Name: Tom Task Selector
Author: NeuroAIHub

Buscar habilidades.../

Level	Construct	Age of Emergence	Key Task	Source
1	Diverse desires	~3 years	Diverse desires task	Wellman & Liu, 2004
2	Diverse beliefs	~3-4 years	Diverse beliefs task	Wellman & Liu, 2004
3	Knowledge access	~4 years	Knowledge access task	Wellman & Liu, 2004
4	First-order false belief	~4-5 years	Sally-Anne (Wimmer & Perner, 1983)	Wellman et al., 2001
5	Hidden emotion	~5-6 years	Appearance-reality emotion task	Wellman & Liu, 2004
6	Second-order false belief	~6-7 years	Ice-cream van task	Perner & Wimmer, 1985
7	Faux pas recognition	~9-11 years	Faux pas stories	Baron-Cohen et al., 1999
8	Advanced/adult ToM	Adolescence-adult	Strange Stories, RMET	Happe, 1994; Baron-Cohen et al., 2001

Dimension	Description	Example Tasks
Belief attribution	Understanding others' beliefs, especially false beliefs	Sally-Anne, unexpected contents
Desire attribution	Understanding others' desires differ from one's own	Diverse desires task
Intention attribution	Understanding goal-directed action and intentionality	Intentional vs. accidental actions
Emotion attribution	Understanding others' emotions from context/cues	Hidden emotion, RMET
Visual perspective-taking	Level 1: what others see; Level 2: how others see it	Director task, Flavell tasks
Implicit/spontaneous ToM	Automatic, non-verbal ToM processing	Anticipatory looking, VoE paradigms

What is the participant's age?
 |
 +-- Infants (6-24 months)
 | --> Implicit ToM tasks only
 | --> Anticipatory looking (Southgate et al., 2007)
 | --> Violation-of-expectation (Onishi & Baillargeon, 2005)
 |
 +-- Preschoolers (3-5 years)
 | --> Wellman & Liu (2004) scale (5 tasks)
 | --> Sally-Anne / Change of location (Wimmer & Perner, 1983)
 | --> Unexpected contents / Smarties task (Gopnik & Astington, 1988)
 |
 +-- School-age (6-12 years)
 | --> Second-order false belief (Perner & Wimmer, 1985)
 | --> Faux pas stories (Baron-Cohen et al., 1999)
 | --> Strange Stories (Happe, 1994) -- simplified versions
 |
 +-- Adolescents and Adults
 --> Strange Stories (Happe, 1994)
 --> RMET (Baron-Cohen et al., 2001)
 --> Director task (Keysar et al., 2003)
 --> Faux pas test (Baron-Cohen et al., 1999)
 --> Movie for the Assessment of Social Cognition (MASC; Dziobek et al., 2006)

What is the target population?
 |
 +-- Typically developing children
 | --> Wellman & Liu (2004) scale (most validated)
 | --> Standard false belief tasks
 |
 +-- Autism spectrum (children)
 | --> Sally-Anne (Baron-Cohen et al., 1985)
 | --> Unexpected contents (Perner et al., 1989)
 | --> Happe Strange Stories (if verbal)
 | |
 | NOTE: Many autistic individuals pass standard false
 | belief tasks by age 6-8. Use advanced tasks to
 | avoid ceiling effects (Happe, 1994).
 |
 +-- Autism spectrum (adults)
 | --> RMET (Baron-Cohen et al., 2001)
 | --> Faux pas test (Baron-Cohen et al., 1999)
 | --> MASC (Dziobek et al., 2006)
 | --> Director task (Keysar et al., 2003)
 |
 +-- Brain injury / neurological
 | --> Faux pas test (Stone et al., 1998)
 | --> Strange Stories (Happe, 1994)
 | --> RMET (Baron-Cohen et al., 2001)
 | --> Yoni task (Shamay-Tsoory & Aharon-Peretz, 2007)
 |
 +-- Aging / dementia
 --> Faux pas test (Gregory et al., 2002)
 --> RMET (Baron-Cohen et al., 2001)
 --> Strange Stories (Happe, 1994)
 --> Note: control for processing speed and working memory

