View in EDS HTML Full Text PDF Full Text

Theory of Mind, Self-Worth and the Mother-Child Relationship

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Title: Theory of Mind, Self-Worth and the Mother-Child Relationship
Language: English
Authors: Cahill, Katherine R., Deater-Deckard, Kirby, Pike, Alison
Source: Social Development. Feb 2007 16(1):45-56.
Availability: Wiley-Blackwell. 350 Main Street, Malden, MA 02148. Tel: 800-835-6770; Tel: 781-388-8598; Fax: 781-388-8232; e-mail: cs-journals@wiley.com; Web site: http://www.wiley.com/WileyCDA/
Peer Reviewed: Y
Physical Description: PDF
Page Count: 12
Publication Date: 2007
Document Type: Journal Articles
Reports - Research
Descriptors: Theory of Mind, Mothers, Child Behavior, Parent Child Relationship, Cognitive Development, Hypothesis Testing, Affective Behavior, Self Esteem, Twins, Young Children, Verbal Ability, Puppetry, Interviews, Observation, Correlation
DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-9507.2007.00371.x
ISSN: 0961-205X
Abstract: We tested the hypothesis that mother-child warmth and responsiveness would moderate the link between young children's theory of mind skills and self-worth. Participants included 125 same-sex pairs of 3.5 year-old twins and their mothers. A battery of tests was individually administered to measure the children's theory of mind skills and verbal intelligence, and their self-reported self-worth was assessed using a puppet interview. Following visits to the families' homes, the observers completed ratings of warm responsive mother-child behavior based on videotaped unstructured and structured observations. As expected, warm responsive behavior moderated the relation between their theory of mind and the child's self-worth. Their theory of mind was positively associated with self-worth in warm responsive mother-child dyads, and there was weaker evidence that their theory of mind may be negatively associated with self-worth in less warm, unresponsive mother-child dyads.
Abstractor: As Provided
Number of References: 43
Entry Date: 2011
Accession Number: EJ942073
Database: ERIC
Full text is not displayed to guests.
FullText Links:
  – Type: pdflink
    Url: https://content.ebscohost.com/cds/retrieve?content=AQICAHj0k_4E0hTGH8RJwT4gCJyBsGNe_WN95AvKlDbXJGqwxwFwKwYqsTPqTyn-0QVDgHeaAAAA4jCB3wYJKoZIhvcNAQcGoIHRMIHOAgEAMIHIBgkqhkiG9w0BBwEwHgYJYIZIAWUDBAEuMBEEDKV1bYBPmvQNQfAa-AIBEICBmutsYHaio0kcCSrR4RIBOQz_U14UQhrxcKenPP8xyIgQs7HrIBXbr0WqlxMIbbZzsX4IX8Hm25wZQ8VqIIbM_v3efiilLzijLdldI1BJ0XGvDOotwYuiril5UIAnL0nd-P-M9n-XA_3Jk8xi64-imvOofyJw6gMsw7nbYZJGjt6cdL32m8OtBrAALsjO5RCb11dBNOwBu2w9g-k=
Text:
  Availability: 1
  Value: <anid>AN0023817548;bsp01feb.07;2019Jun26.08:55;v2.2.500</anid> <title id="AN0023817548-1">Theory of Mind, Self-worth and the Mother–Child Relationship. </title> <p>We tested the hypothesis that mother–child warmth and responsiveness would moderate the link between young children's theory of mind skills and self‐worth. Participants included 125 same‐sex pairs of 3.5 year‐old twins and their mothers. A battery of tests was individually administered to measure the children's theory of mind skills and verbal intelligence, and their self‐reported self‐worth was assessed using a puppet interview. Following visits to the families' homes, the observers completed ratings of warm responsive mother–child behavior based on videotaped unstructured and structured observations. As expected, warm responsive behavior moderated the relation between their theory of mind and the child's self‐worth. Their theory of mind was positively associated with self‐worth in warm responsive mother–child dyads, and there was weaker evidence that their theory of mind may be negatively associated with self‐worth in less warm, unresponsive mother–child dyads.</p> <p>Keywords: theory of mind; self‐concept; self‐esteem; parenting</p> <p>The theory of mind involves the ability to recognize and correctly infer mental states in others such as desire, perspective, knowledge and belief. Children rapidly acquire these skills during the preschool years. These skills are foundational to social‐emotional and cognitive development, with deficits or biases in their theory of mind being linked to behavior and social adjustment problems (e.g., Astington, 2003; Fahie & Symons, 2003; Hughes, Dunn & White, 1998). There is also evidence from research that better theory of mind skills may be linked to problems in self‐worth as a result of greater sensitivity to criticism from others (such as teachers; (Cutting & Dunn, 2002; Dunn, 1995). At the same time, consideration of their theory of mind and self‐worth requires examination of warm responsive behaviors in the mother–child relationship, in light of theory and research that emphasizes the role of these parenting behaviors in the development of social cognitive and behavioral skills (e.g., Kochanska, 2002; Kochanska & Murray, 2000). Thus, in the current study we examine the connection between children's theory of mind their self‐worth and mother–child warmth and responsiveness.</p> <hd id="AN0023817548-2">Theory of Mind</hd> <p>Theory of mind skills are related to real world social behaviors and children's social‐emotional development. False belief task performance is associated with more competent social skills, more pretend play, better peer relations and conflict resolution strategies, and more sophisticated moral judgment (Astington, 2003; Dunn, Brown & Maguire, 1995; Slaughter, Dennis & Pritchard, 2002; Watson, Nixon, Wilson & Capage, 1999).</p> <p>Although theory of mind skills have been tied to adaptive social functioning, more recent investigations suggest links between theory of mind facility and maladaptive social functioning. Theory of mind skills are not always associated with social preference or empathic concern for others, and some studies have found theory of mind skills to be related to a difficult transition to school, peer rejection and bullying (Badenes, Estevan & Bacete, 2000; Repacholi, Slaughter, Pritchard & Gibbs, 2003; Sutton, Smith & Swettenham, 1999). Theory of mind skills may even be used as means to achieve self‐serving, antisocial ends (Repacholi et al., 2003).</p> <p>Less researched has been the potential connection between understanding minds and children's emotional problems. However, there is evidence that children who suffer from depression are more likely than others to show negatively biased social information processing (Quiggle, Garber, Panak & Dodge, 1993), and a realistic (i.e., not positively biased) appraisal of one's own peer status is associated with dysphoria among adolescent girls (Kistner, Balthazor, Risi & David, 2001). Dunn (1995) found that preschoolers with better false belief performance were more likely to report having negative experiences and, in particular, sensitivity to teacher criticism, two years later in kindergarten. Cutting and Dunn (2002) replicated and extended this finding, showing the same result with a broader set of social cognitive skills (theory of mind and emotion understanding) within a larger and more diverse sample. This finding implicates theory of mind abilities as a potential risk factor for the etiology of problems in emotional development, to the extent that the social information being gathered is relevant to children's developing self‐perceptions and concepts.