教学经验如何影响心智理论背后的大脑过程?小学教育工作者研究。

IF 1.7 4区 医学 Q4 NEUROSCIENCES
Jan Szczypiński, Karolina Golec-Staśkiewicz, Agnieszka Pluta, Artur Marchewka
{"title":"教学经验如何影响心智理论背后的大脑过程?小学教育工作者研究。","authors":"Jan Szczypiński, Karolina Golec-Staśkiewicz, Agnieszka Pluta, Artur Marchewka","doi":"10.1080/17470919.2024.2437404","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Despite its importance for daily social interactions, few studies have explored interindividual differences in the Theory of Mind (ToM) abilities of healthy adults. We used Children's False-Attribution (CFA), Children's False-Beliefs (CFB), and Belief-Desire Reasoning tasks, along with fMRI-based assessments, in a comparative analysis of ToM among primary school teachers (PST; <i>n</i> = 27), skilled in social interactions with children, and matched controls (MC; <i>n</i> = 24), who lacked such experience. PST demonstrated slower reaction times than MC in Adult and Child false-belief stories of CFB. However, no other behavioral differences between the groups and between-group differences were observed at the brain level. Both groups presented similar valence ratings for stories in the CFA. Notably, fMRI analysis revealed a group-by-condition interaction effect in the right lateral orbitofrontal cortex (OFC). In PSTs, OFC activation decreased during negative false-attribution stories regarding children compared to stories related to adults, whereas MC demonstrated an opposite activation pattern. Between-group differences in right lateral OFC activity possibly signify a neural efficiency effect secondary to frequent social interactions of PSTs, unlike the MCs, with children in the working environment. These results underscore the significance of everyday social experiences in the functional plasticity of ToM networks.</p>","PeriodicalId":49511,"journal":{"name":"Social Neuroscience","volume":" ","pages":"1-19"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"How does teaching experience impact brain processes underlying the theory of mind? Study on primary school educators.\",\"authors\":\"Jan Szczypiński, Karolina Golec-Staśkiewicz, Agnieszka Pluta, Artur Marchewka\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/17470919.2024.2437404\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Despite its importance for daily social interactions, few studies have explored interindividual differences in the Theory of Mind (ToM) abilities of healthy adults. We used Children's False-Attribution (CFA), Children's False-Beliefs (CFB), and Belief-Desire Reasoning tasks, along with fMRI-based assessments, in a comparative analysis of ToM among primary school teachers (PST; <i>n</i> = 27), skilled in social interactions with children, and matched controls (MC; <i>n</i> = 24), who lacked such experience. PST demonstrated slower reaction times than MC in Adult and Child false-belief stories of CFB. However, no other behavioral differences between the groups and between-group differences were observed at the brain level. Both groups presented similar valence ratings for stories in the CFA. Notably, fMRI analysis revealed a group-by-condition interaction effect in the right lateral orbitofrontal cortex (OFC). In PSTs, OFC activation decreased during negative false-attribution stories regarding children compared to stories related to adults, whereas MC demonstrated an opposite activation pattern. Between-group differences in right lateral OFC activity possibly signify a neural efficiency effect secondary to frequent social interactions of PSTs, unlike the MCs, with children in the working environment. These results underscore the significance of everyday social experiences in the functional plasticity of ToM networks.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":49511,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Social Neuroscience\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"1-19\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-12-05\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Social Neuroscience\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/17470919.2024.2437404\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"NEUROSCIENCES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Social Neuroscience","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/17470919.2024.2437404","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"NEUROSCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

尽管心理理论在日常社会交往中很重要,但很少有研究探讨健康成年人心理理论(ToM)能力的个体差异。我们使用儿童错误归因(CFA)、儿童错误信念(CFB)和信念欲望推理任务,以及基于fmri的评估,对小学教师的ToM进行了比较分析(PST;n = 27),与儿童的社会互动熟练,并匹配对照(MC;N = 24),他们缺乏这样的经验。在成人和儿童错误信念故事中,PST的反应时间比MC慢。然而,两组之间和两组之间在大脑水平上没有观察到其他行为差异。两组在CFA中对故事表现出相似的效价评分。值得注意的是,fMRI分析显示右侧外侧眶额皮质(OFC)存在组-条件相互作用效应。在pst中,与成人相关的故事相比,关于儿童的负面错误归因故事中OFC的激活减少,而MC则表现出相反的激活模式。与MCs不同,pst在工作环境中与儿童进行频繁的社会互动,可能会产生神经效率效应。这些结果强调了日常社会经验在ToM网络功能可塑性中的重要性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
How does teaching experience impact brain processes underlying the theory of mind? Study on primary school educators.

Despite its importance for daily social interactions, few studies have explored interindividual differences in the Theory of Mind (ToM) abilities of healthy adults. We used Children's False-Attribution (CFA), Children's False-Beliefs (CFB), and Belief-Desire Reasoning tasks, along with fMRI-based assessments, in a comparative analysis of ToM among primary school teachers (PST; n = 27), skilled in social interactions with children, and matched controls (MC; n = 24), who lacked such experience. PST demonstrated slower reaction times than MC in Adult and Child false-belief stories of CFB. However, no other behavioral differences between the groups and between-group differences were observed at the brain level. Both groups presented similar valence ratings for stories in the CFA. Notably, fMRI analysis revealed a group-by-condition interaction effect in the right lateral orbitofrontal cortex (OFC). In PSTs, OFC activation decreased during negative false-attribution stories regarding children compared to stories related to adults, whereas MC demonstrated an opposite activation pattern. Between-group differences in right lateral OFC activity possibly signify a neural efficiency effect secondary to frequent social interactions of PSTs, unlike the MCs, with children in the working environment. These results underscore the significance of everyday social experiences in the functional plasticity of ToM networks.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Social Neuroscience
Social Neuroscience 医学-神经科学
CiteScore
3.40
自引率
5.00%
发文量
36
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Social Neuroscience features original empirical Research Papers as well as targeted Reviews, Commentaries and Fast Track Brief Reports that examine how the brain mediates social behavior, social cognition, social interactions and relationships, group social dynamics, and related topics that deal with social/interpersonal psychology and neurobiology. Multi-paper symposia and special topic issues are organized and presented regularly as well. The goal of Social Neuroscience is to provide a place to publish empirical articles that intend to further our understanding of the neural mechanisms contributing to the development and maintenance of social behaviors, or to understanding how these mechanisms are disrupted in clinical disorders.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信