheeverN. A.RokkumJ. (2013). The Media and Technology Usage and Attitudes Scale: An empirical investigation. Computers in Human Behavior, 29, 2501–2511. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2013.06.006
59.
RyanT.XenosS. (2011). Who uses Facebook? An investigation into the relationship between the big five, shyness, narcissism, loneliness and Facebook usage. Computers in Human Behaviour, 27 (5), 1658–1664. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2011.02.004
60.
Shamay-TsooryS. G.TomerR.BergerB. D.GoldsherD.Aharaon-PeretzJ. (2005). Impaired “affective theory of mind” is associated with right ventromedial prefrontal damage. Cognitive and Behavioral Neurology, 18, 55–67. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.wnn.0000152228.90129.99
61.
StanovichK. E.WestR. F. (1989). Exposure to print and orthographic processing. Reading Research Quarterly, 24, 402–433. https://doi.org/10.2307/747605
62.
StewartS. L. K.WrightC.AthertonC. (2019). Deception detection and truth detection are dependent on different cognitive and emotional traits: An investigation of emotional intelligence, theory of mind, and attention. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 45, 794–807. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167218796795
63.
StrobelA.GrassJ.PohlingR.StrobelA. (2017). Need for cognition as a moral capacity. Personality and Individual Differences, 117, 42–51. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2017.05.023
64.
SuddendorfT.Fletcher-FlinnC.JohnstonL. (1999). Pantomime and theory of mind. The Journal of Genetic Psychology, 160, 31–45. https://doi.org/10.1080/00221329909595378
65.
SullivanS.RuffmanT. (2004). Social understanding: How does it fare with advancing years?British Journal of Psychology, 95, 1–18.
66.
Taber-ThomasB.Perez-EdgarK. (2015). Emerging adulthood brain development. In ArnettJ. J. (Ed.), The Oxford handbook of emerging adulthood (pp. 126–141). Oxford University Press.
67.
TamirD. I.BrickerA. B.Dodell-FederD.MitchellJ. P. (2016). Reading fiction and reading minds: The role of simulation in the default network. Social Cognitive and Affective Neuroscience, 11, 215–224. https://doi.org/10.1093/scan/nsv114
68.
TaylorM.CarlsonS. M. (1997). The relation between individual differences in fantasy and theory of mind. Child Development, 68, 436–455.
69.
TaylorM.MottweilerC. M.AguiarN. R.NaylorE. R.LevernierJ. G. (2018). Paracosms: The imaginary worlds of middle childhood. Child Development, 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1111/cdev.13162
70.
ThompsonB. N.GoldsteinT. R. (2019). Disentangling pretend play measurement: Defining the essential elements and developmental progression of pretense. Developmental Review, 52, 24–41. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dr.2019.100867
71.
van BuurenS.Groothuis-OudshoornK. (2011). Mice: Multivariate imputation by chained equations in R. Journal of Statistical Software, 45, 1–67.
72.
VanwesenbeeckI.PonnetK.WalraveM. (2017). Young adolescents’ advertising literacy and purchase intention in social network games: Influence of perspective taking and need for cognition. Journal of Consumer Behaviour, 16, 23–33.
73.
VenablesW. N.RipleyB. D. (2002). Modern applied statistics with S (4th ed.). Springer.
74.
VygotskyL. (1962). Thought and language. The MIT Press.
75.
VygotskyL. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Harvard University Press.
76.
WagenmakersE. J. (2007). A practical solution to the pervasive problem of p values. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 14, 779–804. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03194105
77.
WaltonK. L. (1990). Mimesis as make believe. Harvard University Press.
WellmanH. M. (2017). The development of theory of mind: Historical reflections. Child Development Perspectives, 11, 207–214. https://doi.org/10.1111/cdep.12236
80.
WellmanH. M.CrossD.WatsonJ. (2001). Meta-analysis of theory-of-mind development: The truth about false belief. Child Development, 72, 655–684. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8624.00304