</p> <hd id="AN0023817548-3">Self and the Mother–Child Relationship</hd> <p>Just as children's understanding of others' minds is developing during the preschool years, so are their skills for understanding and defining their self‐concepts (Dweck, 1998). Social cognitive theories suggest that young children incorporate into their self‐concepts information based in part on experiences in their parent–child relationships. In particular, parent–child relationships that are warm, reciprocal and responsive are thought to promote conscience and an adaptive sense of self (Kochanska, 2002). Accordingly, children who have emotionally warm, sensitive and responsive parents are more likely to develop beliefs regarding themselves and their relationships with others that emphasize a positive self‐concept and self‐esteem (Clark & Symons, 2000). In contrast, children with cold and unresponsive parents may be more likely to develop views of themselves that foster beliefs and feelings of low self‐worth.</p> <p>The skills needed to recognize and understand others' internal states are critical to this mechanism, with the emotional context of the parent–child relationship representing the most important source of self‐relevant information in early childhood. Previous research has shown a connection between maternal warmth and children's theory of mind skills (Hughes, Deater‐Deckard & Cutting, 1999) as well as evidence for shared environmental influences generally, i.e., non‐genetic influences that create sibling similarity in theory of mind skills (Hughes, Jaffee, Happé, Taylor, Caspi & Moffitt, 2005). Other studies have shown that warm and responsive caregiving is associated with a host of healthy social‐emotional outcomes, e.g., social competence, emotion regulation (Cole, Teti & Zahn‐Waxler, 2003; Deater‐Deckard & Petrill, 2004; Harrist & Waugh, 2002). Additionally, recent research has demonstrated that theory of mind skills may interact with parenting such that young children with good theory of mind skills may be buffered from the negative effects of harsh parenting on their behavioral development (Hughes & Ensor, 2006). However, none of this previous work has considered the moderating role of warm responsive mother–child interactions in the relation between their theory of mind and self‐worth.</p> <p>Prior research suggests that relatively positive parent–child relations are associated with adaptive social outcomes and positive self‐concept (e.g., Deater‐Deckard & Petrill, 2004) and that relatively negative parent–child relations are associated with emotional and behavioral problems (e.g., Hughes & Ensor, 2006; Morris, Meesters & van den Berg, 2003). Recent research has been uncovering links between aspects of parent–child interactions and the development of social cognitive skills including a theory of mind. For instance, Meins, Fernyhough, Wainwright, Gupta, Fradley and Tuckey (2002) found that mothers' use of mental state talk in response to their infants' behavior predicted their children's later theory of mind skills. Parental positivity (e.g., warmth and responsiveness) and negativity (e.g., intrusiveness) are associated with aspects of social cognitive development including self‐evaluative processes (Pomerantz, 2001) and theory of mind (Hughes et al., 1999). This collection of empirical findings, along with social cognitive theories stating that children's skills for understanding others' minds are formed within their most important social relationships, highlight warm responsiveness in the mother–child relationship as a candidate moderator of the relation between children's theory of mind and self‐worth.</p> <p>We propose that the connection between their theory of mind skills and children's feelings of self‐worth and well‐being will depend on levels of warm, reciprocal, responsive behaviors in the parent–child relationship. If the parent–child relationship is warm and responsive, better theory of mind skills will be linked with higher self‐worth and well‐being because those children are the most likely to notice and understand the frequent supportive and positive parenting behaviors to which they are exposed. In contrast, if the parent–child relationship lacks warmth and responsiveness, there may be a negative association between their theory of mind skills and well‐being because those children are more likely to notice and understand the frequent cold or uninvolved parenting behaviors that they are experiencing.</p> <hd id="AN0023817548-4">Method</hd> <p></p> <hd id="AN0023817548-5">Participants</hd> <p>The participants included 125 same‐sex twin pairs (59 percent girls; 3‐years 6‐months to 3‐years 9‐months, <emph>M</emph> = 43 months). The average Stanford‐Binet summary of area scores attained by the children was 107 (<emph>SD</emph> = 10, min = 78, max = 144). Zygosity was determined using a measure of physical similarity that is 95 percent accurate (Goldsmith, 1991), and any unclear cases were resolved by genotyping using DNA from cheek cells. Sixty‐two twin pairs were identical (MZ) and 58 pairs were fraternal (DZ).</p> <p>The families were recruited through hospital birth records and twin clubs in metropolitan London and other areas of southern and central England. The majority was White English (93 percent); about half of the mothers and fathers had the equivalent of a high‐school diploma or less, about one‐third had college degrees and the remaining parents had postgraduate degrees.</p> <hd id="AN0023817548-6">Procedures</hd> <p>The twins and their primary caregiver (the mother in all but five families) visited the laboratory and also participated in a home visit approximately one month later. Theory of mind and verbal intelligence measures were administered during the laboratory visit, and child self‐reported self‐worth observations and observations of mother–child warmth and responsiveness were conducted during the home visit. During the home visit, the mother and each twin (separately) were videotaped interacting during two 10‐minute sessions—a free play session using the child's favorite toy or game, and a session where they worked together to draw pictures using an Etch‐A‐Sketch drawing toy (Stevenson‐Hinde & Shouldice, 1995). Each individual was assigned a dial so that the pair had to co‐operate to complete the task. While one twin was conducting these videotaped tasks with the mother, the other twin was completing a modified version of a puppet task designed to assess their self‐concept (Eder, 1990; Pike, 1999). Following the home visit, the testers completed a post‐visit inventory of parenting behavior (Dodge, Bates & Pettit, 1986).</p> <hd id="AN0023817548-7">Measures</hd> <p> <bold>Verbal Intelligence. </bold> The vocabulary subtest from the Stanford‐Binet intelligence scale (Thorndike, Hagen & Sattler, 1986) was completed to assess the children's verbal intelligence (<emph>M</emph> = 107.80, <emph>SD</emph> = 12.70). This subtest is a valid and widely used indicator of expressive vocabulary ability.