What ToM construct are you targeting?
 |
 +-- Belief attribution
 | --> False belief tasks (Sally-Anne, unexpected contents)
 | --> Second-order false belief
 |
 +-- Emotion recognition
 | --> RMET (Baron-Cohen et al., 2001)
 | --> Cambridge Mindreading Face-Voice Battery
 |
 +-- Social reasoning / pragmatics
 | --> Faux pas test
 | --> Strange Stories
 |
 +-- Visual perspective-taking
 | --> Director task (Keysar et al., 2003)
 | --> Flavell Level 1/2 tasks
 |
 +-- Implicit / spontaneous ToM
 --> Anticipatory looking paradigms
 --> Dot-perspective task (Samson et al., 2010)

Property	Value	Source
Original citation	Wimmer & Perner, 1983; Baron-Cohen et al., 1985
Age range	3-6 years (standard); used in ASD at any age	Wellman et al., 2001
Administration	Acted out with dolls/puppets or illustrated story	Baron-Cohen et al., 1985
Test question	"Where will Sally look for her marble?"
Control questions	Reality question + memory question (must pass both)	Baron-Cohen et al., 1985
Scoring	Pass/fail (binary)
Passing criterion	Correct test question + both control questions	Baron-Cohen et al., 1985
Typical passing rates	~20% at 3 years, ~50% at 4 years, ~90% by 5-6 years	Wellman et al., 2001
Limitations	Ceiling by age 6; binary scoring limits sensitivity	Wellman et al., 2001

Property	Value	Source
Original citation	Gopnik & Astington, 1988; Perner et al., 1987
Age range	3-6 years	Gopnik & Astington, 1988
Administration	Show container (e.g., Smarties box) with unexpected contents (e.g., pencils)
Test question	"What will [name] think is in the box?" (other's belief)
Self question	"What did you think was in the box before I opened it?" (own prior belief)
Scoring	Pass: predicts other will say "Smarties" (or typical contents)

Property	Value	Source
Original citation	Perner & Wimmer, 1985
Age range	6-9 years	Perner & Wimmer, 1985
Construct	"She thinks that he thinks that..."
Administration	Story scenario (ice-cream van paradigm)	Perner & Wimmer, 1985
Test question	"Where does Mary think John will go to buy ice cream?"
Passing rates	~10% at 5 years, ~50% at 7 years, ~90% by 9 years	Perner & Wimmer, 1985
Comprehension questions	2-3 memory/comprehension checks required	Standard practice

Property	Value	Source
Original citation	Baron-Cohen et al., 2001
Version	Revised version (2001) -- 36 items	Baron-Cohen et al., 2001
Age range	Adults (16+ years); child version available (28 items)	Baron-Cohen et al., 2001
Administration	Forced-choice: pick 1 of 4 mental state words matching eye region photo
Scoring	Total correct out of 36 (adults) or 28 (children)
Adult norms	Mean ~ 26.2 (SD ~ 3.6) in typical adults	Baron-Cohen et al., 2001
ASD norms	Mean ~ 21.9 (SD ~ 6.6) in autistic adults	Baron-Cohen et al., 2001
Reliability	Internal consistency: Cronbach's alpha ~ 0.60-0.70 (modest)	Olderbak et al., 2015
Limitations	Low reliability, possible confound with emotion recognition vs. ToM per se	Olderbak et al., 2015

