تحول نظریه ذهن در کودکان کم‏توان ذهنی و عادی: ارتباط آن با سبک دلبستگی و سلامت روان مادران

نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی

نویسندگان

1 دکتری روان شناسی و آموزش کودکان استثنایی، استادیار گروه روان شناسی دانشگاه بجنورد، بجنورد، ایران

2 کارشناسی ارشد روانشناسی بالینی، دانشگاه آزاد بیرجند، بیرجند، ایران

چکیده

مقدمه و اهداف
هدف پژوهش حاضر مقایسه تحول نظریه ذهن در کودکان عادی و کم‏توانی‏ذهنی و تعیین ارتباط آن با سبک‏های دلبستگی و سلامت روان مادران بود.
مواد و روش­ ها
روش پژوهش توصیفی از نوع همبستگی و علی-مقایسه‏ای بود. نمونه شامل 74 کودک با کم­توانی ذهنی و 100 کودک عادی بود که با استفاده از روش نمونه‏گیری تمام­شماری و در دسترس در شهر بیرجند انتخاب شدند. مادران پرسش­نامه سلامت عمومی و پرسش­نامه سبک‏های دلبستگی بزرگسالان را تکمیل کردند، نظریه ذهن کودکان نیز از طریق آزمون نظریه ذهن ارزیابی شد.
یافته­ ها
نتایج پژوهش نشان داد که بین اکتساب نظریه ذهن در سطوح اول و دوم در کودکان عادی و کم‏توان ذهنی تفاوت معناداری وجود دارد (05/0P<)، اما در سطح سوم بین کودکان عادی و کم‏توان ذهنی تفاوت معناداری وجود ندارد (05/0<P). یافته‏های پژوهش حاضر همچنین نشان داد بین نظریه ذهن با سبک دلبستگی و سلامت روان رابطه‏ی معناداری وجود ندارد (05/0<P).
نتیجه­ گیری
می‏توان نتیجه گرفت بین عملکرد نظریه ذهن کودکان عادی و کم‏توان ذهنی تفاوت وجود دارد، اما بین سبک‏های دلبستگی و سلامت روان مادران با نظریه ذهن رابطه معناداری وجود ندارد.

کلیدواژه‌ها

موضوعات


عنوان مقاله [English]

Development of the Theory of Mind in Intellectually Disabled and Normal Children and Its Relationship with Attachment Styles and Mental Health

نویسندگان [English]

  • Roghayeh Asadi Gandomani 1
  • Abbas Nesayan 1
  • Maryam Maleki 2
1 PhD of Psychology and Education of Exceptional Children, Assistant Professor, University of Bojnord, Bojnord, Iran
2 MA of Clinical Psychology, Azad University, Birjand Branch, Birjand, Iran
چکیده [English]

