| Literature DB >> 30069471 |
U Bivona1, R Formisano1, L Mastrilli1, S Zabberoni1,2, C Caltagirone1,3, A Costa1,2.
Abstract
Background. Recently, increased interest has been shown in Theory of Mind (ToM) abilities of individuals with severe acquired brain injury (sABI). ToM impairment following sABI can be associated with altered executive functioning and/or with difficulty in decoding and elaborating emotions. Two main theoretical models have been proposed to explain the mechanisms underlying ToM in the general population: Theory Theory and Simulation Theory. This review presents and discusses the literature on ToM abilities in individuals with sABI by examining whether they sustain the applicability of the Theory Theory and/or Simulation Theory to account for ToM deficits in this clinical population. We found 32 papers that are directly aimed at investigating ToM in sABI. Results did not show the univocal predominance of one model with respect to the other in explaining ToM deficits in sABI. We hypothesised that ToM processes could be explained by coinvolvement of the two models, i.e., according to personal experience, cognitive features, or the emotional resources of the persons with sABI.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2018 PMID: 30069471 PMCID: PMC6057350 DOI: 10.1155/2018/5205642
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Biomed Res Int Impact factor: 3.411
Search results.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| ||||
| Severe acquired brain injury | social cognition | 188 | 27 | 34 |
| theory of mind | 41 | 1 | 7 | |
| mentalizing | 41 | 13 | 1 | |
| attributions | 9 | 2 | 7 | |
| perspective taking | 7 | 4 | 2 | |
| Theory Theory | 135 | 1 | 26 | |
| Simulation Theory | 3 | 1 | 1 | |
|
| ||||
| Craniocerebral trauma | social cognition | 608 | 0 | 30 |
| theory of mind | 88 | 1 | 3 | |
| mentalizing | 93 | 0 | 0 | |
| attributions | 31 | 0 | 16 | |
| perspective taking | 25 | 0 | 2 | |
| Theory Theory | 719 | 0 | 84 | |
| Simulation Theory | 15 | 0 | 10 | |
|
| ||||
| Head injury | social cognition | 633 | 14 | 217 |
| theory of mind | 92 | 8 | 24 | |
| mentalizing | 97 | 1 | 3 | |
| attributions | 34 | 16 | 145 | |
| perspective taking | 27 | 5 | 10 | |
| Theory Theory | 815 | 2 | 433 | |
| Simulation Theory | 19 | 1 | 31 | |
|
| ||||
| Severe traumatic brain injury | social cognition | 460 | 117 | 544 |
| theory of mind | 69 | 82 | 80 | |
| mentalizing | 69 | 8 | 7 | |
| attributions | 14 | 10 | 210 | |
| perspective taking | 16 | 11 | 16 | |
| Theory Theory | 398 | 12 | 470 | |
| Simulation Theory | 11 | 0 | 14 | |
|
| ||||
|
| 445 | 220 | 332 | |
Summary of studies that investigated the relationship between ToM and cognitive and emotional functions.
|
|
|
|
|
|---|---|---|---|
| Apperly et al. [ | 12 ABI (unspecified severity) | Executive functions | Not investigated |
|
| |||
| Bara et al. [ | 13 sABI | Comprehension of irony, pragmatic communication (n.s.) | Not investigated |
|
| |||
| Bibby and McDonald [ | 15 sTBI | Working memory | Not investigated |
|
| |||
| Bivona et al. [ | 28 sTBI | Executive functions | Emotional responsiveness, Empathy (n.s.) |
|
| |||
| Bivona et al. [ | 20 sTBI | Executive functions (n.s.) | Alexithymia (n.s.) |
|
| |||
| Bosco et al. [ | 30 moderate-to-severe TBI | Executive functions (n.s.) | Not investigated |
|
| |||
| Channon and Crawford [ | 7 ABI, 16 vascular, 5 cancer, 2 abscess, 1 sclerosis (unspecified severity) | Executive functions | Not investigated |
|
| |||
| Channon and Crawford [ | 10 sABI, 10 vascular (unspecified severity) | Comprehension of irony; | Not investigated |
|
| |||
| Channon et al. [ | 19 sABI | Comprehension of sarcasm | Not investigated |
|
| |||
| De Sousa et al. [ | 21 sTBI | Not investigated | Reduced psychophysiological reacti- vity during emotional stimulation |
|
| |||
| Grattan and Eslinger [ | 50 ABI, 27 infarction, 5 surgical resection of tumor, 8 aneurysm rupture, 10 closed head injury (unspecified severity) | Not investigated | Apathy |
|
| |||
| Griffin et al. [ | 11 vascular ABI (unspecified severity) | Executive functions, mentalistic attribution ability, humour rating (n.s.) | Emotion perception (n.s.) |
|
| |||
| Havet-Thomassin et al. [ | 17 sTBI | Executive functions (n.s.) | Not investigated |
|
| |||
| Henry et al. [ | 16 mild-to-moderate TBI | Executive functions | Ability to recognise facial expressions related to emotions (n.s.) |
|
| |||
| Honan et al. [ | 25 sTBI | High Working Memory | Not investigated |
