Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41149763›Full record

ArticleJournal of Intelligence2025

Discrimination of False Response from Object Reality in False Belief Test in Preschool Children.

Melis Süngü, Tevfik Alıcı

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of Intelligence, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

2 authors.

Melis SüngüFaculty of Economics, Administrative and Social Sciences, Antalya Bilim University, 07190 Antalya, Turkey.ORCID 0000-0001-5682-6846
Tevfik AlıcıFaculty of Arts and Science, Bursa Uludağ University, 16059 Bursa, Turkey.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The first-order false belief (FB) test is frequently employed to assess theory of mind (ToM); however, it faces substantial criticism regarding its inadequacies. Critics argue that the responses remain binary and are influenced by the presence and location of the object. This study aims to address these criticisms by manipulating an object's location through three alternative FB tasks, thereby enhancing the understanding of children's reasoning strategies (reality, belief, or perceptual access reasoning) and offering a language skill-independent measure of ToM. This study involved 150 children aged 3-6 years who were administered standard and three alternative FB tasks along with a receptive vocabulary acquisition test. The findings revealed that children predominantly utilized reality reasoning, identifying the object's location as the correct response. However, in a condition where the object was physically removed, the percentage of correct responses increased significantly, and the use of belief reasoning increased. While age and language skills were found to be directly correlated with FB performance, the object's interference with belief reasoning in younger children was reduced. In light of these findings, the three alternative tasks are posited to offer a promising, more accurate measure of FB understanding, independent of the object's presence and language skill.

Indexed as

false belief testobject’s locationtheory of mind

Identifiers

PMID41149763
PMCPMC12565334

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.