Theory of Mind Inventory (ToMI)
Report
Client ID: | B.R. (dad of P.R.) | ||
Age: | 9 years, 8 months | ||
Gender: | Male |
COMPOSITE SCORE
Composite Mean | 12.5 (of 20) |
Standard Score (Mean=100, SD=15) | 75.1 |
Percentile | 1st |
EARLY ToM SUBSCALE
Subscale Mean | 16.3 (of 20) |
Standard Score (Mean=50, SD=10) | 30.7 |
Percentile | 1st |
# | Measure | Score (raw/percentile) |
---|---|---|
3 | early empathy | 15.09 / 11th |
6 | discrimination of basic emotions | 17.47 / 18th |
24 | intentionality | 9.91 / 1st |
25 | basic positive emotion recognition (happy) | 17.36 / 11th |
28 | social referencing: reading fear | 13.25 / 4th |
37 | joint attention: initiating | 19.98 / 73rd * |
38 | joint attention: responding | 20.00 / 74th * |
43 | gaze following | 14.74 / 4th |
44 | social referencing: ambiguous situation | 5.29 / 8th |
48 | basic negative emotion recognition (sad) | 20.00 / 79th * |
49 | basic negative emotion recognition (mad) | 20.00 / 74th * |
50 | basic negative emotion recognition (scared) | 15.43 / 9th - 10th |
54 | mental state term comprehension: early desire (want) | 20.00 / 80th * |
59 | desire-based emotion | 20.00 / 96th * |
* indicates the median percentile within a range of percentiles that are associated with the raw score for this item. This is common when raw scores approach 20 and when high scores are frequent in the normative sample.
BASIC ToM SUBSCALE
Subscale Mean | 14.5 (of 20) |
Standard Score (Mean=50, SD=10) | 28 |
Percentile | 1st |
# | Measure | Score (raw/percentile) |
---|---|---|
1 | physiologically-based behavior | 14.78 / 1st |
4 | emotion-based behavior | 12.81 / 1st |
7 | mental state term comprehension: cognitive terms (think) | 17.70 / 15th |
8 | false beliefs: unexpected location | 18.01 / 11th |
9 | seeing leads to knowing | 15.02 / 12th |
10 | mental state term comprehension: cognitive terms (know) | 20.00 / 77th * |
11 | appearance-reality distinction | 14.64 / 5th |
12 | false beliefs: unexpected contents | 17.77 / 9th |
15 | certainty | 17.36 / 33rd - 34th |
16 | mental-physical distinction | 10.05 / 1st |
26 | pretense: engaging in pretense | 17.74 / 15th |
29 | counterfactual reasoning | 12.53 / 5th |
30 | pretense: understanding pretense in others | 18.38 / 18th |
31 | tactical deception | 13.86 / 13th |
32 | cognitive emotion recognition (disgust) | 9.74 / 1st |
33 | speech acts: performatives (promises) | 20.00 / 69th * |
35 | pragmatics: secrets | 7.47 / 1st |
39 | mental state term comprehension: cognitive terms (belief) | 18.01 / 19th - 20th |
42 | attribute-based behavior | 14.47 / 6th |
51 | cognitive emotion recognition (surprise) | 7.84 / 1st |
53 | mental state term comprehension: desire (need) | 19.91 / 52nd - 53rd |
57 | future thinking (self) | 2.77 / 1st |
60 | belief-based emotion | 12.91 / 1st |
* indicates the median percentile within a range of percentiles that are associated with the raw score for this item. This is common when raw scores approach 20 and when high scores are frequent in the normative sample.
ADVANCED ToM SUBSCALE
Subscale Mean | 8.2 (of 20) |
Standard Score (Mean=50, SD=10) | 26.1 |
Percentile | 1st |
# | Measure | Score (raw/percentile) |
---|---|---|
2 | pragmatics: verbal irony | 18.25 / 21st |
5 | second-order false desire attribution | 5.09 / 1st |
13 | pragmatics: idiomatic language | 18.01 / 8th |
14 | pragmatics: lie-telling by others | 12.70 / 9th |
17 | emotion recognition: display rules | 15.70 / 20th |
18 | pragmatics: complex social judgment | 5.32 / 1st |
19 | pragmatics: white lies | 14.27 / 7th |
20 | pragmatics: lies versus jokes | 14.88 / 23rd |
21 | visual perspective-taking (level 2) | 5.29 / 3rd |
22 | second order understanding of belief | 2.33 / 1st |
23 | second order understanding of emotion | 2.43 / 1st |
27 | complex social judgment | 4.98 / 2nd |
34 | true empathy | 5.36 / 1st |
36 | pragmatics: humor (play on words) | 5.26 / 1st |
40 | interpretive theory of mind: biased cognition | 2.98 / 1st |
41 | interpretive theory of mind: ambiguous figure perception | 4.10 / 1st |
45 | pragmatics: audience adaptation | 7.16 / 6th |
46 | mixed emotions | 13.21 / 15th |
47 | common sense: social knowledge | 4.54 / 1st |
52 | complex emotion recognition (embarrassed) | 5.15 / 1st |
55 | complex emotion recognition (guilt) | 2.13 / 1st |
56 | emotional introspection | 3.79 / 1st |
58 | situation-based disambiguation of emotion | 15.05 / 14th - 15th |
* indicates the median percentile within a range of percentiles that are associated with the raw score for this item. This is common when raw scores approach 20 and when high scores are frequent in the normative sample.