</p> <p> <bold>Theory of Mind. </bold> The children's theory of mind ability was assessed using a battery of eight false‐belief tasks and two deception tasks that have been shown to yield highly reliable individual difference scores representing overall mentalizing ability (Hughes & Cutting, 1999; Hughes, Adlam, Happé, Jackson, Taylor & Caspi, 2000). Four false‐belief tasks involved unexpected locations, whereby either the anticipated contents of a container (e.g., a cereal box) were shown to be in a different container, or a puppet moved an object while another puppet was not present. For each of these, the children had to state either where the puppet would search for an object, or explain why the puppet looked in the wrong location while referring to the puppet's false belief. Two additional false belief tasks involved unexpected identity wherein children were asked to attribute a false belief to a puppet as well as recall their own false belief. The remaining two false belief tasks showed a puppet receiving a good or bad surprise, and required children to attribute a false belief to the puppet as well as to predict and explain how the puppet would have felt before the surprise. All the questions were in forced‐choice format, with the order of choice counterbalanced across the children. To receive credit for a correct response, the children first had to respond correctly to memory and reality control questions. Altogether, each child was presented with 14 test questions, and one point was awarded for each correctly answered question, with the possibility of one or two additional bonus points would be awarded for spontaneous false belief explanations in two of the tasks. Therefore, the maximum possible score was 16.</p> <p>The two deception tasks included Sodian and Frith's (1992) box and puppet game and the penny hiding game. In the box and puppet game, there were four counterbalanced trials: non‐verbal/verbal co‐operation with a friendly puppet, and non‐verbal/verbal competition (including sabotage and deception) with a nasty puppet. For each, a child was awarded two points if she was successful, one point if she passed non‐verbal deceit or co‐operation but did not pass verbal deceit or co‐operation, and zero points for any other performance pattern. In the penny hiding game the researcher showed the child how to trick someone by showing a penny and then hiding it behind her back, then bringing the hands forward and asking the child to guess which hand held the penny. After three trials, the child was invited to play the game several times with the researcher, and received one point if successful on one trial, and two points if successful on at least two trials. Thus, the maximum score for the deception tasks was four.</p> <p>The maximum total score across the 10 tasks was 20. The composite scores were internally consistent (Cronbach's α = .83) and normally distributed, <emph>M</emph> = 7.80, <emph>SD</emph> = 4.50.</p> <p> <bold>Child Self‐reported Self‐worth. </bold> We used a modified version of Eder's (1990) forced‐choice puppet task that is shorter and makes use of hand puppets instead of a puppet theater (Pike, 1999). This version included 35 items spanning a variety of domains as proposed by Eder: achievement, aggression, alienation, harm avoidance, control, social closeness, social potency, stress reaction, traditionalism and self‐worth. The child was introduced to the hand puppets and became familiar with the task through some sample items. The format of the items involved presenting two contrasting statements, and the child was then asked to designate which she or he was most like (e.g., Puppet 1 says, 'I go to nursery school'; puppet 2 says, 'I don't go to nursery school'. Researcher then asks, 'What about you'?). This resulted in a binary score for each item presented (coded as 0 or 1). When necessary, follow‐up prompts were used (e.g., 'Which puppet is most like you'?) or the item was rephrased as a direct question (e.g., 'Do you like to do mostly easy things or hard things'?). The interviews lasted between 10 and 20 minutes and were audiotaped for later coding. Principal components factor analysis yielded evidence, based on an analysis of the scree plot and the root one criterion, for two scales: <emph>self‐worth</emph> (α = .70) and <emph>assertiveness/aggressiveness</emph> (α = .73). The self‐worth score was used in the current analyses and included nine items (e.g., 'I like myself'; 'People want to be with me'; 'When I wake up in the morning I feel good'). The self‐worth scale scores were widely distributed, but had moderate negative skew (−.7), <emph>M</emph> = .66, <emph>SD</emph> = .26. This scale revealed no genetic influence (Pike, 1999), and our emphasis in the current study was not on within‐family comparisons of siblings, so MZ and DZ twins were not separated for analyses.</p> <p> <bold>Warmth and Responsiveness. </bold> Warm, responsive mother–child interactions were measured using several independent observers' ratings. Following the home visit, the researchers completed the four‐item warmth scale from the post‐visit inventory (Dodge et al., 1986): maternal warmth (cold/unfriendly vs. warm/affectionate), relationship quality (hostile/negative vs. warm/positive), knowledge of child (not well vs. very well), and enjoyment of parenting (none vs. a lot); inter‐rater agreement >.7. These items were intercorrelated (.4 to.8) and were averaged to formcomposite scores that were widely distributed and had moderate negative skew, <emph>M</emph> = 3.82, <emph>SD</emph> = .85.</p> <p>Subsequent to the home visit, different research assistants who had not conducted the home visits coded the videotaped parent–child interactions for warmth and responsiveness. In addition, for any given family, different research assistants coded the two mother–child dyads in order to further minimize potential rater bias effects. Coders completed the parent–child interaction system (PARCHISY) global ratings scales (Deater‐Deckard, Pylas & Petrill, 1997). PARCHISY includes global ratings pertaining to each individual and the dyad (see Deater‐Deckard, 2000). Inter‐rater reliability was estimated using Cronbach's α (Bakeman & Gottman, 1986, pp. 92–95). The observers reached and maintained agreement of α >.80 (15 percent data checked) during training and coding, and nearly all of the disagreements were only one‐point discrepancies.