MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W4391012097 · doi:10.21009/jpud.172.01

Theory of Mind, Roles, and the Development of Emotion Regulation in Early Childhood

2023· article· en· W4391012097 sur OpenAlexaboutno aff
Erna Risnawati, Laila Meiliyandrie Indah Wardani, Alpin Herman Saputra, Muktia Pramitasari

Notice bibliographique

RevueJPUD - Jurnal Pendidikan Usia Dini · 2023
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineSocial Sciences
ThématiqueEducational Methods and Impacts
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésTheory of mindPsychologyEmpathyMediationConstruct (python library)Developmental psychologyEarly childhoodProsocial behaviorScale (ratio)Cognitive psychologySocial psychologyCognition

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

The ability to regulate children's emotions is the basis for psychosocial development which is the key to future success, and they can quickly adapt to other people or situations that may not always be comfortable for them. Theory of mind (ToM) is a construct used to describe the ability to interpret other people's mental states, which then develops into the ability to empathize. This study examines how the theory of mind contributes to the development of emotion regulation in children aged 4, 5, and 6 years. This research used a quasi-experimental design to find the effect of ToM stimulation on children's emotional regulation. 109 respondents were selected using a purposive sampling technique. The scales used in this research are the PreBers scale to examine children's emotional regulation and the ToM scale. The research results showed that the influence of ToM development on children's emotional regulation was 52.4%. The results of this research highlight that the better the child acquires a Theory of Mind, the better the development of the child's emotional regulation. Furthermore, these findings are significant for early childhood education providers to develop programs to optimize ToM acquisition from childhood. Keywords: theory of mind, empathy, emotion regulation, children aged 4, 5, and 6 years References: Benita, M., Levkovitz, T., & Roth, G. (2017). Integrative emotion regulation predicts adolescents’ prosocial behavior through the mediation of empathy. Learning and Instruction, 50, 14–20. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2016.11.004 Cress, C. J., Synhorst, L., Epstein, M. H., & Allen, E. (2012). Confirmatory factor analysis of the preschool behavioral and emotional rating scale (PreBERS) with preschool children with disabilities. Assessment for Effective Intervention, 37(4), 203–211. https://doi.org/10.1177/1534508411433499 Cress, C., Lambert, M. C., & Epstein, M. H. (2016). Factor Analysis of the Preschool Behavioral and Emotional Rating Scale for Children in Head Start Programs. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 34(5), 473–486. https://doi.org/10.1177/0734282915617630 Diane E.Papalia; Gabriella Martorell. (2014). Experience Human Development (13th ed.). McGraw Hill-Education. Dunfield, K. A., & Kuhlmeier, V. A. (2013). Classifying prosocial behavior: Children’s responses to instrumental need, emotional distress, and material desire. Child Development, 84(5), 1766–1776. https://doi.org/10.1111/cdev.12075 Eisenberg, N., Fabes, R. A., & Spinrad, T. L. (2007). Prososial Development. Handbook of Child Psychology, 73. Fitzpatrick, P., Frazier, J. A., Cochran, D., Mitchell, T., Coleman, C., & Schmidt, R. C. (2018). Relationship Between Theory of Mind, Emotion Recognition, and Social Synchrony in Adolescents With and Without Autism. Frontiers in Psychology, 9(July), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.01337 Glenwright, M., & Pexman, P. M. (2010). Development of children’s ability to distinguish sarcasm and verbal irony. Journal of Child Language, 37(2), 429–451. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0305000909009520 Graham, A., & Fitzgerald, R. (2011). Supporting children’s social and emotional well-being: Does “having a say” matter? Children and Society, 25(6), 447–457. