@brainpilot/skills 0.0.6

package/skills/12_Social_Cognition/tom-task-selector/SKILL.md

@@ -0,0 +1,379 @@
+---
+name: "tom-task-selector"
+description: "Selects Theory of Mind tasks matched to target population, age, and construct with psychometric guidance"
+domain: "social-cognition"
+version: "1.0.0"
+papers:
+ - "Wimmer & Perner, 1983"
+ - "Baron-Cohen et al., 2001"
+ - "Wellman & Liu, 2004"
+ - "Happe, 1994"
+dependencies:
+ required:
+ - research-literacy
+review_status: "ai-generated"
+---
+
+# Theory of Mind Task Selector
+
+## Purpose
+
+This skill encodes expert knowledge for selecting, administering, and interpreting Theory of Mind (ToM) assessments. It provides a construct taxonomy, task selection decision trees, age-appropriate recommendations, psychometric properties, and guidance on confounds. A general-purpose programmer would not know which ToM tasks are appropriate for which populations, the developmental sequence of ToM abilities, or the psychometric limitations of common measures.
+
+## When to Use This Skill
+
+- Selecting a ToM measure for a developmental, clinical, or adult study
+- Matching a ToM task to the target population (children, adults, ASD, brain injury, aging)
+- Designing a comprehensive ToM assessment battery
+- Evaluating the psychometric properties of a proposed ToM measure
+- Identifying confounds (language, executive function, IQ) that may affect ToM task performance
+- Interpreting ceiling/floor effects in ToM data
+
+## Research Planning Protocol
+
+Before executing the domain-specific steps below, you MUST:
+
+1. **State the research question** -- What specific question is this analysis/paradigm addressing?
+2. **Justify the method choice** -- Why is this approach appropriate? What alternatives were considered?
+3. **Declare expected outcomes** -- What results would support vs. refute the hypothesis?
+4. **Note assumptions and limitations** -- What does this method assume? Where could it mislead?
+5. **Present the plan to the user and WAIT for confirmation** before proceeding.
+
+For detailed methodology guidance, see the `research-literacy` skill.
+
+
+## ⚠️ Verification Notice
+
+This skill was generated by AI from academic literature. All parameters, thresholds, and citations require independent verification before use in research. If you find errors, please [open an issue](https://github.com/HaoxuanLiTHUAI/awesome_cognitive_and_neuroscience_skills/issues).
+
+## ToM Construct Taxonomy
+
+### Developmental Hierarchy
+
+ToM develops in a predictable sequence (Wellman & Liu, 2004). Tasks should be matched to the expected level:
+
+| Level | Construct | Age of Emergence | Key Task | Source |
+|-------|-----------|-----------------|----------|--------|
+| 1 | Diverse desires | ~**3 years** | Diverse desires task | Wellman & Liu, 2004 |
+| 2 | Diverse beliefs | ~**3-4 years** | Diverse beliefs task | Wellman & Liu, 2004 |
+| 3 | Knowledge access | ~**4 years** | Knowledge access task | Wellman & Liu, 2004 |
+| 4 | First-order false belief | ~**4-5 years** | Sally-Anne (Wimmer & Perner, 1983) | Wellman et al., 2001 |
+| 5 | Hidden emotion | ~**5-6 years** | Appearance-reality emotion task | Wellman & Liu, 2004 |
+| 6 | Second-order false belief | ~**6-7 years** | Ice-cream van task | Perner & Wimmer, 1985 |
+| 7 | Faux pas recognition | ~**9-11 years** | Faux pas stories | Baron-Cohen et al., 1999 |
+| 8 | Advanced/adult ToM | Adolescence-adult | Strange Stories, RMET | Happe, 1994; Baron-Cohen et al., 2001 |
+
+### Construct Dimensions
+
+| Dimension | Description | Example Tasks |
+|-----------|-------------|---------------|
+| **Belief attribution** | Understanding others' beliefs, especially false beliefs | Sally-Anne, unexpected contents |
+| **Desire attribution** | Understanding others' desires differ from one's own | Diverse desires task |
+| **Intention attribution** | Understanding goal-directed action and intentionality | Intentional vs. accidental actions |
+| **Emotion attribution** | Understanding others' emotions from context/cues | Hidden emotion, RMET |
+| **Visual perspective-taking** | Level 1: what others see; Level 2: how others see it | Director task, Flavell tasks |
+| **Implicit/spontaneous ToM** | Automatic, non-verbal ToM processing | Anticipatory looking, VoE paradigms |
+
+## Task Selection Decision Tree
+
+### By Age Group
+
+```
+What is the participant's age?