</p> <p>The relevant scales for the current study included the established mother–child mutuality score (Deater‐Deckard & Petrill, 2004), and the mother positive affect score. Mutuality includes four global ratings items: parent responsiveness to child, child responsiveness to parent (1 = 'never responds; ignores comments, questions, behaviors'; 4 = 'moderate amounts of responsiveness; responds to about half of comments, questions and behaviors, although some responses may be delayed'; 7 = 'always responds immediately, expands on comments made by other'), dyadic co‐operation (explicit agreement and discussion regarding how to proceed with task; 1 = 'no evidence of co‐operation during task'; 4 = 'moderate amounts of co‐operation, appears during about half of the interaction'; 7 = 'highly co‐operative interaction for entire task'), and dyadic emotional reciprocity (co‐occurring parent–child positive affect, eye contact and conversation‐like quality to exchanges; 1 = 'no evidence of reciprocity'; 4 = 'moderate levels of reciprocity, evidence of both shared positive affect and eye contact, and some evidence of conversation‐like quality of interaction'; 7 = 'highly integrated and reciprocal, constant shared positive affect and eye contact that never loses turn‐taking quality'). The four scales were standardized, averaged and standardized again to yield a composite mutuality <emph>z</emph>‐score with a mean of 0 and standard deviation of 1. These scores were widely and normally distributed.</p> <p>Mother positive affect is a separate item and is based on evidence of warmth in the interaction based on mothers' smiling, laughter and affection shown toward the child (1 = 'no positive affect displayed'; 4 = 'moderate amounts of positive affect, smiling and/or laughing for about half of the interaction'; 7 = 'constant positive affect, smiling and laughing throughout task'). The scores on this item were widely distributed with a modest positive skew, <emph>M</emph> = 2.60, <emph>SD</emph> = .80.</p> <p>These three indicators of observed warmth and responsiveness (home visit warmth, mutuality and positive affect) were standardized and combined to yield a single composite <emph>z</emph>‐score that was normally distributed. Principal components factor analysis demonstrated that this score accounted for 60 percent of the variance in the items, with loadings ranging from.68 to.77.</p> <hd id="AN0023817548-8">Results</hd> <p>We tested the study hypothesis using the entire sample—the most statistically powerful approach, but one that includes non‐independent observations (i.e., two children per family). Therefore, we also used an internal replication approach and randomly assigned each of the mother–child pairs within any given family into two subsamples (wherein non‐independence is not an issue).</p> <p>We began by estimating the zero‐order Pearson correlations between the study variables, for descriptive purposes (see Table 1). For the total sample, the child's self‐worth was higher for those with higher verbal IQ and theory of mind scores. IQ and theory of mind scores were positively correlated, and both were modestly positively correlated with warmth/responsiveness. Similar patterns were seen in the two random subsamples, although the overall statistical significance was less prevalent because of the lower power.</p> <p>1 Pearson Correlations between Study Variables for Entire Sample, and for Two Random Subsamples (Sample 1 Below Diagonal, Sample 2 Above Diagonal)</p> <p> <ephtml> <table><thead valign="bottom"><tr><th /><th>Entire Sample</th><th>Random Subsamples</th></tr><tr><th>1.</th><th>2.</th><th>3.</th><th>4.</th><th>1.</th><th>2.</th><th>3.</th><th>4.</th></tr></thead><tbody valign="top"><tr><td>1. Verbal IQ</td><td>1</td><td>1</td><td>.38***</td><td>.16</td><td>.35**</td><td /><td /><td /></tr><tr><td>2. Th of mind</td><td>.43***</td><td>1</td><td>.49***</td><td>1</td><td>.11</td><td>.19</td><td /><td /></tr><tr><td>3. Mother warmth</td><td>.17*</td><td>.15*</td><td>1</td><td>.16</td><td>.21*</td><td>1</td><td>.13</td><td /></tr><tr><td>4. Child self‐worth</td><td>.34***</td><td>.21**</td><td>.06</td><td>1</td><td>.32**</td><td>.24*</td><td>−.03</td><td>1</td></tr></tbody></table> </ephtml> </p> <p>1 *  <emph>p</emph> < .05;</p> <ulist> <item>2 **  <emph>p</emph> < .01;</item> <item>3 ***  <emph>p</emph> < .001.</item> </ulist> <p>To test our hypothesis we used hierarchical regression for testing statistical interaction terms (using variables centered on 0). We began with the total sample. The outcome variable was child self‐worth, and predictor variables included verbal IQ, theory of mind, mother–child warmth/responsiveness, and the two‐way interaction between theory of mind and warmth/responsiveness. Main effects were entered in the first step of the model, and together accounted for 12 percent of the variance, <emph>F</emph> (<reflink idref="bib3" id="ref1">3</reflink>,<reflink idref="bib155" id="ref2">155</reflink>) = 6.96, <emph>p</emph> < .001. The only significant predictor was verbal IQ, <emph>beta</emph> = .29, <emph>p</emph> < .01. In step two, the theory of mind × warmth/responsiveness interaction term was entered; this model explained 16 percent of the variance, <emph>F</emph> (<reflink idref="bib4" id="ref3">4</reflink>,<reflink idref="bib154" id="ref4">154</reflink>) = 7.18, <emph>p</emph> < .001, and the interaction term was significant, <emph>beta</emph> = .20, <emph>p</emph> < .01.</p> <p>Next, we estimated the same hierarchical regression equation separately for the two random subsamples. For subsample one, step one (main effects) accounted for 12 percent of the variance, <emph>F</emph> (<reflink idref="bib3" id="ref5">3</reflink>,<reflink idref="bib75" id="ref6">75</reflink>) = 3.24, <emph>p</emph> < .05. The only significant predictor was verbal IQ, <emph>beta</emph> = .25, <emph>p</emph> < .05. In step two, the interaction term was added. This model explained 17 percent of the variance, <emph>F</emph> (<reflink idref="bib4" id="ref7">4</reflink>,<reflink idref="bib74" id="ref8">74</reflink>) = 3.67, <emph>p</emph> < .05, and the interaction term was significant, <emph>beta</emph> = .23, <emph>p</emph> < .05. For subsample two, step one (main effects) accounted for 14 percent of the variance, <emph>F</emph> (<reflink idref="bib3" id="ref9">3</reflink>,<reflink idref="bib76" id="ref10">76</reflink>) = 4.20, <emph>p</emph> < .01. Again, the only significant predictor was verbal IQ, <emph>beta</emph> = .31, <emph>p</emph> < .01. In step two, the interaction term was added. This model explained 17 percent of the variance, <emph>F</emph> (<reflink idref="bib4" id="ref11">4</reflink>,<reflink idref="bib75" id="ref12">75</reflink>) = 3.96, <emph>p</emph> < .01, and the interaction term was marginally significant, <emph>beta</emph> = .19, <emph>p</emph> < .10.</p> <p>Finally, we examined the interaction by dividing the sample and subsamples into those above and below the mean in mother–child warmth/responsiveness, and estimating partial correlations between their theory of mind and the child's self‐worth while controlling for verbal IQ (see Table 2). A pattern somewhat consistent with the hypothesis was seen in the total sample as well as the random subsamples. Among those children whose mother–child interactions were observed to be above average in warmth and responsiveness, better theory of mind skills were correlated with higher self‐worth, and this association was significant in the total sample and both random subsamples. In contrast, among those whose mother–child interactions were below average in warmth and responsiveness, the child's theory of mind skills tended to correlate with <emph>lower</emph> self‐worth, although this was a weak effect. In two of the three analyses conducted (total sample and subsample 2) the negative correlation was marginally significant, and it was close to zero in subsample 1.