Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30150960›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in psychology2018

Why Pragmatics and Theory of Mind Do Not (Completely) Overlap.

Francesca M Bosco, Maurizio Tirassa, Ilaria Gabbatore

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in psychology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 38 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
38citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

38 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. The Intriguingly Social N400 of Preverbal Infants.Developmental neurobiology · 2026
    Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Pragmatic comprehension and inferential ability: interplay with executive functions and Theory of Mind.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2025
    Article
  15. Ten years of using the APACS test: a multistudy cross-diagnostic analysis of pragmatic profiles and their relationship with Theory of Mind.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2025
    Article
  16. Re-evaluating Theory of Mind evaluation in large language models.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2025
    Article
  17. Affective Theory of Mind and linguistic intimacy in irony production: a developmental perspective.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2025
    Review
  18. Understanding Theory of Mind-pragmatics relationship through the spectrum of neurodegenerative diseases.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2025
    Review
  19. Theory of Mind and the brain substrates of direct and indirect communicative action understanding.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2025
    Review
  20. Pragmatics partially segregated from Theory of Mind: evidence from resting-state functional connectivity.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2025
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Francesca M BoscoDepartment of Psychology, University of Turin, Turin, Italy.
Maurizio TirassaDepartment of Psychology, University of Turin, Turin, Italy.
Ilaria GabbatoreDepartment of Psychology, University of Turin, Turin, Italy.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Aim of the paper is to discuss the extent to which pragmatics, i.e., the ability to use language and other expressive means to convey meaning in a specific interactional context, overlaps with Theory of Mind (ToM), i.e., the ability to ascribe mental states to oneself and the others. We present empirical data available in the current literature concerning the relation between these two faculties, with specific reference to the developmental and clinical domains. Part of the literature we take into account appears to show that ToM does correlate with pragmatic ability; however, other studies appear to show that pragmatic ability alone cannot explain the empirical differences of performance across different kinds of pragmatic tasks, and therefore that another, at least partially different faculty is required to account for human communication. We argue that to conceive pragmatics as a sort of subcomponent of ToM, and thus to conflate or reduce the notion of pragmatics into the (wider) notion of ToM, is not theoretically correct and a possible cause of methodological confusion in the relevant empirical research. It thus turns out to be necessary that the two faculties be investigated with separate theories as well as different experimental tasks.

Indexed as

cognitive pragmaticsexperimental pragmaticsinferential abilitypragmaticstheory of mind

Identifiers

PMID30150960
PMCPMC6099790

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.