Document Type : Literature Reviews


1 Ph.D. student of general linguistics, Department of Foreign Languages and Linguistics, Shiraz University, Shiraz, Iran.

2 Ph.D. Candidate of neuroscience , Neuroscience Research Center, Institute of Neuropharmacology, Kerman University of Medical Sciences, Kerman, Iran

3 1- Bone and Joint Diseases Research Center, department of physical medicine and rehabilitation, Shiraz University of Medical Sciences, Shiraz, Iran. 2- Shiraz Geriatric Research Center, Shiraz University of Medical Sciences, Shiraz, Iran.

4 Ph.D. Candidate of General linguistics, Department of Foreign Languages and Linguistics, Shiraz University, Shiraz, Iran


Theory of Mind (ToM) is an essential component of communication
with the others and social understanding. Cognitive structures, such as language,
working memory, and executive functions play a special role in understanding
the others҆ minds. Thus, given importance of the role of language skills in
development of ToM and the previous research findings regarding the restricted
capacity of children with cerebral palsy (CP) in development of their ability to
understand others’ thoughts and feelings, this review study was designed to
mainly evaluate the influence of language on ToM in children with CP.
Methods: For this purpose, initially, electronic databases (PubMed, Scopus,
PsycINFo, MEDLINE, Embase, and Web of Science) were searched from
September 1 to 30 , during 2000-2020. Search was done focusing on the Englishwritten
papers using a combination of keywords including: “Cerebral Palsy,
Theory of Mind, Mentalization, and Language” to identify relevant studies from
2000 to 2020.
Results: A total of 978 publications were identified according to the initial search
criteria. After reviewing abstracts, titles, and references of the identified papers,
10 potentially relevant papers were selected. Based on assessing their full-text, 7
papers completely met the inclusion criteria.
Conclusion: Given that children with CP have not been addressed by numerous
investigations to date, there is limited information about their ToM skills and
the role of other different components of ToM development. Therefore, further
research should be carried out to investigate this issue. The combined findings
of the reviewed papers showed that language skills had an effect on capacity to
elaborate ToM competence in children with CP. This review study paves the path
to the future common research on children with CP and underlines importance
of using a methodology, in which ToM performance is studied in concert with a
detailed investigation of speech and motor impairments.
2021© The Authors. Published by JRSR. All rights reserved.


1.  Palmeri R, Lo Buono V, Corallo F, Foti M, Di Lorenzo G, Bramanti P, Marino S. Nonmotor symptoms in Parkinson disease: a descriptive review on social cognition ability. J Geriatr Psychiatry Neurol. 2017;30(2):109-21.
2. Christidi F, Migliaccio R, Santamaría-García H, Santangelo G, Trojsi F. Social cognition dysfunctions in neurodegenerative diseases: Neuroanatomical correlates and clinical implications. Behav Neurol. 2018: 26.
3. Lockl K, Ebert S, Weinert S. Predicting school achievement from early theory of mind: Differential effects on achievement tests and teacher ratings. Learn Individ Differ. 2017: 1;53:93-102.
4. Bora E, Yucel M, Pantelis C. Theory of mind impairment in schizophrenia: meta-analysis.Schizophr Res. 2009: 1;109(1-3):1-9.
5. Jolly A. Lemur social behavior and primate intelligence. Sci. 1966: 29;153(3735):501-6.
6. Humphrey NK. The social function of intellect. In Growing points in ethology. 1976 (pp. 303-317). Cambridge University Press.
7. Trivers RL. The evolution of reciprocal altruism. Q Rev Biol. 1971:1;46(1):35-57.
8. Premack D, Woodruff G. Does the chimpanzee have a theory of mind?. Behav Brain Sci . 1978;1(4):515-26.
9. Leydesdorff L, Petersen AM, Ivanova I. Self-organization of meaning and the reflexive communication of information. Soc Sci Inf. 2017 ;56(1):4-27.
10. Fujino H, Fukushima K, Fujiyoshi A. Theory of mind and language development in Japanese children with hearing loss. Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol. 2017:1;96:77-83.
11. Ogawa A, Koyasu M. The relation between components of executive function and theory of mind in young children. The Japanese J Dev Psychol. 2008;19:171-82.
12.  Wellman HM, Peterson CC. Theory of mind, development, and deafness. Understanding other minds: Perspect from Dev Soc Neurosci. 2013: 22:51-71.
13. Schick B, De Villiers P, De Villiers J, Hoffmeister R. Language and theory of mind: A study of deaf children. Child Dev. 2007;78(2):376-96.
14. Devine RT, Hughes C. Family correlates of false belief understanding in early childhood: A meta‐analysis. Child Dev. 2018;89(3):971-87.
15. Dahlgren S, Sandberg AD, Hjelmquist E. The non-specificity of theory of mind deficits: Evidence from children with communicative disabilities. Eur J Cogn Psychol. 2003:1;15(1):129-55.
16. Falkman KW, Sandberg AD, Hjelmquist E. Theory of mind in children with severe speech and physical impairment (SSPI): A longitudinal study. Intl J Disabil Dev Educ. 2005: 1;52(2):139-57.
17. Dahlgren S, Sandberg AD, Larsson M. Theory of mind in children with severe speech and physical impairments. Res Dev Disabil. 2010: 1;31(2):617-24.
18. Holck P, Sandberg AD, Nettelbladt U. Inferential ability in children with cerebral palsy, spina bifida and pragmatic language impairment. Res Dev Disabil. 2010:1;31(1):140-50.
19. Sundqvist A, Rönnberg J. Advanced theory of mind in children using augmentative and alternative communication. Commun Disord Q. 2010;31(2):86-97.
20. Caillies S, Hody A, Calmus A. Theory of mind and irony comprehension in children with cerebral palsy. Res Dev Disabil. 2012: 1;33(5):1380-8.
21. Clarke MT, Loganathan D, Swettenham J. Assessing true and false belief in young children with cerebral palsy through anticipatory gaze behaviours: A pilot study. Res Dev Disabil. 2012:1;33(6):2058-66.
22. Wimmer H, Perner J. Beliefs about beliefs: Representation and constraining function of wrong beliefs in young children's understanding of deception. Cogn. 1983: 1;13(1):103-28.
23. Perner J, Wimmer H. “John thinks that Mary thinks that…” attribution of second-order beliefs by 5-to 10-year-old children. J Exp Child Psychol . 1985: 1;39(3):437-71.
24. Bartsch K, Wellman H. Young children's attribution of action to beliefs and desires. Child Dev. 1989: 1:946-64.
25. Dunn LM, Dunn LM. Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test. American Guidance Service. Circle Pines, MN. 1997.
26. Bishop DV. Development of the Children's Communication Checklist (CCC): A method for assessing qualitative aspects of communicative impairment in children. J Child Psychol Psychiatry. 1998;39(6):879-91.
27. Hellquist B, Nya SI. Språkligt impressivt test för barn. Lund: Pedagogisk Design. 1982.
28. Nauclér K, Magnusson E. Identification and correction of syntactically unacceptable sentences [Working Papers 42]. Lund, Sweden: Lund University, Dept. of Linguistics. 1994.
29. Lecocq,P. The ECOSSE: A French tool for evaluating syntactic-semantic comprehension.Villeneuve d’Ascq, France: Septentrion University Press. 1996.
 30. Masidlover M, Knowles W. Derbyshire language scheme: Rapid screening test. Derby:Derbyshire County Council. 1979.
 31. Byrne A, MacDonald J, Buckley S. Reading, language and memory skills: A comparative longitudinal study of children with Down syndrome and their mainstream peers. Br J Educ Psychol. 2002;72(4):513-29.