</p> <p>2 Partial Correlations (with Degrees of Freedom) and One‐tailed p‐values Controlling for Child Verbal IQ between Theory of Mind and Child Self‐Worth as a Function of Observed Maternal Warmth/Responsiveness for the Total Sample and Two Random Subsamples</p> <p> <ephtml> <table><thead valign="bottom"><tr><th /><th>Total sample</th><th>Subsample 1</th><th>Subsample 2</th></tr><tr><th><italic>r</italic></th><th><italic>p</italic></th><th><italic>r</italic></th><th><italic>p</italic></th><th><italic>r</italic></th><th><italic>p</italic></th></tr></thead><tbody valign="top"><tr><td>Low warmth</td><td>−.21 (59)</td><td><.06</td><td>−.04 (31)</td><td><italic>n.s.</italic></td><td>−.29 (27)</td><td><.07</td></tr><tr><td>High warmth</td><td>.28 (94)</td><td><.01</td><td>.26 (42)</td><td><.05</td><td>.25 (47)</td><td><.05</td></tr></tbody></table> </ephtml> </p> <hd id="AN0023817548-9">Discussion</hd> <p>Our hypothesis that mother–child warmth and responsiveness would moderate the relation between the child's theory of mind skills and self‐worth was partly supported, with the most consistent evidence of an association being found within the high warmth dyads. Using an internal replication design, we tested the hypothesis in the entire sample and separately for each sibling in this twin study. In each regression model, the statistical interaction between warm responsive mother–child interactions and the child's theory of mind accounted for 3 to 5 percent of the variance in self‐worth scores. As anticipated, when controlling for verbal IQ, better theory of mind skills were associated with higher self‐worth if the mother–child interactions were observed to be warm and responsive. However, the evidence that better theory of mind skills would be associated with lower self‐worth in the low warmth, unresponsive dyads was neither strong nor consistent, although we did find a negative correlation that was marginally significant for two of the three analyses conducted. Thus, mother–child warmth and responsiveness does appear to moderate the association between a child's theory of mind and self‐worth, although it remains to be seen whether there really is a negative association between social cognitive skills and self‐worth for children in low warmth dyads.</p> <p>The findings are consistent with the expectation that the link between a child's theory of mind and social adaptation depends in part on the social‐emotional context in which children's social cognitive skills develop and operate. There is no question that theory of mind skills are crucial for understanding other people's behavior. Without recognition that others have internal states separate from one's own, observing even mundane behaviors performed by others is confusing. Their theory of mind undergoes steady advances during early childhood in typically developing children. Some of the advances that children must make to be judged as having acquired theory of mind are recognition that mental states exist, recognition that other people may have different mental states from their own, and understanding the representational nature of mental states. Individual differences in children's theory of mind are related to family‐member discourse regarding internal states and verbal ability, and include genetic and environmental sources of variance (Dunn, Brown, Slomkowski, Tesla & Youngblade, 1991; Hughes & Cutting, 1999; Jenkins & Astington, 1996).</p> <p>Among preschoolers, having better theory of mind skills may have different implications for developing self‐perceptions and beliefs, depending on the content of the mother–child relationship. Children who are more able to notice and understand the intentions and often subtle nuances of their mothers' behaviors toward them are more likely to be affected by those behaviors. For those with poorer mother–child relations, it may well be an enhanced sensitivity to criticism (e.g., Cutting & Dunn, 2002; Dunn, 1995) that most strongly influences the developing sense of self, although we did not measure this in the current study.</p> <p>We investigated the dimension of warmth and responsiveness in the parent–child relationships. However, it is worth stressing that low levels of warmth and responsiveness are distinct from negativity in the parent–child relationship. It is likely that negativity would co‐occur with low warmth/responsiveness, but some parent–child relationships are also likely to be characterized by disengagement, or low levels of both warmth and negativity. Perhaps children whose theory of mind skills are advanced and who experience high levels of negativity would be found to have particularly low levels of self‐worth. We were not able to examine this question in the current study, because we rarely observed incidences of harsh, angry maternal behavior. In contrast, there was wide variability in warm, responsive behavior. Future research might demonstrate that negativity in the parent–child relationship is a more powerful predictor of a negative association between a child's theory of mind and self‐worth than low levels of maternal warmth and responsiveness.</p> <p>The pattern of results for the 3.5‐year‐old children in the current study may not hold true for younger or older children. The relevant components of social cognitions, including theory of mind and self‐concept, are changing throughout early and middle childhood. In addition, we do not know whether the same pattern of findings would be obtained for other relationships, such as father–child, sibling, peer and teacher–child relationships. Furthermore, previous research has clearly shown that genetic as well as environmental factors are involved in the etiology of individual differences in theory of mind skills (Hughes & Cutting, 1999; Hughes et al., 2005), self‐esteem and self‐worth (McGuire, Manke, Saudino, Reiss, Hetherington & Plomin, 1999), and exposure to warm responsive maternal behavior (Deater‐Deckard & Petrill, 2004). Unfortunately, we lacked sufficient power to test the hypothesis using a quantitative genetic analysis of these twin data.</p> <p>Assessing self‐worth in preschoolers is challenging. Some theories of self‐concept development (e.g., Harter, 1999) assume that relatively sophisticated verbal ability is necessary for children to be able to develop a coherent sense of self. Thus, there has been uncertainty regarding whether preschool aged children, with fairly limited verbal repertoires, are able to report on constructs such as self‐concept and well‐being. Nevertheless, recent measurement innovations, including puppet interviews like the one we used, have allowed researchers to gather valid and reliable self‐reports of self‐concept and psychological health among preschoolers (Eder, 1990; Measelle, Ablow, Cowan & Cowan, 1998). We did not ask parents to report on their children's self‐worth, but rather elected to rely on children's self‐reports. Much of the motivation to develop self‐report measures for use with preschoolers came from evidence that parental reports are ineffective in capturing children's inner experiences during preschool (e.g., parent and child reports of internalizing symptoms are uncorrelated; Measelle et al., 1998).