Example Essay: “Strategies used to measure theory of mind.”

Theory of mind (TOM) is is the ability to realise that other people have their own thoughts and feelings that are different to their own. TOM is measured using a range of strategies in human development like the Reading the Mind in the Eyes Test (RMET), correlational studies and the Sally-Anne task. While each of these strategies are useful, they have some limitations that will be explained.

TOM sounds like a simple cognitive process but like memory, it has been broken down into many sub-types. Also like other cognitive processes such as memory and language, different people have different abilities in TOM which psychologists can measure. TOM is an important cognitive process to study and measure the development of in children because it is linked with many behaviours. For example, TOM is important in the emotion of empathy. If you lack TOM then it’s difficult to consider how someone else might feel or see the world. This reduces your ability to feel empathy. It’s not surprising that people with autism have low TOM as they also find it harder to recognise emotions in others and to feel empathy. TOM is also positively correlated with moral development in children and amygdala volume.

One way psychologists measure TOM is in correlational studies. They want to see if some co-variables develop alongside TOM abilities, like figuring out the mental or emotional states of other people. In these correlational studies, the TOM ability is one co-variable and the other might be amygdala volume, IQ, socioeconomic status or some variable the researchers think is linked with TOM. For example, in one study they used brain imaging to measure the volume of the amygdala in kids and adults. To measure TOM they used the “Reading the Mind in the Eyes Test” (RMET). This involves giving people just a photo of someone’s eyes and the participant having to guess which emotion they’re experience (happiness, surprise, anger, etc.) In total there are 36 photos. So to find if TOM is correlated with amygdala volume they correlate the RMET score /36 with amygdala volume. These studies show that there’s a positive correlation between amygdala volume and TOM as measured by the RMET test. In other words, kids with larger amygdala volume score better on the RMET test, whereas kids with low volume score lower. This suggests a link between amygdala volume and TOM development.

However, there are some issues with using these as a measurement of TOM. Firstly, correlation doesn’t mean causation. In this case, it’s assumed that the larger volume in the amygdala is leading to improved RMET scores, so better TOM skills. However, it might be the other way around – perhaps people have well-developed TOM skills from a young age and so this increases the size of their amygdala over time. There might also be other moderating variables that affect this connect. For example, socioeconomic status and adverse childhood experiences can affect the amygdala development. Perhaps these traumatic experiences as a kid are also affecting the TOM skills. Therefore, using correlational measurements we can’t draw cause and effect conclusions.

Another problem with using the RMET is that they’re still images of people’s eyes. They also show only just someone’s eyes. It’s shown people with autism and asperges have a harder time understanding people’s emotions from eyes, but they might use other cues to understand someone else’s emotions, like body language or mouth movements.

Another common research method used to measure TOM is the Sally-Anne false-belief task. In this task, children watch a puppet show with two girls – Sally and Anne. Sally has a basket, and a marble and Anne has a box. Sally puts her marble in the basket, leaves and then Anne puts the marble in her box. Then Anne comes back. To measure TOM kids are asked where will Anne look for her marble? To get the right answer you have to understand the perspective of Anne, that she would leave and have no clue to look in the box and not where she left it. When given to 5-year-olds, about 80% of kids get the right answer. However, the opposite is true as kids with asperges or autism only get it right about 20% of the time. This suggests a lack of TOM in these kids.

One problem with measuring behaviour in fake tasks like this is that it lacks consequences. If the kid gets the wrong answer there’s no consequence – it’s just a puppet show and not real life. The findings might not generalise to real-life situations when TOM is useful. For example, just because a kid might get the Sally-Anne task wrong, doesn’t mean they wouldn’t understand how someone might feel if they stole something from them in real life. A lack of understanding of a puppet or a cartoon strip is not the same as lacking empathy and understanding in real life.

In this essay, I’ve argued that TOM is an important cognitive skill to study for psychologists because it is correlated with other important social skills like morality and empathy. TOM is measured in studies using correlational studies, the RMET test, and tasks like the Sally-Anne task. While these can provide some useful insights into possible causes of TOM differences and effects of TOM differences, they have weaknesses based on our ability to understand causality and their real-world applicability.

(900 words)

A good introduction outlines the scope of the essay. All essay questions will contain a topic, a context and a concept. Therefore, the introduction should hit all three of these points.

It makes sense to explain the topic first in the essay. Sometimes the topic is specific, like “biological explanations.” This will give good guidance on what to write about. If it’s just “theory of mind,” there’s no guidance for students. Therefore, a good revision (and teaching) strategy is to have a central argument prepared – what about each topic should the students understand and be able to explain. 

An explanation of the topic is needed because the rubric says students need to show “understanding of the content.”

In my mind, this is an unfair question because the concept is “measurement,” not “measure.” A concept is an abstract idea, strategies to measure TOM are very concrete things. That said, the specimen paper highlights the need for students to understand human behaviour and the research methods used to study that behaviour. This is why studies are still essential in the course.

I’ve always argued that the most logical essays explain a topic, use the research and then evaluate. With the new guide, my advice remains. The one key for top students to remember is to link to the concept throughout. This can be done in the introduction and the topic sentences and summary sentences in each paragraph. 

Essays require “critical analysis,” which means “critical thinking.” Furthermore, the three command terms for the essay are evaluate, discuss and to what extent. We know the guide says evaluate and discuss mean the same thing. To what extent means to “consider the merits or otherwise of an argument.” Sounds like an evaluation to me. Therefore, we know students should be prepared to critically evaluate the topic and/or research. All that’s changed is they link it to a concept.

You might be wondering where the research and studies fits in all of this. If you look at the BIG SIX (as I’ve started calling them), you’ll see they’re all about research. You cannot, therefore, show conceptual understanding of the topics without understanding research.

I never try to write perfect essays. Remember that only about 5% of students get 7s in Psych, and yet historically about 70% has been the cut off mark. That means to get a 7 a student is aiming for a 11+ out of 15 in this essay. This essay would score that.