# PWR-171 — Theory of mind: learner worksheet Release: Revision 7T · Full Tutorial Edition Estimated time: Estimated 29 min reading and worksheet pass Difficulty: Intermediate Equipment: Basic stationery or digital tools — Declared Theory of mind fixture: Compare a small false-belief training trial with a digital social-cognition trial that used an active control, focusing on whether either study shows retained real-world social function.; Setup aid for Separate the constructs: Prewrite the difference between trainability, retention, transfer and clinical value.; Theory of mind log: Accuracy and confidence on declared belief-reasoning tasks plus participant-chosen function; retain Theory of mind errors, assistance, stop and fallback.; Theory-of-mind study grid: compare “A randomized controlled trial of training of affect recognition in schizophrenia shows lasting effects for theory of mind” with “The Social and Cognitive Online Training (SCOT) project”. Copy population, task, control, immediate result, follow-up and functional outcome; mark every place where affect recognition, belief reasoning or language demands differ. The monitoring guidance is a no-assessment boundary. Space: Desk / seated Automated structural checklist: 10 of 10 structural checks present Evidence quality/context: G5; Detailed research depth Automated method-quality band: Comprehensive Method-rating basis: Structure coverage, instruction/check specificity, alternative distinctness, source troubleshooting, comparison depth and whether purpose/check fields are authored rather than derived. Editorial review: Pending manual editorial sign off ## Before you begin - [ ] I read the tutorial authority and stop conditions. - [ ] I have the required equipment/space or a declared accessible alternative. ## Canonical source context Build a paper audit around false-belief and digital social-cognition trials rather than trying to read another person’s mind. You will separate belief reasoning from affect recognition, language demands, active-control effects, retention and everyday function, then state what replication would be needed before training claims or individual assessment could be justified. Target outcome: The learner produces a methods table that distinguishes belief, emotion, intention and language demands, tests an active-control explanation, and states the evidence gate for any future training claim. ### Authority and setup conditions - Obtain the full methods and results, not only an abstract. - Prewrite the difference between trainability, retention, transfer and clinical value. - Start check for Theory of mind: Population, intervention, comparator, task outcome and delay appear in one sentence. - Top-of-sheet stop for Theory of mind: Stop the review if a source cannot be verified or the study identity is uncertain. ### Required or supplied materials - Declared Theory of mind fixture: Compare a small false-belief training trial with a digital social-cognition trial that used an active control, focusing on whether either study shows retained real-world social function. - Setup aid for Separate the constructs: Prewrite the difference between trainability, retention, transfer and clinical value. - Theory of mind log: Accuracy and confidence on declared belief-reasoning tasks plus participant-chosen function; retain Theory of mind errors, assistance, stop and fallback. - Theory-of-mind study grid: compare “A randomized controlled trial of training of affect recognition in schizophrenia shows lasting effects for theory of mind” with “The Social and Cognitive Online Training (SCOT) project”. Copy population, task, control, immediate result, follow-up and functional outcome; mark every place where affect recognition, belief reasoning or language demands differ. The monitoring guidance is a no-assessment boundary. ## 1. Write one narrow question Ask: “In the declared population, does the named training improve novel belief-reasoning accuracy beyond an active control, and is any gain retained?” Why: Population, intervention, comparator, task outcome and delay appear in one sentence. Success check: Population, intervention, comparator, task outcome and delay appear in one sentence. Accessible alternative: Complete the same research action — “Ask: “In the declared population, does the named training improve novel belief-reasoning accuracy beyond an active control, and is any gain retained?”” — using speech-to-text, text-to-speech, enlarged text, keyboard-only navigation, shorter work blocks or a support person. Preserve this declared check: “Population, intervention, comparator, task outcome and delay appear in one sentence.” Do not convert the research task into capability practice. Alternative relationship: Target preserving when declared check is preserved Learner notes: ________________________________________________________________________________ Completed: [ ] ## 2. Separate the constructs Make four columns: belief, emotion, intention and language. Mark which each test actually requires. Why: No test is labelled simply “theory of mind” without its component demands. Success check: No test is labelled simply “theory of mind” without its component demands. Accessible alternative: Complete the same research action — “Make four columns: belief, emotion, intention and language. Mark which each test actually requires.” — using speech-to-text, text-to-speech, enlarged text, keyboard-only navigation, shorter work blocks or a support person. Preserve this declared check: “No test is labelled simply “theory of mind” without its component demands.” Do not convert the research task into capability practice. Alternative relationship: Target preserving when declared check is preserved Learner notes: ________________________________________________________________________________ Completed: [ ] ## 3. Extract the sample and allocation Record sample size, age or diagnosis, recruitment, randomisation, exclusions and attrition for each study. Why: Every number is tied to a study arm and missing participants are visible. Success check: Every number is tied