</p> <p>There are other caveats to consider. It remains to be seen whether these findings would apply in non‐twin families. Additionally, although there was considerable socio‐economic diversity among the families, the sample was ethnically homogeneous, which limits the generalizability of the findings. Finally, given our correlational design, inferences of causality cannot be made.</p> <p>These potential limitations aside, we made every effort to rigorously test the study hypothesis. We used an extensive battery of theory of mind tasks and controlled for verbal IQ, both of which are necessary for reliably assessing individual differences in theory of mind skills (Hughes & Cutting, 1999). We assessed several inter‐related aspects of warm responsive parenting using observers' ratings, in order to focus on maternal behaviors that also could be observed by the child. By comparison, mothers' self‐reports might include indications of warmth or negativity that may not be reflected in their behaviors. In addition, we employed an internal replication design to examine the robustness of the effect. The findings implicate young children's developing social‐cognitive skills and the emotional climate of the mother–child relationship in the development of self‐worth.</p> <hd id="AN0023817548-10">Acknowledgments</hd> <p>We are grateful to the children and parents who participated in the TRACKS twin study, and to our TRACKS research team members: Alex Cutting, Thomas G. O'Connor, Stephen A. Petrill and Robert Plomin. We also wish to thank the many research staff members who assisted with the data collection and management. This study was supported by funds from the Social, Genetic and Developmental Psychiatry Research Centre of the Institute of Psychiatry, Kings College, London.</p> <ref id="AN0023817548-11"> <title> References </title> <blist> <bibl id="bib1" type="bt">1</bibl> <bibtext> Astington, J. W. (2003). Sometimes necessary, never sufficient. In B. Repacholi, & V. Slaughter (Eds.), Individual differences in theory of mind (pp. 13 – 36). New York: Psychology Press.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib2" type="bt">2</bibl> <bibtext> Badenes, L. V., Estevan, R. A., & Bacete, F. J. G. (2000). Theory of mind and peer rejection at school. Social Development, 9, 271 – 283.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib3" idref="ref1" type="bt">3</bibl> <bibtext> Bakeman, R., & Gottman, J. M. (1986). Observing interaction: An introduction to sequential analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib4" idref="ref3" type="bt">4</bibl> <bibtext> Clark, S. E., & Symons, D. K. (2000). A longitudinal study of Q‐sort attachment security and self‐processes at age 5. Infant and Child Development, 9, 91 – 104.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib5" type="bt">5</bibl> <bibtext> Cole, P. M., Teti, L. O., & Zahn‐Waxler, C. (2003). Mutual emotional regulation and the stability of conduct problems between preschool and early school age. Development and Psychopathology, 15, 1 – 18.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib6" type="bt">6</bibl> <bibtext> Cutting, A. L., & Dunn, J. (2002). The cost of understanding other people: Social cognition predicts young children's sensitivity to criticism. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 43, 849 – 860.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib7" type="bt">7</bibl> <bibtext> Deater‐Deckard, K. (2000). Parenting and child behavioral adjustment in early childhood: A quantitative genetic approach to studying family processes. Child Development, 71, 468 – 484.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib8" type="bt">8</bibl> <bibtext> Deater‐Deckard, K., & Petrill, S. A. (2004). Parent–child dyadic mutuality and child behavior problems: An investigation of gene–environment processes. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 45, 1171 – 1179.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib9" type="bt">9</bibl> <bibtext> Deater‐Deckard, K., Pylas, M. V., & Petrill, S. A. (1997). The parent–child interaction system (PARCHISY). London: Institute of Psychiatry.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Dodge, K. A., Bates, J. E., & Pettit, G. S. (1986). Development of aggressive behavior. Unpublished manuscript.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Dunn, J. (1995). Children as psychologists: The later correlates of individual differences in understanding of emotions and other minds. Cognition and Emotion, 9, 187 – 201.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Dunn, J., Brown, J. R., & Maguire, M. (1995). The development of children's moral sensibility: Individual differences and emotion understanding. Developmental Psychology, 31, 649 – 659.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Dunn, J., Brown, J., Slomkowski, C., Tesla, C., & Youngblade, L. (1991). Young children's understanding of other people's feelings and beliefs: Individual differences and their antecedents. Child Development, 62, 1352 – 1366.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Dweck, C. S. (1998). The development of early self‐conceptions: Their relevance for motivational processes. In J. Heckhausen & C. Dweck (Eds.), Motivation and self‐regulation across the life span (pp. 257 – 280). New York: Cambridge University Press.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Eder, R. A. (1990). Uncovering young children's psychological selves: Individual and developmental differences. Child Development, 61, 849 – 863.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Fahie, C. M., & Symons, D. K. (2003). Executive functioning and theory of mind in children clinically referred for attention and behavior problems. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 24, 51 – 73.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Goldsmith, H. H. (1991). A zygosity questionnaire for young twins: A research note. Behavior Genetics, 21, 257 – 269.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Harrist, A. W., & Waugh, R. M. (2002). Dyadic synchrony: Its structure and function in children's development. Developmental Review, 22, 555 – 592.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Harter, S. (1999). The construction of the self: A developmental perspective. New York: Guilford Press.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Hughes, C., Adlam, A., Happé, F., Jackson, J., Taylor, A., & Caspi, A. (2000). Good test–retest reliability for standard and advanced false‐belief tasks across a wide range of abilities. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 41, 483 – 490.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Hughes, C., & Cutting, A. L. (1999). Nature, nurture, and individual differences in early understanding of mind. Psychological Science, 10, 429 – 432.