Theory of Mind: Assessment of Underlying Cognitive Components of Reading in Elementary School Grades

Öz

The research aimed to construct a test based on the theory of mind, which is an important variable affecting reading comprehension and listening comprehension skills in the context of Turkish language skills in elementary school children. Based on the purpose of the research, the theory of mind test was tried to be constructed. During the process, writing the test items, making pilot applications, item analysis, and reliability studies were followed. The sample of the research consisted of two 3rd grade classes (N=52) of a public school located in Aydın province Efeler district. The theory of mind test was used as a data collection tool in the study. Three different false belief tasks (bake sale, birthday celebration, a farm visit) were included in this test. In addition, there are 12 pictures in total in the test, four of which are related to each scenario. Again, the test consists of a total of 18 questions, including six questions related to each scenario. The data obtained in the research were entered into the Excel program. Then the data were transferred to SPSS and Jamovi programs. Item and reliability analyses were run on the obtained data. As a result of the calculations and reliability analyzes of the item difficulty and discrimination indices carried out in the research, it was revealed that the theory of mind test was a reliable and valid test that can evaluate reading skills and related cognitive structures in a more qualified way at elementary school level.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Reading comprehension
• Elementary school students
• Simple view of reading (SVR)
• Cognitive skills
• Theory of mind

Zihin Kuramı: İlkokul Düzeyinde Okuma Becerisini Oluşturan Bilişsel Bileşenleri Değerlendirme

Öz

Araştırmanın amacı ilkokul çocukları özelinde okuduğunu anlama ve dinlediğini anlama becerisini etkileyen önemli bir değişken olan zihin kuramının Türkçe dil becerileri bağlamında yapılandırılmış bir testini oluşturmaktır. Araştırmanın amacından hareketle zihin kuramı testi yapılandırılmaya çalışılmıştır. Bu testin yapılandırılma sürecinde, test maddelerinin yazılması, pilot uygulamalar yapılması, madde analizi, geçerlilik ve güvenirlik çalışmaları işlem basamakları olarak takip edilmiş ve sunulmuştur. Araştırmanın çalışma grubunu Aydın ili Efeler ilçesinde bulunan bir devlet okulunun iki 3. sınıf şubesi (N=52) oluşturmuştur. Çalışmada veri toplama aracı olarak Zihin Kuramı Testi kullanılmıştır. Bu testte üç farklı yanlış inanç görevi (pasta kermesi, doğum günü kutlaması ve çiftlik ziyareti) yer almaktadır. Ek olarak testte her bir senaryo ile ilgili dört resim olmak üzere toplamda 12 resim bulunmaktadır. Yine her bir senaryo ile ilişkili altı soru olmak üzere test toplam 18 sorudan oluşmaktadır. Araştırmada elde edilen veriler öncelikli olarak Excel programına girilmiştir. Daha sonra veriler SPSS ve Jamovi programlarına aktarılmıştır. Elde edilen veriler üzerinde madde ve güvenirlilik analizleri gerçekleştirilmiştir. Yapılan madde güçlük ve ayırt edicilik indekslerine ilişkin hesaplamalar ve güvenirlik analizleri sonucunda, yapılandırılan zihin kuramı testinin ilkokul düzeyinde okuma becerisi ve ilişkili bilişsel yapıları daha nitelikli bir şekilde değerlendirilebilecek güvenilir ve geçerli bir test olduğu ortaya konulmuştur.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Okuma
• İlkokul öğrencileri
• Okumaya ilişkin basit anlayış teorisi
• bilişsel beceriler,
• Zihin kuramı

Kaynakça

1. Altıntaş, M. (2014). Çocuklar için Zihin Kuramı Test Bataryası’nın 4-5 yaş Türk çocuklarına uyarlanması, geçerlik güvenirlik çalışması [Yayımlanmamış yüksek lisans tezi]. Haliç Üniversitesi.
2. Arikan, Z. (2020). 5-6 yaş çocuklarının zihin kuramı becerileri ve problem davranışlarının incelenmesi [Yayımlanmamış yüksek lisans tezi]. Gazi Üniversitesi.
