Competenza pragmatica e comprensione delle emozioni. Training studies con bambini a sviluppo tipico e atipico

This research project originates within, and extends, the enquiry into the link between emotion and language (Astington & Jenkins, 1999; Cutting & Dunn, 1999; Dunn, Brown, Slomkowski, Tesela, & Youngblade, 1991; Hughes, 1998). Communication competence implies the ability to understand the mental state of an interlocutor, which in turn requires what has been defined as “theory of mind”. Having a theory of mind (ToM) means both being able to attribute mental states (in terms of emotions, feelings, beliefs, thoughts) to self and others, and understanding that behavior is based on such mental states (Premack & Woodruff, 1978). Children’s conscious awareness of emotional mental states in particular is considered to be a specific aspect of overall ToM, termed “emotional theory of mind” (Saarni e Harris, 1989). Linguistic competence is a very broad domain that may be investigated in different ways and focusing on different aspects. With regard to the link between language and emotion comprehension, some studies have examined children’s lexicon, that is to say, the breadth and quality of their vocabulary for expressing emotions (Dunn et al., 1991; Denham et al., 1994). Other research has explored syntactic competence (rules for the construction of sentences, ability to combine words) (Lohman & Tomasello, 2003; Hale & Tager-Flusberg, 2003), while still other studies have focused on semantics, or the ability to understand the meaning of words (Astington & Jenkins, 1999). All of these abilities have been found to be linked with understanding of the mind and of emotions: specifically, the more advanced children’s lexical, syntactic and semantic competence, the greater their emotion understanding. However, few studies have investigated the link between emotion understanding and another key aspect of language competence: pragmatics. The term pragmatics refers to the ability to comprehend the set of relations that link language to context; this ability is essential to understanding the meaning of communication (Levinson, 1983). Pragmatic language skills have however been studied in relation to overall ability to understand the mental states of others, especially in children with autism. The latter have difficulty in understanding the thoughts, desires and feelings of others and this deficit has been found to be linked with language difficulties, specifically in the area of pragmatics (Baron-Cohen,1988; Eisemajer & Prior, 1991). Research in this area has mainly focused on individuals with autism displaying a high level of verbal competence, especially those with High-Functioning Autism (HFA) or Asperger’s Syndrome (AS), because they provide a valuable opportunity to investigate the qualitative nature of language deficits and how these are related to other aspects of development. Nonetheless even in this area the number of studies carried out to date remains low and the results are not univocal. The current study aims to add to this line of research, by investigating the role of pragmatic competence in the development of emotion understanding, first in typically developing subjects and second in a clinical sample of subjects known to have a specific deficit in pragmatic competence. To this end, two studies were conducted in parallel with the following aims: 1. to investigate the link between the pragmatic aspects of communication and emotion understanding in subjects with typical and atypical development 2. to explore the extent to which the components of pragmatic competence impact on emotion understanding (in both typically developing and clinical samples) through an intervention designed to train the children in the use of pragmatic skills 3. within the population diagnosed with autism spectrum disorders, to verify whether there are differences between children with HFA and children with AS in terms of pragmatic competence and emotion understanding. The basic underlying hypothesis was that more advanced pragmatic competence would contribute to a higher level of emotion understanding. I therefore expected that pragmatic abilities would predict emotion understanding in both groups, and that strengthening pragmatic skills would have a positive effect on the ability to understand emotions. Finally, within the sample with atypical development, I expected to find more advanced pragmatic and emotion understanding abilities in subjects with AS, whose language abilities are typically largely intact. Study I Participants in the first study were 64 normally developing children, average age 8 years and 8 months, from two third grade classes at a primary school in the Greater Milan Area. In a preliminary phase of the research, Raven’s CPM (Coloured Progressive Matrices, 1984) was administered to participants in order to verify that they all displayed typical cognitive development. In order to assess participants’ level of emotion understanding, I used the TEC: Test of Emotion Comprehension (Pons & Harris, 2000, in the standardized Italian version by Albanese & Molina, 2008), which evaluates nine different components of emotion understanding in children between the ages of 3 and 11 years. In order to assess participants’ pragmatic competence, I administered a battery of sub-tests evaluating pragmatic language ability (APL - Medea Abilità Pragmatiche nel Linguaggio, Lorusso, 