to a study arm and missing participants are visible. Accessible alternative: Complete the same research action — “Record sample size, age or diagnosis, recruitment, randomisation, exclusions and attrition for each study.” — using speech-to-text, text-to-speech, enlarged text, keyboard-only navigation, shorter work blocks or a support person. Preserve this declared check: “Every number is tied to a study arm and missing participants are visible.” Do not convert the research task into capability practice. Alternative relationship: Target preserving when declared check is preserved Learner notes: ________________________________________________________________________________ Completed: [ ] ## 4. Rebuild the task Write the exact stimulus, response format, scoring rule, cueing and whether the item was trained or novel. Why: Another reader could tell what counted as a correct answer. Success check: Another reader could tell what counted as a correct answer. Accessible alternative: Complete the same research action — “Write the exact stimulus, response format, scoring rule, cueing and whether the item was trained or novel.” — using speech-to-text, text-to-speech, enlarged text, keyboard-only navigation, shorter work blocks or a support person. Preserve this declared check: “Another reader could tell what counted as a correct answer.” Do not convert the research task into capability practice. Alternative relationship: Target preserving when declared check is preserved Learner notes: ________________________________________________________________________________ Completed: [ ] ## 5. Record comparators and timing Name the active or passive control, immediate test, delayed test and any chosen functional outcome. Why: A within-group gain is not mistaken for an advantage over control. Success check: A within-group gain is not mistaken for an advantage over control. Accessible alternative: Complete the same research action — “Name the active or passive control, immediate test, delayed test and any chosen functional outcome.” — using speech-to-text, text-to-speech, enlarged text, keyboard-only navigation, shorter work blocks or a support person. Preserve this declared check: “A within-group gain is not mistaken for an advantage over control.” Do not convert the research task into capability practice. Alternative relationship: Target preserving when declared check is preserved Learner notes: ________________________________________________________________________________ Completed: [ ] ## 6. Test alternative explanations Check language practice, repeated items, expectancy, assessor awareness and unequal contact time. Why: At least one viable non-mentalising explanation is retained when the design cannot remove it. Success check: At least one viable non-mentalising explanation is retained when the design cannot remove it. Accessible alternative: Complete the same research action — “Check language practice, repeated items, expectancy, assessor awareness and unequal contact time.” — using speech-to-text, text-to-speech, enlarged text, keyboard-only navigation, shorter work blocks or a support person. Preserve this declared check: “At least one viable non-mentalising explanation is retained when the design cannot remove it.” Do not convert the research task into capability practice. Alternative relationship: Target preserving when declared check is preserved Learner notes: ________________________________________________________________________________ Completed: [ ] ## 7. Compare claim with result Put primary interaction, confidence interval or uncertainty beside the authors’ conclusion; note the active-control null finding where applicable. Why: The verdict follows the comparison, not the abstract’s tone. Success check: The verdict follows the comparison, not the abstract’s tone. Accessible alternative: Complete the same research action — “Put primary interaction, confidence interval or uncertainty beside the authors’ conclusion; note the active-control null finding where applicable.” — using speech-to-text, text-to-speech, enlarged text, keyboard-only navigation, shorter work blocks or a support person. Preserve this declared check: “The verdict follows the comparison, not the abstract’s tone.” Do not convert the research task into capability practice. Alternative relationship: Target preserving when declared check is preserved Learner notes: ________________________________________________________________________________ Completed: [ ] ## 8. Write the next gate Require independent replication, novel tasks, delayed retention, participant-valued function and adverse-event reporting before calling the method trainable. Why: The final paragraph states what evidence is missing and contains no home protocol. Success check: The final paragraph states what evidence is missing and contains no home protocol. Accessible alternative: Complete the same research action — “Require independent replication, novel tasks, delayed retention, participant-valued function and adverse-event reporting before calling the method trainable.” — using speech-to-text, text-to-speech, enlarged text, keyboard-only navigation, shorter work blocks or a support person. Preserve this declared check: “The final paragraph states what evidence is missing and contains no home protocol.” Do not convert the research task into capability practice. Alternative relationship: Target preserving when declared check is preserved Learner notes: ________________________________________________________________________________ Completed: [ ] ## Reflection What changed? ________________________________________________________________________________ What remains difficult? ________________________________________________________________________________ What will I repeat, adapt, ask for help with, or stop? ________________________________________________________________________________ --- Completion of this worksheet demonstrates tutorial participation only. It does not establish capability, qualification, safety clearance, diagnosis, treatment or independent validation.