3. Arslan, B., Hohenberger, A. ve Verbrugge, R. (2017). Syntactic recursion facilitates and working memory predicts recursive theory of mind. PloS one, 12(1), e0169510. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0169510
4. Atkinson, L., Slade, L., Powell, D. ve Levy, J. P. (2017). Theory of mind in emerging reading comprehension: A longitudinal study of early indirect and direct effects. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 164, 225-238. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jecp.2017.04.007
5. Babayiğit, S. ve Stainthorp, R. (2011). Modeling the relationships between cognitive–linguistic skills and literacy skills: New insights from a transparent orthography. Journal of Educational Psychology, 103(1), 169–189. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0021671a0021671
6. Baron-Cohen, S., Leslie, A. M. ve Frith, U. (1985). Does the autistic child have a “theory of mind”? Cognition, 21(1), 37-46. https://doi.org/10.1016/0010-0277(85)90022-8
7. Baron-Cohen, S., Wheelwright, S., Hill, J., Raste, Y. ve Plumb, I. (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. The Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry and Allied Disciplines, 42(2), 241-251.
8. Beaumont, R. B. ve Sofronoff, K. (2008). A new computerized advanced theory of mind measure for children with Asperger syndrome: the ATOMIC. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 38, 249–260. https://doi:10.1007/s10803-007-0384-2

9. Blijd-Hoogewys, E. M. A., Van Geert, P. L. C., Serra, M. ve Minderaa, R. B. (2008). Measuring theory of mind in children. Psychometric properties of the ToM storybooks. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 38, 1907-1930.
10. Bodur, E. (2022). Turkish mothers’ use of complement clauses in storytelling in relation to children’s comprehension of complement clauses and theory of mind abilities [Yayımlanmamış doktora tezi]. Bilkent Üniversitesi.
11. Bosco, F. M., Gabbatore, I., Tirassa, M. ve Testa, S. (2016). Psychometric properties of the Theory of Mind Assessment Scale in a sample of adolescents and adults. Frontiers in Psychology, 7, 566. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2016.00566
12. Brown-Schmidt, S. (2009). The role of executive function in perspective taking during online language comprehension. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 16, 893-900.
13. Cromley, J.G. ve Azevedo, R. (2007). Testing and refining the direct and inferential mediation model of reading comprehension. Journal of Educational Psychology, 99(2), 311–325. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.99.2.311
14. Devine, R. T., White, N., Ensor, R. ve Hughes, C. (2016). Theory of mind in middle childhood: Longitudinal associations with executive function and social competence. Developmental Psychology, 52(5), 758–771. https://doi.org/10.1037/dev0000105
15. Dore, R. A., Amendum, S. J., Golinkoff, R. M. ve Hirsh-Pasek, K. (2018). Theory of mind: A hidden factor in reading comprehension? Educational Psychology Review, 30, 1067-1089.
16. Duke, N. K. ve Cartwright, K. B. (2021). The science of reading progresses: Communicating advances beyond the simple view of reading. Reading Research Quarterly, 56, 25-44. https://doi.org/10.1002/rrq.411
17. Durgunoğlu, A. Y. (2006). How language characteristics influence Turkish literacy development. R. Malatesha Joshi ve P.G. Aaron (Ed.), Handbook of orthography and literacy içinde (1. Baskı, s. 219-230). Routledge.
18. Ebert, S. (2020a). Early language competencies and advanced measures of mental state understanding are differently related to listening and reading comprehension in early adolescence. Frontiers in Psychology, 11, 952. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.00952
19. Ebert, S. (2020b). Theory of mind, language, and reading: Developmental relations from early childhood to early adolescence. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 191, 104739. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jecp.2019.104739
20. Etel, E. ve Yagmurlu, B. (2015). Social competence, theory of mind, and executive function in institution-reared Turkish children. International Journal of Behavioral Development, 39(6), 519-529. https://doi.org/10.1177/0165025414556095
21. Evsen, S. (2022). Detailed investigation of the relation between mothers’ mental state language and children's theory of mind abilities [Yayımlanmamış doktora tezi]. Bilkent Üniversitesi.
22. Field, A. (2009). Discovering statistics using SPSS. Sage.
23. Flavell, J. H., Flavell, E. R. ve Green, F. L. (1983). Development of the appearance reality distinction. Cognitive Psychology, 15, 95–120. https://doi.org/10.1016/0010-0285(83)90005-1
24. Flobbe, L., Verbrugge, R., Hendriks, P. ve Krämer I. (2008). Children’s application of theory of mind in reasoning and language. Journal of Logic, Language and Information, 17(4), 417–442.