Property	Value	Source
Original citation	Baron-Cohen et al., 1999
Age range	9 years to adult	Baron-Cohen et al., 1999
Administration	Read 10 faux pas stories + 10 control stories
Questions per story	Detection ("Did someone say something awkward?"), identification, belief, empathy	Baron-Cohen et al., 1999
Scoring	0-2 points per question; max 60 for faux pas stories	Baron-Cohen et al., 1999
Control stories	Must also score comprehension questions for controls
Sensitivity	Good for detecting subtle ToM deficits in ASD, right hemisphere lesions, frontotemporal dementia	Stone et al., 1998; Gregory et al., 2002

Property	Value	Source
Original citation	Happe, 1994
Construct	Advanced ToM: irony, white lie, double bluff, misunderstanding, persuasion, appearance/reality, figure of speech, sarcasm, forgetting, contrary emotions
Administration	Read vignettes, open-ended question: "Why did X say that?"
Scoring	0 (incorrect), 1 (partial), 2 (full mental state reference)	Happe, 1994
Number of stories	8-16 ToM stories + physical control stories	Happe, 1994
Age range	Children (8+) and adults	Happe, 1994
Reliability	Inter-rater reliability for scoring: kappa > 0.85 recommended	Happe, 1994

Property	Value	Source
Original citation	Keysar et al., 2003
Construct	Level 2 perspective-taking under communicative demand
Administration	Grid of objects; director (behind grid) instructs participant to move objects; some slots occluded from director's view
Measure	Eye movements (egocentric intrusions), accuracy, RT	Keysar et al., 2003
Key finding	Even adults show egocentric errors on ~30-50% of critical trials	Keysar et al., 2003
Age range	7 years to adult	Dumontheil et al., 2010

Task	Internal Consistency	Test-Retest	Source
Sally-Anne (single item)	N/A (binary)	Variable	Wellman et al., 2001
Wellman & Liu Scale	Guttman scalability > 0.90	Moderate	Wellman & Liu, 2004
RMET	alpha ~ 0.60-0.70	r ~ 0.63-0.83	Olderbak et al., 2015; Fernandez-Abascal et al., 2013
Faux pas test	alpha ~ 0.70-0.80	Not well-established	Baron-Cohen et al., 1999
Strange Stories	Inter-rater: kappa > 0.85	Moderate	Happe, 1994
MASC	alpha ~ 0.70	Adequate	Dziobek et al., 2006

Confound	Impact	Mitigation	Source
Verbal demands	False belief tasks require comprehension of complex sentences	Include vocabulary/language control measure	Milligan et al., 2007
Narrative complexity	Second-order tasks have heavy memory load	Add comprehension check questions	Perner & Wimmer, 1985
Word knowledge (RMET)	Vocabulary confound in forced-choice emotion labels	Control for verbal IQ	Olderbak et al., 2015

Confound	Impact	Mitigation	Source
Inhibitory control	Must inhibit own knowledge to attribute false belief	Include inhibition measure (e.g., Stroop, day-night)	Carlson & Moses, 2001
Working memory	Must hold multiple perspectives simultaneously	Control for WM span	Carlson & Moses, 2001
Cognitive flexibility	Must switch between self and other perspective	Include set-shifting measure	Carlson & Moses, 2001

Population	Recommended Battery	Rationale
Preschool (3-5y)	Wellman & Liu Scale (5 tasks) + diverse desires + diverse beliefs	Guttman-scalable, captures developmental progression (Wellman & Liu, 2004)
School-age (6-12y)	First-order FB + second-order FB + faux pas + Strange Stories subset	Spans implicit to advanced ToM
ASD (children)	Sally-Anne + unexpected contents + Strange Stories (simplified)	Avoids ceiling; includes advanced items
ASD (adults)	RMET + faux pas + MASC + Director task	Multiple constructs; includes real-time and reflective tasks
Neurological (adults)	Faux pas + Strange Stories + RMET	Sensitive to frontal and right hemisphere lesions (Stone et al., 1998)
Aging research	Faux pas + RMET + Strange Stories	Control for processing speed; established aging norms