+ |
+ +-- Infants (6-24 months)
+ | --> Implicit ToM tasks only
+ | --> Anticipatory looking (Southgate et al., 2007)
+ | --> Violation-of-expectation (Onishi & Baillargeon, 2005)
+ |
+ +-- Preschoolers (3-5 years)
+ | --> Wellman & Liu (2004) scale (5 tasks)
+ | --> Sally-Anne / Change of location (Wimmer & Perner, 1983)
+ | --> Unexpected contents / Smarties task (Gopnik & Astington, 1988)
+ |
+ +-- School-age (6-12 years)
+ | --> Second-order false belief (Perner & Wimmer, 1985)
+ | --> Faux pas stories (Baron-Cohen et al., 1999)
+ | --> Strange Stories (Happe, 1994) -- simplified versions
+ |
+ +-- Adolescents and Adults
+ --> Strange Stories (Happe, 1994)
+ --> RMET (Baron-Cohen et al., 2001)
+ --> Director task (Keysar et al., 2003)
+ --> Faux pas test (Baron-Cohen et al., 1999)
+ --> Movie for the Assessment of Social Cognition (MASC; Dziobek et al., 2006)
+```
+
+### By Population
+
+```
+What is the target population?
+ |
+ +-- Typically developing children
+ | --> Wellman & Liu (2004) scale (most validated)
+ | --> Standard false belief tasks
+ |
+ +-- Autism spectrum (children)
+ | --> Sally-Anne (Baron-Cohen et al., 1985)
+ | --> Unexpected contents (Perner et al., 1989)
+ | --> Happe Strange Stories (if verbal)
+ | |
+ | NOTE: Many autistic individuals pass standard false
+ | belief tasks by age 6-8. Use advanced tasks to
+ | avoid ceiling effects (Happe, 1994).
+ |
+ +-- Autism spectrum (adults)
+ | --> RMET (Baron-Cohen et al., 2001)
+ | --> Faux pas test (Baron-Cohen et al., 1999)
+ | --> MASC (Dziobek et al., 2006)
+ | --> Director task (Keysar et al., 2003)
+ |
+ +-- Brain injury / neurological
+ | --> Faux pas test (Stone et al., 1998)
+ | --> Strange Stories (Happe, 1994)
+ | --> RMET (Baron-Cohen et al., 2001)
+ | --> Yoni task (Shamay-Tsoory & Aharon-Peretz, 2007)
+ |
+ +-- Aging / dementia
+ --> Faux pas test (Gregory et al., 2002)
+ --> RMET (Baron-Cohen et al., 2001)
+ --> Strange Stories (Happe, 1994)
+ --> Note: control for processing speed and working memory
+```
+
+### By Construct
+
+```
+What ToM construct are you targeting?