25. Florit, E. ve Cain, K. (2011). The simple view of reading: Is it valid for different types of alphabetic orthographies? Educational Psychology Review, 23, 553-576.
26. Florit, E., Roch, M., Altoè, G. ve Levorato, M. C. (2009). Listening comprehension in preschoolers: The role of memory. British Journal of Developmental Psychology, 27(4), 935-951. https://doi.org/10.1348/026151008X397189
27. Francis, D. J., Kulesz, P. A. ve Benoit, J. S. (2018). Extending the simple view of reading to account for variation within readers and across texts: The complete view of reading (CVR i). Remedial and Special Education, 39(5), 274-288.
28. Girli, A. ve Tekin, D. (2010). Investigating false belief levels of typically developed children and children with autism. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 2(2), 1944-1950. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2010.03.261
29. Gough, P. B. ve Tumner W. E. (1986). Decoding, reading, and reading disability. Remedial and Special Education, 7(1), 6-10.
30. Gök, S. ve Yıldırım, K. (2022). Akıcı okuma. Doğan, B. (ed.) Okuma öğretimi içinde (1. baskı, s. 107-152). Eğiten Kitap.
31. Göral, F. (2022). Otistik özellikler gösteren bireylerin görsel ve işitsel zihin kuramı test performanslarının değerlendirilmesi [Yayımlanmamış doktora tezi]. İstanbul Üniversitesi.
32. Gözün Kahraman, Ö. (2012). Zihin kuramına bağlı eğitim programının 48-60 aylık çocukların bilişsel bakış açısı becerileri ve prososyal davranışları üzerindeki etkisinin incelenmesi [Yayımlanmamış doktora tezi]. Gazi Üniversitesi.
33. Guajardo, N. R. ve Cartwright, K. B. (2016). The contribution of theory of mind, counterfactual reasoning, and executive function to pre-readers’ language comprehension and later reading awareness and comprehension in elementary school. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 144, 27-45. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jecp.2015.11.004
34. Happé, F. G. (1994). An advanced test of theory of mind: Understanding of story characters' thoughts and feelings by able autistic, mentally handicapped, and normal children and adults. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 24(2), 129–154. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02172093
35. Hogan, T. P., Adlof, S. M. ve Alonzo, C. N. (2014). On the importance of listening comprehension. International Journal of Speech-Language Pathology, 16(3), 199-207. https://doi.org/10.1037/t50435-000
36. Hogrefe, G. J., Wimmer, H. ve Perner, J. (1986). Ignorance versus false belief: A developmental lag in attribution of epistemic states. Child Development, 567-582.
37. Hoover, W. A. ve Gough, P. B. (1990). The simple view of reading. Reading and Writing, 2(2), 127-160.
38. Hoover, W.A. ve Tunmer, W.E. (2021). A commentary on some recent claims made against the simple view of reading. LDA Bulletin, 53(3), 40-42.
39. Hoover, W. A. ve Tunmer, W. E. (2022). The primacy of science in communicating advances in the science of reading. Reading Research Quarterly, 57(2), 399-408. https://doi.org/10.1002/rrq.446
40. Hutchins, T. L., Prelock, P. A. ve Bonazinga, L. (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(3), 327– 341. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10803-011-1244-7
41. Hutchins, T. L., Prelock, P. A. ve Chace, W. (2008). Test-retest reliability of a theory of mind task battery for children with autism spectrum disorders. Focus on Autism and Other Developmental Disabilities, 23(4), 195-206. https://doi.org/10.1177/1088357608322998
42. Ilgaz, H., Allen, J. W. P. ve Haskaraca, F. N. (2022). Is cultural variation the norm? A closer look at sequencing of the theory of mind scale. Cognitive Development, 63, 101216. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cogdev.2022.101216
43. Jackson, S., Slade, L., Levy, J. P. ve McCormick, S. F. (2022). A longitudinal study of theory of mind and listening comprehension: Is preschool theory of mind important? Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 219, 105388. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jecp.2022.105388
44. Johnston, T. C. ve Kirby, J. R. (2006). The contribution of naming speed the simple view of reading. Reading and Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 19, 339–361.