2009), and specifically examining how the different components of pragmatic competence develop in children aged 5 to 14 years. In this training study I adopted intervention research methodology. During the first phase, the competences under study (pragmatic language ability and emotion understanding) were assessed using the measures outlined above. In the second phase of the research, half of the participants, that is to say 32 children, received training in pragmatic language skills, while the other half (control group) followed the standard curriculum. Finally pragmatic language ability and emotion understanding were retested in all participants. The training in pragmatic language skills was based on the “Parliamone” program (Santoro, Mazzotta, & Lorusso, 2009), designed to promote development in the same components of pragmatic ability as measured by the APL test. It was carried out with small groups (eight children per group) over a ten-week period, at once-weekly sessions lasting about one hour each. The descriptive statistics for the overall sample showed that all participants obtained pragmatic language ability and emotion understanding scores within the normative range for their age group. However, lower scores were obtained at the pre-test stage, particularly in the experimental group. Correlational (Pearson’s coefficient, two-way) and linear regression analyses were then performed on the overall sample. An association was found between pragmatic language ability and emotion understanding, in support of the first research hypothesis. The second research hypothesis was tested using a repeated measures analysis of variance (ANOVA), which showed a statistically significant gain in the experimental group at the post-test phase in both pragmatic competence and emotion understanding, indicating that the training had been effective. The control group too demonstrated a statistically significant gain in pragmatic competence, probably attributable to normal development over time. Study II Participants in the second study were eight subjects, of whom four had diagnoses of High-Functioning Autism and four diagnoses of Asperger’s Syndrome; these children were aged between 4 and 9 years and were all members of an association in the province of Lecco. The same methodology was used as in the first study – that is to say, pre-test - training - post-test – but in this case all participants took part in all three phases of the research. In this study, the training covered the same components of pragmatic language competence as in the prior study, but was adapted to suit the abilities and skill bases of the participants. It was conducted with small groups (participants were divided into two groups of four on the basis of diagnosis); one two-hour session was held weekly over a five-week period. The descriptive analysis showed that children’s scores for emotion understanding went from below normative average for their age group at pre-test to in line with normative average at the post-test stage. A similar trend was found for pragmatic language ability, with scores in line with age-adjusted normative average at pre-test and higher than normative average at post-test. In addition, there was a difference between the scores of the subjects with HFA and those of the subjects with AS: specifically, the latter displayed a higher level of competence in both areas under study, particularly at the pre-test stage. Non-parametric correlation analysis (Spearman’s rho) between emotion understanding and pragmatic language ability confirmed a link between the two competences only at the pre-test stage In order to verify the efficacy of the training, I also conducted non-parametric analyses for dependent samples using the Wilcoxon test. Although participants’ scores for pragmatic language ability were considerably higher at post-test, this change was not statistically significant. In contrast, scores for emotion comprehension were significantly higher at the post-test stage, thus confirming – albeit partially – the second research hypothesis. Finally the Mann-Whitney test between independent samples was used to compare the HFA and AS sub-samples. The AS group was found to obtain higher scores than the HFA group on both measures at both times, but this difference was only statistically significant for emotion understanding at the pre-test stage. However, it must be acknowledged that non-parametric analyses with very small samples are relatively low in power. Further limitations of these studies include the lack of follow up to verify the longer-term effects of the interventions, the lack of a control group in the second study and the fundamental difference between the test setting, which offers close to laboratory conditions, and real life situations. Nonetheless, the results essentially support the research hypotheses, particularly in the first study, providing some additional insight into the aspects of communication required to understand the emotions of others in both typical and atypical development. My findings also suggest the desirability of educational interventions with children aimed at enhancing the preliminary basic abilities required to establish positive relationships with others. Thus, studies of this kind are not only of value in extending theoretical knowledge at the explanatory and/or predictive levels, but also in informing educational practice.