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1099-0860.2010.00295.x Hum, K., & Lewis, M. (2013). Emotion Regulation in Children. Handbook of Self-Regulatory Processes in …, 33(April), 102–112. http://books.google.com/books?hl=en&lr=&id=o9DG7crxtZoC&oi=fnd&pg=PA173&dq=Emotion+Regulation+in+Children+With&ots=Lh-WsDVhYR&sig=9M0LvXTiIxBAP85dfTvmEIvqJWA Imuta, K., Henry, J. D., Slaughter, V., & Ruffman, T. (2016). Supplemental Material for Theory of Mind and Prosocial Behavior in Childhood: A Meta-Analytic Review. Developmental Psychology, 52(8), 1192–1205. https://doi.org/10.1037/dev0000140.supp Kuntoro, I. A., Risnawati, E., & Collier-Baker, E. (2019). The development of mental time travel in Indonesian children. Diversity in Unity: Perspectives from Psychology and Behavioral Sciences, 91–98. https://doi.org/10.1201/9781315225302-12 Lane, J. D., Wellman, H. M., Olson, S. L., LaBounty, J., & Kerr, D. C. R. (2010). Theory of mind and emotional understanding predict moral development in early childhood. British Journal of Developmental Psychology, 28(4), 871–889. https://doi.org/10.1348/026151009X483056 Lee, K., Sidhu, D. M., & Pexman, P. M. (2021). Teaching sarcasm: Evaluating metapragmatic training for typically developing children. Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology, 75(2), 139–145. https://doi.org/10.1037/cep0000228 Lei, Y., Wang, Y., Wang, C., Wang, J., Lou, Y., & Li, H. (2019). Taking familiar others’ perspectives to regulate our own emotion: An event-related potential study. Frontiers in Psychology, 10(JUN), 1–9. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.01419 Lewis, A. (2019). Examining the concept of well-being and early childhood: Adopting multi-disciplinary perspectives. Journal of Early Childhood Research, 17(4), 294–308. https://doi.org/10.1177/1476718X19860553 Meyebovsky, M. M., Tabullo, Á. J., & García, C. S. (2021). Associations between Theory of Mind and Emotion Regulation in Argentinean Adults. Current Psychology, 40(12), 6118–6131. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-019-00539-9 Mizokawa, Ai; Koyasu, M., & Mizokawa, A. (1999). Children ’ understanding of hidden emotion , theory of mind , and peer relationship Method Participants. 2025–2030. Nyklíček, I., Zeelenberg, M., & Vingerhoets, A. (2011). Emotion regulation and well-being. In Emotion Regulation and Well-Being (Issue January 2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4419-6953-8 Risnawati, E., Anggraika, I., & Collier-baker, E. (2015). Kontribusi Perolehan Theory of mind terhadap Perkembangan mental Time Travel pada Anak Usia 3-5 tahun. 4(1), 37–39. Shahaeian, A., Peterson, C. C., Slaughter, V., & Wellman, H. M. (2011). Culture and the Sequence of Steps in Theory of Mind Development. Developmental Psychology, 47(5), 1239–1247. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0023899 Shukla, P., & Rishi, P. (2014). A Corelational Study of Psychosocial & Spiritual Well Being and Death Anxiety among Advanced Stage Cancer Patients. American Journal of Applied Psychology, 2(3), 59–65. https://doi.org/10.12691/ajap-2-3-1 Slaughter, V., Dennis, M. J., & Pritchard, M. (2002). Theory of mind and peer acceptance in preschool children. British Journal of Developmental Psychology, 20(4), 545–564. https://doi.org/10.1348/026151002760390945 Wellman, H. M., & Liu, D. (2004). Scaling of theory-of-mind tasks. Child Development, 75(2), 523–541. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8624.2004.00691.x

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction machine sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,001
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Observationnel · Signal consensuel: Observationnel
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,007
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,015

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0010,004
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0010,000
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0010,002
Communication savante0,0020,001
Science ouverte0,0000,001
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,001
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0010,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,040
Tête enseignante GPT0,343
Écart entre enseignants0,303 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeObservationnel
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations3
Publié2023
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueJPUD - Jurnal Pendidikan Usia DiniMême sujetEducational Methods and ImpactsTravaux en français237 207