45. Joshi, R. M. ve Aaron, P. G. (2000). The component model of reading: Simple view of reading made a little more complex. Reading Psychology, 21, 85–97.
46. Joshi, R. M., Tao, S., Aaron, P. G. ve Quiroz, B. (2012). Cognitive component of componential model of reading applied to different orthographies. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 45, 480– 486. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022219411432690
47. Kaysılı, B. K. (2014). Zihin kuramı ve dil arasındaki ilişki: Bir derleme. Ankara Üniversitesi Eğitim Bilimleri Fakültesi Özel Eğitim Dergisi, 15(02), 81-94.
48. Kelly, J. H. (2022). Investigating the theoretical and ınstructional relations between theory of mind and reading comprehension [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. University of Maryland.
49. Kendeou, P., van den Broek, P., White, M. J. ve Lynch, J. S. (2009). Predicting reading comprehension in early elementary school: The independent contributions of oral language and decoding skills. Journal of Educational Psychology, 101(4), 765–778. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0015956
50. Kılıç Tülü, B. (2020). 3-5 yaş arası çocuklara yönelik Zihin Kuramı Ölçeğinin geliştirilmesi [Yayımlanmamış doktora tezi]. Ankara Üniversitesi.
51. Kim, Y. S. (2015). Language and cognitive predictors of text comprehension: Evidence from multivariate analysis. Child Development, 86(1), 128-144. https://doi.org/10.1111/cdev.12293
52. Kim, Y. S. G. (2016). Direct and mediated effects of language and cognitive skills on comprehension of oral narrative texts (listening comprehension) for children. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 141, 101-120 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jecp.2015.08.003
53. Kim, Y. S. G. (2017). Why the simple view of reading is not simplistic: Unpacking component skills of reading using a direct and indirect effect model of reading (DIER). Scientific Studies of Reading, 21(4), 310-333. https://doi.org/10.1080/10888438.2017.1291643
54. Kim, Y. S. G. (2020a). Theory of mind mediates the relations of language and domain-general cognitions to discourse comprehension. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 194, 104813. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jecp.2020.104813
55. Kim, Y. S. G. (2020b). Simple but not simplistic: The simple view of reading unpacked and expanded. The Reading League Journal, 1(2), 15-34.
56. Kim, Y. S. G. (2020c). Toward integrative reading science: The direct and indirect effects model of reading. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 53(6), 469-491.
57. Kim, Y. S. G. (2020d). Hierarchical and dynamic relations of language and cognitive skills to reading comprehension: Testing the direct and indirect effects model of reading (DIER). Journal of Educational Psychology, 112(4), 667. https://doi.org/10.1037/edu0000407
58. Kim, Y. S. G. ve Petscher, Y. (2021). Influences of individual, text, and assessment factors on text/discourse comprehension in oral language (listening comprehension). Annals of Dyslexia, 71, 218-237.
59. Kim, Y. S. G. ve Pilcher, H. (2016). What is listening comprehension and what does it take to improve listening comprehension?. Interventions in Learning Disabilities: A Handbook on Systematic Training Programs for Individuals with Learning Disabilities içinde (s. 159-173). Springer.
60. Kim, Y. S. G., Dore, R., Cho, M., Golinkoff, R. ve Amendum, S. J. (2021). Theory of mind, mental state talk, and discourse comprehension: Theory of mind process is more important for narrative comprehension than for informational text comprehension. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 209, 105181. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jecp.2021.105181
61. Kim, Y. S. ve Phillips, B. (2014). Cognitive correlates of listening comprehension. Reading Research Quarterly, 49(3), 269-281. https://doi.org/10.1002/rrq.74
62. Kim, Y.-S. G. (2022). Learning to read and write. R. Tierney, F. Rizvi ve K. Ercikan (Ed.) Cognition, Human Development and Learning of the International Encyclopedia of Education içinde (4.baskı). Elsevier.
63. Kintsch, W. (1988). The role of knowledge in discourse comprehension: A construction-integration model. Psychological Review, 95(2), 163–182. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.95.2.163
64. Lecce, S., Bianco, F., Devine, R. T. ve Hughes, C. (2017). Relations between theory of mind and executive function in middle childhood: A short-term longitudinal study. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 163, 69-86. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jecp.2017.06.011
65. Lecce, S., Caputi, M. ve Hughes, C. (2011). Does sensitivity to criticism mediate the relationship between theory of mind and academic achievement? Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 110(3), 313–331. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jecp.2011.04.011.