+ |
+ +-- Belief attribution
+ | --> False belief tasks (Sally-Anne, unexpected contents)
+ | --> Second-order false belief
+ |
+ +-- Emotion recognition
+ | --> RMET (Baron-Cohen et al., 2001)
+ | --> Cambridge Mindreading Face-Voice Battery
+ |
+ +-- Social reasoning / pragmatics
+ | --> Faux pas test
+ | --> Strange Stories
+ |
+ +-- Visual perspective-taking
+ | --> Director task (Keysar et al., 2003)
+ | --> Flavell Level 1/2 tasks
+ |
+ +-- Implicit / spontaneous ToM
+ --> Anticipatory looking paradigms
+ --> Dot-perspective task (Samson et al., 2010)
+```
+
+## Key Tasks with Parameters
+
+### First-Order False Belief: Sally-Anne Task
+
+| Property | Value | Source |
+|----------|-------|--------|
+| **Original citation** | Wimmer & Perner, 1983; Baron-Cohen et al., 1985 | |
+| **Age range** | **3-6 years** (standard); used in ASD at any age | Wellman et al., 2001 |
+| **Administration** | Acted out with dolls/puppets or illustrated story | Baron-Cohen et al., 1985 |
+| **Test question** | "Where will Sally look for her marble?" | |
+| **Control questions** | Reality question + memory question (must pass both) | Baron-Cohen et al., 1985 |
+| **Scoring** | Pass/fail (binary) | |
+| **Passing criterion** | Correct test question + both control questions | Baron-Cohen et al., 1985 |
+| **Typical passing rates** | ~**20%** at 3 years, ~**50%** at 4 years, ~**90%** by 5-6 years | Wellman et al., 2001 |
+| **Limitations** | Ceiling by age 6; binary scoring limits sensitivity | Wellman et al., 2001 |
+
+### Unexpected Contents (Smarties Task)
+
+| Property | Value | Source |
+|----------|-------|--------|
+| **Original citation** | Gopnik & Astington, 1988; Perner et al., 1987 | |
+| **Age range** | **3-6 years** | Gopnik & Astington, 1988 |
+| **Administration** | Show container (e.g., Smarties box) with unexpected contents (e.g., pencils) | |
+| **Test question** | "What will [name] think is in the box?" (other's belief) | |
+| **Self question** | "What did you think was in the box before I opened it?" (own prior belief) | |
+| **Scoring** | Pass: predicts other will say "Smarties" (or typical contents) | |
+
+### Second-Order False Belief
+
+| Property | Value | Source |
+|----------|-------|--------|
+| **Original citation** | Perner & Wimmer, 1985 | |
+| **Age range** | **6-9 years** | Perner & Wimmer, 1985 |
+| **Construct** | "She thinks that he thinks that..." | |
+| **Administration** | Story scenario (ice-cream van paradigm) | Perner & Wimmer, 1985 |
+| **Test question** | "Where does Mary think John will go to buy ice cream?" | |
+| **Passing rates** | ~**10%** at 5 years, ~**50%** at 7 years, ~**90%** by 9 years | Perner & Wimmer, 1985 |
+| **Comprehension questions** | **2-3** memory/comprehension checks required | Standard practice |
+
+### RMET (Reading the Mind in the Eyes Test)
+
+| Property | Value | Source |
+|----------|-------|--------|
+| **Original citation** | Baron-Cohen et al., 2001 | |
+| **Version** | Revised version (2001) -- 36 items | Baron-Cohen et al., 2001 |
+| **Age range** | Adults (16+ years); child version available (28 items) | Baron-Cohen et al., 2001 |
+| **Administration** | Forced-choice: pick 1 of 4 mental state words matching eye region photo | |
+| **Scoring** | Total correct out of **36** (adults) or **28** (children) | |
+| **Adult norms** | Mean ~ **26.2** (SD ~ **3.6**) in typical adults | Baron-Cohen et al., 2001 |
+| **ASD norms** | Mean ~ **21.9** (SD ~ **6.6**) in autistic adults | Baron-Cohen et al., 2001 |
+| **Reliability** | Internal consistency: Cronbach's alpha ~ **0.60-0.70** (modest) | Olderbak et al., 2015 |
+| **Limitations** | Low reliability, possible confound with emotion recognition vs. ToM per se | Olderbak et al., 2015 |
+
+### Faux Pas Test
+
+| Property | Value | Source |
+|----------|-------|--------|
+| **Original citation** | Baron-Cohen et al., 1999 | |
+| **Age range** | **9 years** to adult | Baron-Cohen et al., 1999 |
+| **Administration** | Read 10 faux pas stories + 10 control stories | |
+| **Questions per story** | Detection ("Did someone say something awkward?"), identification, belief, empathy | Baron-Cohen et al., 1999 |
+| **Scoring** | **0-2** points per question; max **60** for faux pas stories | Baron-Cohen et al., 1999 |
