Theory of mind in naturalistic conversations between autistic and typically developing children and adolescents

Abstract

Successful social interactions are assumed to depend on theory of mind—the ability to represent others’ mental states—yet most studies of the relation between theory of mind and social-interactive success rely on non-interactive tasks that do not adequately capture the spontaneous engagement of theory of mind, a crucial component of everyday social interactions. We addressed this gap by establishing a novel observational rating scale to measure the spontaneous use of theory of mind (or lack thereof) within naturalistic conversations ( conversational ToM; cToM). In 50 age- and gender-matched dyads of autistic and typically developing youth aged 8–16 years (three dyad types: autistic–typically developing, typically developing–typically developing, autistic–autistic), we assessed cToM during 5-min unstructured conversations. We found that ratings on the cToM Negative scale, reflecting theory-of-mind-related violations of neurotypical conversational norms, were negatively associated with two forms of non-interactive theory of mind: visual-affective and spontaneous. In contrast, the cToM Positive scale, reflecting explicit mental state language and perspective-taking, was not associated with non-interactive theory of mind. Furthermore, autistic youth were rated higher than typically developing youth on cToM Negative, but the groups were rated similarly on cToM Positive. Together, these findings provide insight into multiple aspects of theory of mind in conversation and reveal a nuanced picture of the relative strengths and difficulties among autistic youth. Lay abstract Conversation is a key part of everyday social interactions. Previous studies have suggested that conversational skills are related to theory of mind, the ability to think about other people’s mental states, such as beliefs, knowledge, and emotions. Both theory of mind and conversation are common areas of difficulty for autistic people, yet few studies have investigated how people, including autistic people, use theory of mind during conversation. We developed a new way of measuring cToM using two rating scales: cToM Positive captures behaviors that show consideration of a conversation partner’s mental states, such as referring to their thoughts or feelings, whereas cToM Negative captures behaviors that show a lack of theory of mind through violations of neurotypical conversational norms, such as providing too much, too little, or irrelevant information. We measured cToM in 50 pairs of autistic and typically developing children (ages 8–16 years) during 5-min “getting to know you” conversations. Compared to typically developing children, autistic children displayed more frequent cToM Negative behaviors but very similar rates of cToM Positive behaviors. Across both groups, cToM Negative (but not Positive) ratings were related to difficulties in recognizing emotions from facial expressions and a lower tendency to talk about others’ mental states spontaneously (i.e., without being instructed to do so), which suggests that both abilities are important for theory of mind in conversation. Altogether, this study highlights both strengths and difficulties among autistic individuals, and it suggests possible avenues for further research and for improving conversational skills.