66. Lecce, S., Caputi, M. ve Pagnin, A. (2014). Long-term effect of theory of mind on school achievement: The role of sensitivity to criticism. European Journal of Developmental Psychology, 11(3), 305-318. https://doi.org/10.1080/17405629.2013.821944
67. Lockl, K., Ebert, S. ve Weinert, S. (2017). Predicting school achievement from early theory of mind: Differential effects on achievement tests and teacher ratings. Learning and Individual Differences, 53, 93-102. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2016.11.007
68. Muris, P., Steerneman, P., Meesters, C., Merckelbach, H., Horselenberg, R., van den Hogen, T. ve van Dongen, L. (1999). The TOM test: A new instrument for assessing theory of mind in normal children and children with pervasive developmental disorders. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 29, 67–80. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1025922717020
69. Mutter, B., Alcon, M. B. ve Welsh, M. (2006). Theory of mind and executive function: Working-memory capacity and inhibitory control as predictors of false-belief task performance. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 102(3), 819–835.
70. Onishi, K. H. ve Baillargeon, R. (2005). Do 15-month-old infants understand false beliefs? Science, 308(5719), 255–258. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1107621.
71. Osterhaus, C., Koerber, S. ve Sodian, B. (2016). Scaling of advanced theory‐of‐mind tasks. Child Development, 87(6), 1971-1991. https://doi.org/10.1111/cdev.12566
72. Öztürkçe, A. (2020). 48-72 aylık çocukların zihin kuramı ve erken okuryazarlık becerileri arasındaki ilişkinin incelenmesi [Yayımlanmamış yüksek lisans tezi]. Marmara Üniversitesi.
73. Panzeri, F. ve Foppolo, F. (2016). You surely know what I mean. Theory of Mind and Non-Literal Language Comprehension. Pre-proceedings of ‘Trends in Experimental Pragmatics, 110-114.
74. Paunov, A. M., Blank, I. A. ve Fedorenko, E. (2019). Functionally distinct language and Theory of Mind networks are synchronized at rest and during language comprehension. Journal of Neurophysiology, 121(4), 1244-1265. https://doi.org/10.1152/jn.00619.2018
75. Pelletier, J. ve Beatty, R. (2015). Children’s understanding of Aesop’s fables: relations to reading comprehension and theory of mind. Frontiers in Psychology, 6, 1448. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2015.01448
76. Perner, J. ve Wimmer, H. (1985). “John thinks that Mary thinks that…” attribution of second-order beliefs by 5- to 10-year-old children. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 39, 437–471. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-0965(85)90051-7
77. Premack, D. ve Woodruff, G. (1978). Does the chimpanzee have a theory of mind?. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 1(4), 515-526.
78. Repacholi, B. M. ve Gopnik, A. (1997). Early reasoning about desires: evidence from 14- and 18-month-olds. Developmental Psychology, 33(1), 12–21. https://doi.org/10.1037/0012-1649.33.1.12.
79. Rivas-Garcia, S., Bateman, A. ve Caracuel, A. (2020). Validation of the ToMas-child Scale for the Assessment of the Theory of Mind in a Group of Spanish Speaking Children Aged 3 to 7 Years from Spain. Developmental Neuropsychology, 45(4), 232-245. https://doi.org/10.1080/87565641.2020.1764567
80. Scarborough, H.S. (2001). Connecting early language and literacy to later reading (dis)abilities: Evidence, theory, and practice. S.B. Neuman ve D.K. Dickinson (Ed.), Handbook of early literacy research içinde. (s. 97– 110). Guilford.
81. Selcuk, B., Brink, K. A., Ekerim, M. ve Wellman, H. M. (2018). Sequence of theory‐of‐mind acquisition in Turkish children from diverse social backgrounds. Infant and Child Development, 27(4), e2098. https://doi.org/10.1002/icd.2098
82. Snow, C. E. (2018). Simple and not-so-simple views of reading. Remedial and Special Education, 39(5), 313-316.
83. Sohtaoğlu, S. (2022). Dikkat eksikliği ve hiperaktivite bozukluğu tanısı alan ve almayan çocukların sosyal işlevsellik, zihin kuramı, duygu tanıma, duygu düzenleme ve yönetici işlevler açısından karşılaştırılması [Yayımlanmamış yüksek lisans tezi]. Yıldırım Beyazıt Üniversitesi.
