Theory of mind and executive functions in normal human aging and Parkinson's disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Although the majority of research in theory of mind (TOM) has focused on young children or individuals with autism, recent investigations have begun to look at TOM throughout the lifespan and in other neurological and psychiatric populations. Some have suggested that TOM may represent a dissociable, modular brain system that is related to, but separable, from other brain functions including executive functions (EF). Recently, studies have shown that TOM performance can be compromised following an acquired brain insult (e.g., damage to the right hemisphere). However, the relationship of such impaired TOM performance to other brain functions in these cases has not been explored. This study investigated the effects of both normal human aging and Parkinson's disease on TOM. The relationship of TOM performance and EF in these groups was also examined. The results suggested that although TOM performance appeared compromised in the group of individuals with Parkinson's disease, the elderly control participants were relatively unimpaired relative to younger individuals. Significant relationships between several measures of TOM and EF were also found. The implications of these findings, and also the finding that failure on one measure of TOM did not necessarily predict failure on all measures of TOM, are discussed.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".