Baron-Cohen, S., Leslie, A. M., & Frith, U. (1985). Does the autistic child have a "theory of mind"? Cognition, 21(1), 37-46.
Baron-Cohen, S., O'Riordan, M., Stone, V., Jones, R., & Plaisted, K. (1999). Recognition of faux pas by normally developing children and children with Asperger syndrome or high-functioning autism. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 29(5), 407-418.
Baron-Cohen, S., Wheelwright, S., Hill, J., Raste, Y., & Plumb, I. (2001). The "Reading the Mind in the Eyes" test revised version. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 42(2), 241-251.
Carlson, S. M., & Moses, L. J. (2001). Individual differences in inhibitory control and children's theory of mind. Child Development, 72(4), 1032-1053.
Dumontheil, I., Apperly, I. A., & Blakemore, S. J. (2010). Online usage of theory of mind continues to develop in late adolescence. Developmental Science, 13(2), 331-338.
Dziobek, I., Fleck, S., Kalbe, E., Rogers, K., Hassenstab, J., Brand, M., ... & Convit, A. (2006). Introducing MASC: A movie for the assessment of social cognition. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 36(5), 623-636.
Fernandez-Abascal, E. G., Cabello, R., Fernandez-Berrocal, P., & Baron-Cohen, S. (2013). Test-retest reliability of the "Reading the Mind in the Eyes" test. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 43(9), 2220-2223.
German, T. P., & Hehman, J. A. (2006). Representational and executive selection resources in "theory of mind." Psychological Science, 17(2), 130-132.
Gopnik, A., & Astington, J. W. (1988). Children's understanding of representational change and its relation to the understanding of false belief. Child Development, 59(1), 26-37.
Gregory, C., Lough, S., Stone, V., Erzinclioglu, S., Martin, L., Baron-Cohen, S., & Hodges, J. R. (2002). Theory of mind in patients with frontal variant frontotemporal dementia and Alzheimer's disease. Journal of Neurology, Neurosurgery & Psychiatry, 72(6), 752-756.
Happe, F. G. (1994). An advanced test of theory of mind. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 24(2), 129-154.
Keysar, B., Lin, S., & Barr, D. J. (2003). Limits on theory of mind use in adults. Cognition, 89(1), 25-41.
Milligan, K., Astington, J. W., & Dack, L. A. (2007). Language and theory of mind: Meta-analysis of the relation between language ability and false-belief understanding. Child Development, 78(2), 622-646.
Olderbak, S., Wilhelm, O., Olaru, G., Geiger, M., Brenneman, M. W., & Roberts, R. D. (2015). A psychometric analysis of the Reading the Mind in the Eyes test. Assessment, 22(6), 798-806.
Onishi, K. H., & Baillargeon, R. (2005). Do 15-month-old infants understand false beliefs? , 308(5719), 255-258.

Tom Task Selector | Skills Pool

Tom Task Selector

Tom Task Selector

Theory of Mind Task Selector

Purpose

When to Use This Skill

Research Planning Protocol

⚠️ Verification Notice

ToM Construct Taxonomy

Developmental Hierarchy

Construct Dimensions

Task Selection Decision Tree

By Age Group

By Population

By Construct

Key Tasks with Parameters

First-Order False Belief: Sally-Anne Task

Unexpected Contents (Smarties Task)

Second-Order False Belief

RMET (Reading the Mind in the Eyes Test)

Faux Pas Test

Strange Stories (Happe, 1994)

Director Task (Visual Perspective-Taking)

Psychometric Considerations

Reliability Summary

Validity Concerns

Confounds and Controls

Language

Executive Function

Recommended Control Measures

Task Combination Recommendations

Comprehensive Battery by Population

Minimum Battery (2-3 tasks)

Common Pitfalls

Minimum Reporting Checklist

References

Continuous Learning V2

Continuous Learning V2

Continuous Learning V2

Continuous Learning

Continuous Learning

Pytorch Patterns