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Hughes, C., Deater‐Deckard, K., & Cutting, A. L. (1999). ' Speak roughly to your little boy'? Sex differences in the relationship between parenting and preschoolers' understanding of mind. Social Development, 8, 143 – 160.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Hughes, C., Dunn, J., & White, A. (1998). Trick or treat? Uneven understanding of mind and emotion and executive dysfunction in 'hard‐to‐manage' preschoolers. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry and Allied Disciplines, 39, 981 – 994.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Hughes, C., & Ensor, R. (2006). Behavioural problems in 2‐year‐olds: Links with individual differences in theory of mind, executive function and harsh parenting. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 47, 488 – 497.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Hughes, C., Jaffee, S. R., Happé, F., Taylor, A., Caspi, A., & Moffitt, T. E. (2005). Origins of individual differences in theory of mind: From nature to nurture? Child Development, 76, 356 – 370.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Jenkins, J. M., & Astington, J. W. (1996). Cognitive factors and family structure associated with theory of mind development in young children. Developmental Psychology, 32, 70 – 78.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Kistner, J., Balthazor, M., Risi, S., & David, C. (2001). Adolescents' perceptions of peer acceptance: Is dysphoria associated with greater realism? Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 20, 66 – 81.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Kochanska, G. (2002). Mutually responsive orientation between mothers and their young children: A context for the early development of conscience. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 11, 191 – 195.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Kochanska, G., & Murray, K. T. (2000). Mother–child mutually responsive orientation and conscience development: From toddler to early school age. Child Development, 71, 417 – 431.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> McGuire, S., Manke, B., Saudino, K. J., Reiss, D., Hetherington, E. M., & Plomin, R. (1999). Perceived competence and self‐worth during adolescence: A longitudinal behavioral genetic study. Child Development, 70, 1283 – 1296.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Measelle, J. R., Ablow, J. C., Cowan, P. A., & Cowan, C. P. (1998). Assessing young children's views of their academic, social, and emotional lives: An evaluation of the self‐perception scales of the Berkeley puppet interview. Child Development, 69, 1556 – 1576.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Meins, E., Fernyhough, C., Wainwright, R., Gupta, M. D., Fradley, E., & Tuckey, M. (2002). Maternal mind‐mindedness and attachment security as predictors of theory of mind understanding. Child Development, 73, 1715 – 1726.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Morris, P., Meesters, C., & Van Den Berg, S. (2003). Internalizing and externalizing problems as correlates of self‐reported attachment style and perceived parental rearing in normal adolescents. Journal of Child and Family Studies, 12, 171 – 183.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Pike, A. (1999). Preschoolers' self‐concepts: A twin study. Paper presented at the biennial meeting of the Society for Research in Child Development, Albuquerque NM, April.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Pomerantz, E. (2001). Parent × child socialization: Implications for the development of depressive symptoms. Journal of Family Psychology, 15, 510 – 525.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Quiggle, N. L., Garber, J., Panak, W. F., & Dodge, K. (1993). A. Social information processing in aggressive and depressed children. Annual Progress in Child Psychiatry and Child Development, 25, 217 – 241.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Repacholi, B., Slaughter, V., Pritchard, M., & Gibbs, V. (2003). Theory of mind, Machiavellianism, and social functioning in childhood. In B. Repacholi & V. Slaughter (Eds.), Individual differences in theory of mind (pp. 67 – 94). New York: Psychology Press.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Slaughter, V., Dennis, M. J., & Pritchard, M. (2002). Theory of mind and peer acceptance in preschool children. British Journal of Developmental Psychology, 20, 545 – 564.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Sodian, B., & Frith, U. (1992). Deception and sabotage in autistic, retarded and normal children. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry and Allied Disciplines, 33, 591 – 605.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Stevenson‐Hinde, J., & Shouldice, A. (1995). Maternal interactions and self‐reports related to attachment classification at 4.5 years. Child Development, 66, 583 – 596.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Sutton, J. P., Smith, P., & Swettenham, J. (1999). Bullying and 'theory of mind': A critique of the 'social deficits view' of anti‐social behavior. Social Development, 8, 117 – 127.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Thorndike, R. L., Hagen, E. P., & Sattler, J. M. (1986). Guide for administering and scoring the fourth edition: Stanford‐Binet intelligence scale. Chicago, IL: Riverside.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Watson, A. C., Nixon, C. L., Wilson, A., & Capage, L. (1999). Social interaction skills and theory of mind in young children. Developmental Psychology, 35, 386 – 391.</bibtext> </blist> </ref> <aug> <p>By Katherine R. Cahill; Kirby Deater‐Deckard; Alison Pike and Claire Hughes</p> <p>Reported by Author; Author; Author; Author</p> </aug> <nolink nlid="nl1" bibid="bib155" firstref="ref2"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl2" bibid="bib154" firstref="ref4"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl3" bibid="bib75" firstref="ref6"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl4" bibid="bib74" firstref="ref8"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl5" bibid="bib76" firstref="ref10"></nolink>
Header DbId: eric
DbLabel: ERIC
An: EJ942073
AccessLevel: 3
PubType: Academic Journal
PubTypeId: academicJournal
PreciseRelevancyScore: 0
IllustrationInfo
Items – Name: Title
  Label: Title
  Group: Ti
  Data: Theory of Mind, Self-Worth and the Mother-Child Relationship
– Name: Language
  Label: Language
  Group: Lang
  Data: English
– Name: Author
  Label: Authors
  Group: Au
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Cahill%2C+Katherine+R%2E%22">Cahill, Katherine R.</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Deater-Deckard%2C+Kirby%22">Deater-Deckard, Kirby</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Pike%2C+Alison%22">Pike, Alison</searchLink>
– Name: TitleSource
  Label: Source
  Group: Src
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="SO" term="%22Social+Development%22"><i>Social Development</i></searchLink>. Feb 2007 16(1):45-56.