EMOTION RECOGNITION ToM SUBSCALE
Subscale Mean | 13.1 (of 20) |
Standard Score (Mean=50, SD=10) | 28.1 |
Percentile | 1st |
# | Measure | Score (raw/percentile) |
---|---|---|
6 | discrimination of basic emotions | 17.47 / 18th |
17 | emotion recognition: display rules | 15.70 / 20th |
25 | basic positive emotion recognition (happy) | 17.36 / 11th |
32 | cognitive emotion recognition (disgust) | 9.74 / 1st |
48 | basic negative emotion recognition (sad) | 20.00 / 79th * |
49 | basic negative emotion recognition (mad) | 20.00 / 74th * |
50 | basic negative emotion recognition (scared) | 15.43 / 9th - 10th |
51 | cognitive emotion recognition (surprise) | 7.84 / 1st |
52 | complex emotion recognition (embarrassed) | 5.15 / 1st |
55 | complex emotion recognition (guilt) | 2.13 / 1st |
* indicates the median percentile within a range of percentiles that are associated with the raw score for this item. This is common when raw scores approach 20 and when high scores are frequent in the normative sample.
MENTAL STATE TERM COMPREHENSION ToM SUBSCALE
Subscale Mean | 19.3 (of 20) |
Standard Score (Mean=50, SD=10) | 52.3 |
Percentile | 54th |
# | Measure | Score (raw/percentile) |
---|---|---|
7 | mental state term comprehension: cognitive terms (think) | 17.70 / 15th |
10 | mental state term comprehension: cognitive terms (know) | 20.00 / 77th * |
33 | speech acts: performatives (promises) | 20.00 / 69th * |
39 | mental state term comprehension: cognitive terms (belief) | 18.01 / 19th - 20th |
53 | mental state term comprehension: desire (need) | 19.91 / 52nd - 53rd |
54 | mental state term comprehension: early desire (want) | 20.00 / 80th * |
* indicates the median percentile within a range of percentiles that are associated with the raw score for this item. This is common when raw scores approach 20 and when high scores are frequent in the normative sample.
PRAGMATICS ToM SUBSCALE
Subscale Mean | 11.5 (of 20) |
Standard Score (Mean=50, SD=10) | 25.3 |
Percentile | 1st |
# | Measure | Score (raw/percentile) |
---|---|---|
2 | pragmatics: verbal irony | 18.25 / 21st |
13 | pragmatics: idiomatic language | 18.01 / 8th |
14 | pragmatics: lie-telling by others | 12.70 / 9th |
18 | pragmatics: complex social judgment | 5.32 / 1st |
19 | pragmatics: white lies | 14.27 / 7th |
20 | pragmatics: lies versus jokes | 14.88 / 23rd |
35 | pragmatics: secrets | 7.47 / 1st |
36 | pragmatics: humor (play on words) | 5.26 / 1st |
45 | pragmatics: audience adaptation | 7.16 / 6th |
* indicates the median percentile within a range of percentiles that are associated with the raw score for this item. This is common when raw scores approach 20 and when high scores are frequent in the normative sample.
Intra-ToM Cognitive Profile Analysis
Table for Treatment Planning: Strength and challenge areas in a developmental context
Probably Not Developed(parental rating between 0 and 7) |
Undecided(parental rating between 7 and 13) |
Probably Developed(parental rating between 13 and 20) |
|
Item score high for age(at least one standard deviation above the mean) |
* Should not occur: raw scores between 0-7 will not be 1 SD above the mean |
Treatment is NOT recommended for these areas. Items in this category are of clinical interest in that they may represent an area of ToM strength. |
Treatment is NOT recommended for these areas. Items in this category are of clinical interest in that they may represent an area of ToM strength. |
Item score typical for age(within one standard deviation of the mean) |
Treatment is NOT recommended for these areas. The parent believes this aspect is not developed but the item score is in the normative range. Thus, this aspect of ToM is not yet expected given the child's age. |
Treatment is NOT recommended for these areas. The parent is undecided as to whether this skill is developed but the item score is in the normative range. Thus, this aspect is not necessarily expected to be mastered given the child's age and it may even be emerging. |
Treatment is NOT recommended for these areas. The parent believes this aspect is developed and the item score is in the normative range. Thus, this aspect is expected given the child's age.
|
Item score low for age(at least one standard deviation below the mean) |
Treatment in these areas could be pursued, however, caregiver confidence in the presence of this ToM knowledge area is low or very low: competence is not readily apparent, is not actualized, or may exist primarily as a potential. As such, clinicians should consider whether these aspects of ToM are developmentally appropriate targets for intervention. Advanced skills may be unlikely to benefit from intervention directed at this competency at this time. When clinicians target these items, they are encouraged to focus on early and foundational ToM competencies. The clinician might also consider basic level skills as appropriate.
|
Treatment in these areas could be pursued. Especially good candidates may be those areas that are foundational to other, more advanced areas of ToM development. For these items, the caregiver is undecided about child competency which may reflect inconsistent child performance or partial acquisition of a ToM skill. This is generally considered a good starting point for intervention as it suggests some degree of understanding of this ToM aspect. There is potential that training in this area will provide opportunities for meaningful growth.
|
Treatment in these areas could be pursued. For these items, the caregiver is indicating that the competency is probably (but not definitely) present although this level of certainty is below that of the normative sample. In short, these areas can be viewed as relative deficits insofar at the normative score is low for the child's age but at the same time, these are also relative strength areas insofar as the raw score is relatively high. Thus, these areas could be a priority for intervention especially when the area is seen as foundational to current and later success or the goal of intervention is to establish competency in this area more consistently (across time, contexts).
|