+| **Control stories** | Must also score comprehension questions for controls | |
+| **Sensitivity** | Good for detecting subtle ToM deficits in ASD, right hemisphere lesions, frontotemporal dementia | Stone et al., 1998; Gregory et al., 2002 |
+
+### Strange Stories (Happe, 1994)
+
+| Property | Value | Source |
+|----------|-------|--------|
+| **Original citation** | Happe, 1994 | |
+| **Construct** | Advanced ToM: irony, white lie, double bluff, misunderstanding, persuasion, appearance/reality, figure of speech, sarcasm, forgetting, contrary emotions | |
+| **Administration** | Read vignettes, open-ended question: "Why did X say that?" | |
+| **Scoring** | **0** (incorrect), **1** (partial), **2** (full mental state reference) | Happe, 1994 |
+| **Number of stories** | **8-16** ToM stories + physical control stories | Happe, 1994 |
+| **Age range** | Children (**8+**) and adults | Happe, 1994 |
+| **Reliability** | Inter-rater reliability for scoring: kappa > **0.85** recommended | Happe, 1994 |
+
+### Director Task (Visual Perspective-Taking)
+
+| Property | Value | Source |
+|----------|-------|--------|
+| **Original citation** | Keysar et al., 2003 | |
+| **Construct** | Level 2 perspective-taking under communicative demand | |
+| **Administration** | Grid of objects; director (behind grid) instructs participant to move objects; some slots occluded from director's view | |
+| **Measure** | Eye movements (egocentric intrusions), accuracy, RT | Keysar et al., 2003 |
+| **Key finding** | Even adults show egocentric errors on ~**30-50%** of critical trials | Keysar et al., 2003 |
+| **Age range** | **7 years** to adult | Dumontheil et al., 2010 |
+
+See `references/task-database.md` for the full task list with administration protocols.
+
+## Psychometric Considerations
+
+### Reliability Summary
+
+| Task | Internal Consistency | Test-Retest | Source |
+|------|---------------------|-------------|--------|
+| Sally-Anne (single item) | N/A (binary) | Variable | Wellman et al., 2001 |
+| Wellman & Liu Scale | Guttman scalability **> 0.90** | Moderate | Wellman & Liu, 2004 |
+| RMET | alpha ~ **0.60-0.70** | r ~ **0.63-0.83** | Olderbak et al., 2015; Fernandez-Abascal et al., 2013 |
+| Faux pas test | alpha ~ **0.70-0.80** | Not well-established | Baron-Cohen et al., 1999 |
+| Strange Stories | Inter-rater: kappa > **0.85** | Moderate | Happe, 1994 |
+| MASC | alpha ~ **0.70** | Adequate | Dziobek et al., 2006 |
+
+### Validity Concerns
+
+1. **Ceiling effects**: Standard false belief tasks show ceiling by age **5-6** in typical children. Use Wellman & Liu scale or advanced tasks (Wellman & Liu, 2004).
+2. **Floor effects**: RMET and faux pas tests may show floor effects in clinical populations with severe deficits. Consider graded scoring.
+3. **Ecological validity**: Structured ToM tasks may not predict real-world social behavior (German & Hehman, 2006).
+4. **Task purity**: No ToM task measures *only* ToM. All tasks involve language, memory, executive function, and attention.
+
+## Confounds and Controls
+
+### Language
+
+| Confound | Impact | Mitigation | Source |
+|----------|--------|------------|--------|
+| Verbal demands | False belief tasks require comprehension of complex sentences | Include vocabulary/language control measure | Milligan et al., 2007 |
+| Narrative complexity | Second-order tasks have heavy memory load | Add comprehension check questions | Perner & Wimmer, 1985 |
+| Word knowledge (RMET) | Vocabulary confound in forced-choice emotion labels | Control for verbal IQ | Olderbak et al., 2015 |
+
+### Executive Function
+
+| Confound | Impact | Mitigation | Source |
+|----------|--------|------------|--------|
+| Inhibitory control | Must inhibit own knowledge to attribute false belief | Include inhibition measure (e.g., Stroop, day-night) | Carlson & Moses, 2001 |
+| Working memory | Must hold multiple perspectives simultaneously | Control for WM span | Carlson & Moses, 2001 |
+| Cognitive flexibility | Must switch between self and other perspective | Include set-shifting measure | Carlson & Moses, 2001 |
+
+### Recommended Control Measures
+
+For any ToM study, include at minimum:
+
+1. **Verbal ability**: Receptive vocabulary (e.g., PPVT) or verbal IQ subscale
