Volume 23, Issue 3 (Fall 2017)                   IJPCP 2017, 23(3): 294-305 | Back to browse issues page

XML Persian Abstract Print

Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:

Tehrani Doost M, Shahrivar Z, Khorrami Banaraki A, Mohammad Zadeh A. Validity of the “Moving Shapes” Paradigm: A Test to Evaluate the Ability to Understand Others’ Intentionality. IJPCP. 2017; 23 (3) :294-305
URL: http://ijpcp.iums.ac.ir/article-1-2447-en.html
1- Roozbeh Hospital, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran
2- Research Center for Cognitive and Behavioral Sciences, Roozbeh Hospital, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.-Department of Psychiatry, School of Medicine, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran. 3. Psychiatry Assistant, Depar , E-mail: sharivar@sina.tums.ac.ir
3- , Department of Cognitive Sciences, Institute for Cognitive Science Studies, Tehran, Iran
4- Roozbeh Hospital, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
Abstract:   (1990 Views)
Objectives Attributing the intention to others’ behavior is one important factor in the theory of mind development. This study aimed to assess validity of the “Moving shapes” paradigm in a group of Iranian school-aged children to evaluate their understanding the intention of others’ behavior.
Methods Through randomized cluster sampling, students at grades 3 to 5 were recruited among the mainstream schools in Tehran. Parents completed the Child Behavior Checklist (CBCL). After using the Ishihara test to rule out color-blindness, the “Moving shapes” paradigm was performed for all participants. Data were analyzed using descriptive methods, T test, linear regression, and Pearson’s correlation analysis.
Results The mean age of the participants was 9.96(SD=0.916) years, and 49.2% of them were male. There was no association between age and gender with intentionality score. All variables of the paradigm were significantly correlated with each other (P<0.05). The correlation coefficient for intentionality score and number of metallizing terms was 0.612 (P=0.01). There was no significant association between the CBCL subscale scores and animated variables.
Conclusion The “Moving shapes paradigm” can be used as a valid test for evaluation of the intentionality in Iranian school-aged children.
Full-Text [PDF 2574 kb]   (760 Downloads) |   |   Full-Text (HTML)  (436 Views)  
Type of Study: Original Research | Subject: Psychiatry and Psychology
Received: 2016/02/10 | Accepted: 2017/01/25 | Published: 2017/10/1

1. Baron Cohen S, Tager Flusberg H, Cohen DJ. Understanding other minds: Perspective from autism. New York: Oxford University Press; 2000. [PMCID]
2. Abell F, Happé F, Frith U. Do triangles play tricks? Attribution of mental states to animated shapes in normal and abnormal development. Cognitive Development. 2000; 15(1):1–16. doi: 10.1016/s0885-2014(00)00014-9 [DOI:10.1016/S0885-2014(00)00014-9]
3. Knickmeyer R, Baron Cohen S, Raggatt P, Taylor K, Hackett G. Fetal testosterone and empathy. Hormones and Behavior. 2006; 49(3):282–92. doi: 10.1016/j.yhbeh.2005.08.010 [DOI:10.1016/j.yhbeh.2005.08.010]
4. Montgomery DE, Montgomery DA. The influence of movement and outcome on young children's attributions of intention. British Journal of Developmental Psychology. 1999; 17(2):245-61. doi: 10.1348/026151099165258 [DOI:10.1348/026151099165258]
5. Bowler DM, Thommen E. Attribution of mechanical and social causality to animated displays by children with autism. Autism. 2000; 4(2):147–71. doi: 10.1177/1362361300004002004 [DOI:10.1177/1362361300004002004]
6. Castelli F, Happé F, Frith U, Frith C. Movement and mind: A functional imaging study of perception and interpretation of complex intentional movement patterns. NeuroImage. 2000; 12(3):314–25. doi: 10.1006/nimg.2000.0612 [DOI:10.1006/nimg.2000.0612]
7. Mohammadzadeh A, Tehrani Doost M, Banaraki AK. Evaluation of ToM (intentionality) in primary school children using movement shape paradigm. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences. 2012; 32:69–73. doi: 10.1016/j.sbspro.2012.01.012 [DOI:10.1016/j.sbspro.2012.01.012]
8. Mohammadzadeh A, Tehrani Doost M, Khorrami A, Noorian N. Understanding intentionality in children with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder. ADHD Attention Deficit and Hyperactivity Disorders. 2015; 8(2):73–8. doi: 10.1007/s12402-015-0187-9. [DOI:10.1007/s12402-015-0187-9]
9. Ishihara S. Tests for colour blindness. Tokyo: Kanehara Shuppan Company; 1960.
10. Achenbach TM. Manual for the child behavior checklist/4-18 and 1991 profile. Burlington: University of Vermont; 1991.
11. Tehrani Doost M, Shahrivar Z, Pakbaz B, Rezaie A, Ahmadi F. Normative data and psychometric properties of the child behavior checklist and teacher rating form in an Iranian community sample. Iranian Journal of Pediatrics. 2011; 21(3):331-42. [PMID] [PMCID]
12. Castelli F. Autism, asperger syndrome and brain mechanisms for the attribution of mental states to animated shapes. Brain. 2002; 125(8):1839–49. doi: 10.1093/brain/awf189 [DOI:10.1093/brain/awf189]
13. Knickmeyer R, Baron Cohen S, Raggatt P, Taylor K, Hackett G. Fetal testosterone and empathy. Hormones and Behavior. 2006; 49(3):282–92. doi: 10.1016/j.yhbeh.2005.08.010 [DOI:10.1016/j.yhbeh.2005.08.010]
14. Pavlova M. Perception and understanding of intentions and actions: Does gender matter. Neuroscience Letters. 2009; 449(2):133–6. doi: 10.1016/j.neulet.2008.10.102 [DOI:10.1016/j.neulet.2008.10.102]

Add your comments about this article : Your username or Email:

Send email to the article author

© 2019 All Rights Reserved | Iranian Journal of Psychiatry and Clinical Psychology

Designed & Developed by : Yektaweb