84. Strasser, K. ve Río, F. D. (2014). The role of comprehension monitoring, theory of mind, and vocabulary depth in predicting story comprehension and recall of kindergarten children. Reading Research Quarterly, 49(2), 169-187.
85. Taboada Barber, A., Vizcaya-Jofré, F. ve Klauda, S. L. (2021). The Importance of Theory of Mind in Oral and Reading Comprehension in Emergent Bilingual Students. Grantee Submission, 58(2), 1-18.
86. Taymaz Sarı, O. (2011). Zihin Kuramı hikâyeleri testinin Türk çocuklarına uyarlanması ve okul öncesi dönemdeki normal gelişim gösteren, zihin engelli ve otizmli çocukların Zihin Kuramı gelişimlerinin karşılaştırılması [Yayımlanmamış doktora tezi]. Marmara Üniversitesi.
87. Ünözkan Aksu, G. (2022). Otizm spektrum bozukluğu olan ve tipik gelişen çocuklarda zihin kuramı becerileri ve pragmatik dil becerileri arasındaki ilişkinin karşılaştırılması [Yayımlanmamış yüksek lisans tezi]. Üsküdar Üniversitesi.
88. van Elk, M., Maij, D. ve Rutjens, B. (2020). Development and validation of a porous theory of mind scale. Journal of Cognition and Culture, 20(1-2), 41-65.
89. Vellutino, F. R., Tunmer, W. E., Jaccard, J. J. ve Chen, R. (2007). Components of reading ability: Multivariate evidence for a convergent skills model of reading development. Scientific Studies of Reading, 11(1), 3-32.
90. Wang, Z. ve Wang, L. (2015). The mind and heart of the social child: Developing the empathy and theory of mind scale. Child Development Research, 2015. http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2015/171304
91. Wellman, H. M. (2002). Understanding the psychological world: Developing a theory of mind. U. Goswami (Ed.), Handbook of childhood cognitive development içinde (s. 167– 187). Blackwell.
92. Wellman, H. M. ve Liu, D. (2004). Theory of mind task scale. Child Development, 75(2), 523 – 541.
93. Wellman, H. M., Cross, D. ve Watson, J. (2001). Meta‐analysis of theory‐of‐mind development: The truth about false belief. Child Development, 72(3), 655-684. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8624.00304
94. Wellman, H. M., Fang, F. ve Peterson, C. C. (2011). Sequential progressions in a theory‐of‐mind scale: Longitudinal perspectives. Child Development, 82(3), 780–792. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8624.2011.01583.x
95. Wellman, H. M., Fang, F., Liu, D., Zhu, L. ve Liu, G. (2006). Scaling of theory-of-mind understandings in Chinese children. Psychological Science, 17(12), 1075-1081.
96. Westra, E. ve Carruthers, P. (2017). Pragmatic development explains the Theory-of-Mind Scale. Cognition, 158, 165-176. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2016.10.021
97. Wimmer, H. ve Perner, J. (1983). Beliefs about beliefs: representation and constraining function of wrong beliefs in young children’s understanding of deception. Cognition, 13(1), 103–128. https://doi.org/10.1016/0010-0277(83)90004-5.
98. Yildiz, M., Kanik Uysal, P., Bilge, H., Patricia Wolters, A., Saka, Y., Yildirim, K. ve Rasinski, T. (2019). Relationships between Turkish eighth-grade students’ oral reading efficacy, reading comprehension and achievement scores on a high-stakes achievement test. Reading Psychology, 40(4), 329-349. https://doi.org/10.1080/02702711.2018.1555363
99. Zhang, D., Pang, Y., Cai, W., Fazio, R. L., Ge, J., Su, Q., Pan, Y., Chen, S. ve Zhang, H. (2016). Development and psychometric properties of an informant assessment scale of theory of mind for adults with traumatic brain injury. Neuropsychological Rehabilitation, 26(4), 481-501. https://doi.org/10.1080/09602011.2015.1030431