+2. **Inhibitory control**: Age-appropriate inhibition task
+3. **Working memory**: Forward/backward digit span or equivalent
+4. **Non-ToM comprehension**: Physical causality control stories (for Strange Stories and faux pas)
+
+## Task Combination Recommendations
+
+### Comprehensive Battery by Population
+
+| Population | Recommended Battery | Rationale |
+|------------|-------------------|-----------|
+| Preschool (3-5y) | Wellman & Liu Scale (5 tasks) + diverse desires + diverse beliefs | Guttman-scalable, captures developmental progression (Wellman & Liu, 2004) |
+| School-age (6-12y) | First-order FB + second-order FB + faux pas + Strange Stories subset | Spans implicit to advanced ToM |
+| ASD (children) | Sally-Anne + unexpected contents + Strange Stories (simplified) | Avoids ceiling; includes advanced items |
+| ASD (adults) | RMET + faux pas + MASC + Director task | Multiple constructs; includes real-time and reflective tasks |
+| Neurological (adults) | Faux pas + Strange Stories + RMET | Sensitive to frontal and right hemisphere lesions (Stone et al., 1998) |
+| Aging research | Faux pas + RMET + Strange Stories | Control for processing speed; established aging norms |
+
+### Minimum Battery (2-3 tasks)
+
+If time is limited, prioritize:
+
+1. **One false belief task** (for belief attribution)
+2. **Faux pas or Strange Stories** (for advanced ToM / social reasoning)
+3. **RMET** (for emotion/mental state recognition -- if construct-relevant)
+
+## Common Pitfalls
+
+1. **Using a single task as the sole ToM measure**: ToM is multidimensional. Single tasks have low reliability and capture only one construct. Use a battery (Wellman & Liu, 2004).
+2. **Ignoring ceiling/floor effects**: Standard false belief tasks ceiling by age 5-6. The RMET has modest reliability. Check for restricted range.
+3. **Not controlling for language**: Most ToM tasks have substantial verbal demands. Group differences in ToM may reflect language differences, especially in ASD (Milligan et al., 2007).
+4. **Confounding ToM with executive function**: False belief tasks require inhibitory control. Include EF measures and control statistically or use low-EF-demand tasks (Carlson & Moses, 2001).
+5. **Age-inappropriate task selection**: Giving first-order false belief to adults (ceiling) or faux pas to 4-year-olds (floor). Match task to developmental level.
+6. **Treating the RMET as a pure ToM measure**: The RMET has low reliability (alpha ~ 0.60-0.70) and may measure emotion recognition more than mental state inference (Olderbak et al., 2015).
+7. **Assuming failed performance = absent ToM**: Implicit/anticipatory looking studies suggest infants may have ToM understanding that explicit tasks fail to capture (Onishi & Baillargeon, 2005). Distinguish competence from performance.
+8. **Not including control stories**: For faux pas and Strange Stories, physical/non-mental-state control stories are essential to rule out general comprehension deficits.
+
+## Minimum Reporting Checklist
+
+- [ ] ToM construct(s) targeted (belief, desire, emotion, perspective-taking)
+- [ ] Task(s) used with full citation and version
+- [ ] Administration method (live, video, computerized)
+- [ ] Scoring criteria and inter-rater reliability (for open-ended tasks)
+- [ ] Control questions included and pass rates
+- [ ] Confound measures included (language, EF, IQ)
+- [ ] Ceiling/floor analysis: report distribution of scores, not just means
+- [ ] Age and developmental level of participants
+- [ ] Clinical classification criteria (if clinical population)
+- [ ] Effect sizes and confidence intervals for group comparisons
+
+## References
+
+- Baron-Cohen, S., Leslie, A. M., & Frith, U. (1985). Does the autistic child have a "theory of mind"? *Cognition*, 21(1), 37-46.
+- Baron-Cohen, S., O'Riordan, M., Stone, V., Jones, R., & Plaisted, K. (1999). Recognition of faux pas by normally developing children and children with Asperger syndrome or high-functioning autism. *Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders*, 29(5), 407-418.
+- Baron-Cohen, S., Wheelwright, S., Hill, J., Raste, Y., & Plumb, I. (2001). The "Reading the Mind in the Eyes" test revised version. *Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry*, 42(2), 241-251.