|
| |||
| Martin and McDonald [ | 16 TBI (unspecified severity) | Inferential reasoning | Not investigated |
|
| |||
| Martin and McDonald [ | 21 ABI (unspecified severity) | Executive functions; Irony comprehension (n.s.) | Not investigated |
|
| |||
| McDonald and Flanagan [ | 34 sTBI | Detection of irony and lies (n.s.) | Ability to recognise emotional expressions of faces and voices (n.s.) |
|
| |||
| McDonald and Pearce [ | 9 ABI, 1 vascular (unspecified severity) | Executive functions (data applicable only to a sub-sample) | Ability to recognise facial expressions related to emotions |
|
| |||
| McDonald et al [ | 31 sTBI | Difficulty understanding insincere comments such as sarcasm | Emotion perception (n.s.) |
|
| |||
| Milders et al. [ | 17 moderate-to-severe TBI | Cognitive flexibility; Understanding Intentions and Social Situations (n.s.) | Ability to recognize emotional expressions in faces and voices (n.s.) |
|
| |||
| Milders et al. [ | 33 moderate-to-severe TBI | Executive functions | Not investigated |
|
| |||
| Milders et al. [ | 33 mild-to-severe TBI | Cognitive flexibility (n.s.) | Ability to recognise emotional expressions in faces and voices (n.s.) |
|
| |||
| Muller et al. [ | 15 sTBI | Executive functions (n.s.) | Not investigated |
|
| |||
| Neumann and coll. [ | 60 moderate-to-severe TBI | Not investigated | Alexithymia |
|
| |||
| Njomboro et al. [ | 49 ABI, 24 cerebrovascular accident, 14 head injury, 5 anoxia, 6 herpes simplex encephalitis | Executive functions (n.s.) | Apathy and perception of facial expressions of emotion (n. s.) |
|
| |||
| Rowe et al. [ | 31 ABI (unspecified severity) | Executive functions (n.s.) | Not investigated |
|
| |||
| Shamay-Tsoory et al. [ | 33 ABI, 6 vascular, 5 meningioma | Not investigated | Emotional variables of the stimuli |
|
| |||
| Shaw et al. [ | 19 ABI (unspecified severity) | Not investigated | Ability to recognise and evaluate facial expressions related to emotions (n.s.) |
|
| |||
| Spikman et al. [ | 28 moderate-to-severe ABI | Executive functions (n.s.) | Relationship between ToM and discrimination of emotions |
|
| |||
| Turkstra et al. [ | 58 moderate-to-severe TBI | Working Memory | Not investigated |
|
| |||
| Williams and Wood (2009) | 64 sTBI | Not investigated | Relationship between reduced empathy and alexithymia |
sABI: patients with severe acquired brain injury.
sTBI: patients with severe traumatic brain injury.
HCs: healthy control subjects.
n.s.: non-statistically significant relationship.
Tendency towards statistically significant relationship.
Statistically significant relationship.
Main ToM tasks.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |||
| First Order False Beliefs | Baron-Cohen et al. [ | Subject has to understand one person's (the character of a short story) belief about a belief attributed to a second person. |
|
|
| |||
| Second Order False Beliefs | Baron-Cohen et al. [ | Subject has to understand one person's belief about a belief attributed to a second and to a third person. |
|
|
| |||
| Faux Pas test | Baron-Cohen et al. [ | Subject is required to detect whether a character in a short story says something that should not be said, due to the embarrassment of the listener. |
|
|
| |||
| Reading the Mind in the Eyes test | Baron-Cohen et al. [ | Subject is required to select the most appropriate eye-driven emotion or thought in 36 grey-scale pictures of human eyes; each of them is associated with four terms related to as many emotions. |
|
|
| |||
| Social Problem Resolution Task | Channon and Crawford [ | Subjects are asked to indicate how the main character of the stories should act in several situations (responses are classified according to two criteria: social sensitivity and practical effectiveness). |
|
|
| |||
| Social Problem Fluency Task | Channon and Crawford [ | Participants are asked what the main character could do in some awkward situation (i.e., theyare asked to explain why the situation might be awkward for the main character and how awkward it was). |
|
|
| |||
| Character Intention Task | Havet-Thomassin [ | Subjects are asked to choose, as quickly as possible, the most logical conclusion to some short comic strips (i.e., three different alternatives show a character performing an action motivated by an easily recognisable intention). |
|
|
| |||
| Cartoon Task | Gallagher et al. [ | Subjects are allowed to examine a number of ToM cartoons (based on a character's lack of knowledge about a physical situation - e.g. |
|