0054 THE ROLE OF SLEEP ON THEORY OF MIND DEVELOPMENT IN TYPICALLY DEVELOPING CHILDREN
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Theory of Mind (ToM), defined as the ability to infer a range of internal mental states (beliefs, intentions, desire, and emotions) of others’, is central to the development of appropriate social and emotional processing skills. Children with poor ToM have been shown to have difficulty interpreting situations requiring complex social reasoning and have a greater risk of peer rejection. Although poor sleep has been implicated as a risk factor for poor social and emotional functioning in children, to date, the role of sleep in the successful development of ToM specifically has not been studied. The goal of this pilot study was to determine the relationship between sleep and ToM in typically developing school-aged children. It was hypothesized that longer sleep duration would be associated with better performance on ToM tasks. Nineteen typically developing children (Mage = 9.6 years, SD = .98) completed two ToM tasks: the Reading the Eyes in the Mind Task (RMET), measuring emotional and facial processing, and the Faux Pas Recognition Task (FPR), measuring complex cognitive understanding of socially acceptable situations. Sleep was measured using the Children’s Sleep Habits Questionnaire, filled out by parents. Sleep duration was negatively associated with poor performance on the RMET but not on the FPR, a task less heavily dependent on facial processing. The preliminary results of this study are consistent with findings from literature on adolescents’ and adults’, suggesting that poor sleep is associated with emotional and facial processing. Further research using a larger sample size and objective sleep measures is needed to better understand the implication of sleep as a risk factor in successful ToM development.
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 | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| 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) | 0.003 | 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".