+- Carlson, S. M., & Moses, L. J. (2001). Individual differences in inhibitory control and children's theory of mind. *Child Development*, 72(4), 1032-1053.
+- Dumontheil, I., Apperly, I. A., & Blakemore, S. J. (2010). Online usage of theory of mind continues to develop in late adolescence. *Developmental Science*, 13(2), 331-338.
+- Dziobek, I., Fleck, S., Kalbe, E., Rogers, K., Hassenstab, J., Brand, M., ... & Convit, A. (2006). Introducing MASC: A movie for the assessment of social cognition. *Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders*, 36(5), 623-636.
+- Fernandez-Abascal, E. G., Cabello, R., Fernandez-Berrocal, P., & Baron-Cohen, S. (2013). Test-retest reliability of the "Reading the Mind in the Eyes" test. *Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders*, 43(9), 2220-2223.
+- German, T. P., & Hehman, J. A. (2006). Representational and executive selection resources in "theory of mind." *Psychological Science*, 17(2), 130-132.
+- Gopnik, A., & Astington, J. W. (1988). Children's understanding of representational change and its relation to the understanding of false belief. *Child Development*, 59(1), 26-37.
+- Gregory, C., Lough, S., Stone, V., Erzinclioglu, S., Martin, L., Baron-Cohen, S., & Hodges, J. R. (2002). Theory of mind in patients with frontal variant frontotemporal dementia and Alzheimer's disease. *Journal of Neurology, Neurosurgery & Psychiatry*, 72(6), 752-756.
+- Happe, F. G. (1994). An advanced test of theory of mind. *Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders*, 24(2), 129-154.
+- Keysar, B., Lin, S., & Barr, D. J. (2003). Limits on theory of mind use in adults. *Cognition*, 89(1), 25-41.
+- Milligan, K., Astington, J. W., & Dack, L. A. (2007). Language and theory of mind: Meta-analysis of the relation between language ability and false-belief understanding. *Child Development*, 78(2), 622-646.
+- Olderbak, S., Wilhelm, O., Olaru, G., Geiger, M., Brenneman, M. W., & Roberts, R. D. (2015). A psychometric analysis of the Reading the Mind in the Eyes test. *Assessment*, 22(6), 798-806.
+- Onishi, K. H., & Baillargeon, R. (2005). Do 15-month-old infants understand false beliefs? *Science*, 308(5719), 255-258.
+- Perner, J., Leekam, S. R., & Wimmer, H. (1987). Three-year-olds' difficulty with false belief. *British Journal of Developmental Psychology*, 5(2), 125-137.
+- Perner, J., & Wimmer, H. (1985). "John thinks that Mary thinks that..." Attribution of second-order beliefs. *Journal of Experimental Child Psychology*, 39(3), 437-471.
+- Samson, D., Apperly, I. A., Braithwaite, J. J., Andrews, B. J., & Bodley Scott, S. E. (2010). Seeing it their way: Evidence for rapid and involuntary computation of what other people see. *Journal of Experimental Psychology: HPP*, 36(5), 1255-1266.
+- Shamay-Tsoory, S. G., & Aharon-Peretz, J. (2007). Dissociable prefrontal networks for cognitive and affective theory of mind. *Neuropsychologia*, 45(13), 3054-3067.
+- Southgate, V., Senju, A., & Csibra, G. (2007). Action anticipation through attribution of false belief by 2-year-olds. *Psychological Science*, 18(7), 587-592.
+- Stone, V. E., Baron-Cohen, S., & Knight, R. T. (1998). Frontal lobe contributions to theory of mind. *Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience*, 10(5), 640-656.
+- Wellman, H. M., Cross, D., & Watson, J. (2001). Meta-analysis of theory-of-mind development: The truth about false belief. *Child Development*, 72(3), 655-684.
+- Wellman, H. M., & Liu, D. (2004). Scaling of theory-of-mind tasks. *Child Development*, 75(2), 523-541.
+- Wimmer, H., & Perner, J. (1983). Beliefs about beliefs: Representation and constraining function of wrong beliefs in young children's understanding of deception. *Cognition*, 13(1), 103-128.
+
+See `references/` for the full task database with administration protocols and scoring rubrics.