ABSTRACT
The main aim of this study was to investigate the existence and the direction of a causal relationship between theory of mind (ToM) and metaphor comprehension during middle childhood. To this purpose, we used a compelling training design, involving 53 typically developing children (25 M, pre-training Mage = 9 years; 3 months, SD = 0;4, age-range = 8;9-9;10) who were randomly assigned either to a ToM or a metaphor comprehension training (MetaCom) condition. Training programs were matched in structure and length and already proved effective in previous studies. Before and after the intervention, children were assessed for both advanced ToM (Strange Stories task) and metaphor comprehension (Physical and Mental Metaphors task). Groups were equivalent at baseline for the focus (ToM and metaphor comprehension) and the control variables (grammar, receptive vocabulary, reading comprehension, and working memory). Results showed that the two training programs significantly differ in their effect on ToM and metaphor comprehension. While both groups significantly improved in the respective focus variables (children in the ToM training improved in ToM skills and children in the MetaCom training improved in metaphor comprehension), the MetaCom training had a significant cross-domain effect on ToM. Conversely, the ToM training did not enhance children’s metaphor comprehension. Overall, this study suggests a driving role of metaphor comprehension in the development of advanced ToM, rather than vice versa.
Acknowledgments
The authors thank the school staff, all the children who took part in the study, and their parents.
3.5.1. Data availability statement
The dataset analyzed in this study is available in the OSF repository at the link https://osf.io/zpe9r/?view_only=11d59f63b88d4688b6d1fc705cc3fdc3.
Declaration of interest statement
The authors report no conflicts of interest. The authors alone are responsible for the content and writing of this article.
Notes
1 Of the 13 participants excluded, 4 (1 in the MetaCom and 3 in the ToM group) had a diagnosis of specific learning disability or developmental delay, 4 (1 in the MetaCom and 3 in the ToM group) did not speak Italian from birth, 3 (3 in the ToM group) missed the pre- or post-test assessment, and 2 (1 in the MetaCom 1 in the ToM group) scored at ceiling at pre-training.
2 This study was part of a larger training project and the MetaCom sample was included in another study (with different exclusion criteria; Tonini et al. Citation2022).
3 Results remained significant when we added age (in months) as a covariate: Outcomes X Time X Group interaction, F(1,46) = 4.97, p = .031, ηp2 = .10.
Additional information
Funding
Notes on contributors
Paola Del Sette
P. Del Sette was responsible for the conceptualization, methodology, investigation, data curation, formal analysis, writing of the original draft, and visualization. V. Bambini was responsible for the conceptualization, methodology, and writing of the original draft. E. Tonini was responsible for methodology and investigation. S. Lecce was responsible for conceptualization, methodology, writing of the original draft, and resources.