– Name: Avail
  Label: Availability
  Group: Avail
  Data: Wiley-Blackwell. 350 Main Street, Malden, MA 02148. Tel: 800-835-6770; Tel: 781-388-8598; Fax: 781-388-8232; e-mail: cs-journals@wiley.com; Web site: http://www.wiley.com/WileyCDA/
– Name: PeerReviewed
  Label: Peer Reviewed
  Group: SrcInfo
  Data: Y
– Name: PhysDesc
  Label: Physical Description
  Group: PhysDesc
  Data: PDF
– Name: Pages
  Label: Page Count
  Group: Src
  Data: 12
– Name: DatePubCY
  Label: Publication Date
  Group: Date
  Data: 2007
– Name: TypeDocument
  Label: Document Type
  Group: TypDoc
  Data: Journal Articles<br />Reports - Research
– Name: Subject
  Label: Descriptors
  Group: Su
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Theory+of+Mind%22">Theory of Mind</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Mothers%22">Mothers</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Child+Behavior%22">Child Behavior</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Parent+Child+Relationship%22">Parent Child Relationship</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Cognitive+Development%22">Cognitive Development</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Hypothesis+Testing%22">Hypothesis Testing</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Affective+Behavior%22">Affective Behavior</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Self+Esteem%22">Self Esteem</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Twins%22">Twins</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Young+Children%22">Young Children</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Verbal+Ability%22">Verbal Ability</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Puppetry%22">Puppetry</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Interviews%22">Interviews</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Observation%22">Observation</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Correlation%22">Correlation</searchLink>
– Name: DOI
  Label: DOI
  Group: ID
  Data: 10.1111/j.1467-9507.2007.00371.x
– Name: ISSN
  Label: ISSN
  Group: ISSN
  Data: 0961-205X
– Name: Abstract
  Label: Abstract
  Group: Ab
  Data: We tested the hypothesis that mother-child warmth and responsiveness would moderate the link between young children's theory of mind skills and self-worth. Participants included 125 same-sex pairs of 3.5 year-old twins and their mothers. A battery of tests was individually administered to measure the children's theory of mind skills and verbal intelligence, and their self-reported self-worth was assessed using a puppet interview. Following visits to the families' homes, the observers completed ratings of warm responsive mother-child behavior based on videotaped unstructured and structured observations. As expected, warm responsive behavior moderated the relation between their theory of mind and the child's self-worth. Their theory of mind was positively associated with self-worth in warm responsive mother-child dyads, and there was weaker evidence that their theory of mind may be negatively associated with self-worth in less warm, unresponsive mother-child dyads.
– Name: AbstractInfo
  Label: Abstractor
  Group: Ab
  Data: As Provided
– Name: Ref
  Label: Number of References
  Group: RefInfo
  Data: 43
– Name: DateEntry
  Label: Entry Date
  Group: Date
  Data: 2011
– Name: AN
  Label: Accession Number
  Group: ID
  Data: EJ942073
PLink https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&site=eds-live&db=eric&AN=EJ942073
RecordInfo BibRecord:
  BibEntity:
    Identifiers:
      – Type: doi
        Value: 10.1111/j.1467-9507.2007.00371.x
    Languages:
      – Text: English
    PhysicalDescription:
      Pagination:
        PageCount: 12
        StartPage: 45
    Subjects:
      – SubjectFull: Theory of Mind
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Mothers
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Child Behavior
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Parent Child Relationship
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Cognitive Development
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Hypothesis Testing
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Affective Behavior
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Self Esteem
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Twins
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Young Children
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Verbal Ability
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Puppetry
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Interviews
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Observation
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Correlation
        Type: general
    Titles:
      – TitleFull: Theory of Mind, Self-Worth and the Mother-Child Relationship
        Type: main
  BibRelationships:
    HasContributorRelationships:
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Cahill, Katherine R.
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Deater-Deckard, Kirby
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Pike, Alison
    IsPartOfRelationships:
      – BibEntity:
          Dates:
            – D: 01
              M: 02
              Type: published
              Y: 2007
          Identifiers:
            – Type: issn-print
              Value: 0961-205X
          Numbering:
            – Type: volume
              Value: 16
            – Type: issue
              Value: 1
          Titles:
            – TitleFull: Social Development
              Type: main
ResultId 1