Background and Aims: The aim of the present study was to compare the theory of mind in intellectually disabled and normal children and to determine the relationship between theory of mind and attachment style and mental health.
Materials and Methods The method of study was descriptive correlational and Ex post facto. The sample consisted of 74 children with intellectual disabilities and 100 normal children who were selected using census sampling and available sampling in Birjand city. Mothers completed General Health Questionnaire (GHQ) and Adult Attachment Style Questionnaire and the theory of mind in children was evaluated through the theory of mind Test.
Result: The results showed that there is a significant difference between children with intellectual disability and normal children in the first and second levels of acquisition of the theory of mind (p<0/05), but there is no significant difference between children with intellectual disability and normal children in the third level of acquisition of the theory of mind (p>0/05).
Conclusion: Also, the result showed that there is no significant relationship between theory of mind with attachment style and mental health (p>0/05). Therefore, it can be concluded that there is a significant difference between the acquisition of the theory of mind in children with intellectual disability and normal children, but there is no significant relationship between the theory of mind as well as attachment style and mental health in mothers.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Theory of mind
  • Attachment styles
  • Mental health
  • Intellectual disability
1.   Astington JW, Edward M. The Development of Theory of Mind in Early Childhood. Social Cognition. 2010:1-5.##
2.   Korkmaz B. Theory of Mind and Neurodevelopmental Disorders of Childhood. Pediatric Research. 2011;69(5): 101-8. ##
3.   Bradford B, Jentzsch I &  Gomez J. From self to social cognition: Theory of Mind mechanisms and their relation to Executive Functioning Cognition. 2015;138:21-34. ##
4.   Wang Z,  Devine R.T, Wong K & Hughes C. Theory of mind and executive function during middle childhood across cultures. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology. 2016;149:6-22. ##
5.   Devine R & Hughes C. Relations Between False Belief Understanding and Executive Function in Early Childhood: A Meta-Analysis Child Development. 2014;85(5):1777-94. ##
6.   Ahmed F.S, & Miller L. S. Executive function mechanisms of theory of mind. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders. 2011;41:667-78. ##
7.   Hughes C, & Devine R. T. A social perspective on theory of mind. In R. M. Lerner (Ed.), Socioemotional processes (7th ed..  In & M. E. Lamb (Eds.). Handbook of child psychology (7th ed) (Vol 3, pp 564-609) Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley. 2015. ##
8.   Baron-Cohen S, Leslie A, Frith U. Does the autistic child have a “theory of mind”? . Cognition. 1985;21:37-46. ##
9.   Thirion- Marissiaux AF, Nader- Grosbois N. Theory of mind ‘‘emotion’’, developmental characteristics and social understanding in children and adolescents with intellectual Disabilities Research in Developmental Disabilities 2008;29:414-30. ##
10. Porter M, Coltheart M. theory of mind in Williams syndrome assessed using a nonverbal task. J autism Dev Disord 2008;38:806-14. ##
11. Mashhadi A, Mohseni N. A comparative study of the theory of mind competence and mental maintenance in the number of mentally retarded children and normal children of pre-school education possible. Journal of Psychology. 2007;10:155-34. ##
12. Ghamarani A, Alborzi Sh, Khayer M. Validity and reliability tests of theory of mind in a group of normal and mental retarded students in Shiraz. . Journal of Psychology. 2007;10:199 81. ##
13. Abbeduto L, Short-Meyerson K, Dolish J & Benson G. Relationship between theory of mind and language ability in children and adolescents with intellectual disability. Journal of Intellectual Disability Research. 2004;48:150-9. ##
14. Pavarini G, Souza D & Hawk C. Parental Practices and Theory of Mind Development. Journal of  Child and Family  Studies. 2013;22:844-53. ##
15. Hünefeldt T, Laghi F, Ortu F, Belardinelli MO. The relationship between ‘theory of mind’and attachment-related anxiety and avoidance in Italian adolescents. Journal of adolescence. 2013 Jun 30;36(3):613-21. ##
16.  Repacholi B, & Trapolini T. Attachment and preschool children’s understanding of maternal versus non-maternal psychological states British Journal of Developmental Psychology. 2004;22: 395-415. ##
17. Symons DK & Clark S. E. A longitudinal study of mother–child relationships and theory of mind in the preschool period. Social Development. 2000;9:3-23. ##
18. McElwain NL, & Volling B. L. Attachment security and parental sensitivity during infancy: Associations with friendship quality and false-belief understanding at age 4. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships. 2004;21:639-67. ##
19. Steele M, Steele H, Croft C, & Fonagy P. Infant mother attachment at one year predicts children’s understanding of mixed emotions at 6 years. Social Development. 1999;8:161-78. ##
20. Onti L. L & Thampson R.A. Attachment , Parent-Child discourse and theory of mind development Blackwell Publishing. 2008:47-61. ##
21. Assadi Gandomani R, Nesayan A, Sharify Dramadi P. Attechment parent and theory of mind intellectual disability student. Psychology of Exceptional Indivtual 2013;2(8):99-116. ##     
22. Rigby J, Conroy S, Miele-Norton M, Pawlby S & Happ F. Theory of mind as a predictor of maternal sensitivity in women with severe mental illness. Psychological Medicine 2016;46:1853-63. ##
23. Taghavi S. Normalization of General Health Questionnaire (GHQ) on Shiraz University. . Daneshvar Raftar. 2000;15(28): 12-1. ##
24. Taheri M. The relationship between parental attachment and social maturity of mentally retarded students of Shiraz. . Master's thesis, University of Welfare and Rehabilitation Sciences. 2010. ##
25. Besharat M.A. Making and norm-seeking adult attachment scale. (Report research). Faculty of Psychology and Educational Sciences of Tehran University. 2001. ##
26. Harrison M. Executive function, parenting style, theory of mind. MA thesis, University of Oregon. 2006. ##
27. McAlister A, Peterson C. A longitudinal study of child siblings and theory of mind development. Cognitive  Development. 2007;22(2):258-70. ##