When we talk about human connection, we often think of empathy — our ability to understand how someone else feels. But underneath empathy lies something even more fundamental: Theory of Mind (ToM). It’s our brain’s ability to recognize that other people have thoughts, beliefs, and emotions that are separate from our own.
For most hearing children, this develops naturally through early conversation and exposure to how people talk about what others think or feel. But for many Deaf and hard-of-hearing (DHH) children — particularly those born to hearing parents who don’t sign — the story unfolds differently.
What Is Theory of Mind?
Theory of Mind is the capacity to interpret and predict others’ behaviors based on their beliefs, emotions, and intentions. It’s what helps us understand sarcasm, deception, and humor, and what allows us to say, “Sally believes the marble is in the basket,” even when we know it isn’t.
Children typically develop this skill between ages 4 and 5, once they realize that others can hold beliefs different from their own. For Deaf children, however, this timeline often depends less on hearing ability and more on access to a fully accessible language.
The Language Link
Dozens of studies have shown that language deprivation, not deafness itself, explains why many Deaf children demonstrate delays in Theory of Mind development.
In a landmark study, Peterson and Siegal (1995) found that Deaf children raised by hearing parents — who often had limited exposure to fluent language early in life — performed significantly worse on Theory of Mind tasks than hearing peers. Later, Peterson, Wellman, and Liu (2005) expanded this finding, showing that Deaf children of Deaf parents, who grew up in rich signing environments, developed Theory of Mind skills on par with hearing children.
Language provides the foundation for mental-state talk — words like think, believe, know, pretend, and feel. These words give children the vocabulary to understand inner experiences — both their own and others’. Without this, children may have fewer opportunities to practice perspective-taking or to overhear conversations that reveal how others think.
The Social Consequences
Delays in Theory of Mind development can ripple through childhood and adolescence. Deaf children with limited language exposure often struggle to interpret others’ behavior, anticipate emotions, or understand social nuance (Peterson et al., 2016). This can lead to social isolation, misunderstandings, and frustration — not from a lack of intelligence, but from years of missed access to conversation.
This is not a deficit within Deaf children — it is a systemic failure of access. When a Deaf child grows up without a language they can fully understand, the brain’s natural pathway for social reasoning is interrupted.
Hope and Healing
The good news is that Theory of Mind can be nurtured and strengthened. Studies show that when Deaf children are exposed to mental-state discussions — such as parents talking about thoughts and feelings during story time — they catch up significantly (Nordlund et al., 2020).
Even structured training programs, like “thought-bubble” interventions (Peterson, Wellman, & Slaughter, 2009), have been shown to improve understanding of false beliefs and perspective-taking.
For Deaf adults working through trauma, revisiting Theory of Mind concepts can be equally powerful. Many have grown up navigating fractured communication — piecing together meaning from limited cues, carrying roles that required reading minds without words. Helping clients name, label, and explore perspectives supports emotional regulation and relational repair.
Why It Matters for Clinicians and Educators
For professionals serving the Deaf community, this research reinforces a critical truth: language access is mental health access. When families, educators, and clinicians communicate in ASL or another fully accessible language, they aren’t just teaching vocabulary — they’re building the neurological foundation for empathy, trust, and connection.
In trauma work, especially, we cannot process what we cannot name. And for Deaf individuals, the act of naming — of finding the right word or sign for an emotion, a belief, or a memory — is part of reclaiming what was once inaccessible.
Closing Thoughts
Theory of Mind helps us understand not only others, but ourselves.
For Deaf individuals, its development is deeply intertwined with the right to communication, community, and visibility.
By recognizing that language access is both a human right and a mental health need, we move closer to a world where everyone — Deaf, hearing, or Coda — can be fully understood and seen.
References
Nordlund, H., Hultgren, K., Ibertsson, T., Berglund, E., & Samuelsson, C. (2020). Theory of mind and parental mental-state talk in children with cochlear implants. Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education, 28(3), 288–303. DOI:10.1093/deafed/enad004
Peterson, C. C., & Siegal, M. (1995). Deafness, conversation, and theory of mind. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 36(3), 459–474. DOI.org/10.1111/j.1469-7610.1995.tb01303.x
Peterson, C. C., Wellman, H. M., & Liu, D. (2005). Steps in theory-of-mind development for children with deafness or autism. Child Development, 76(2), 502–517. DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-8624.2005.00859.x
Peterson, C. C., Wellman, H. M., & Slaughter, V. (2009). The mind behind the message: Thought-bubble training helps deaf children develop theory of mind. Child Development, 80(3), 806–819. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3758439/
Peterson, C. C., Berglund, E., Hultgren, K., Ibertsson, T., & Samuelsson, C. (2016). Theory of mind and reading comprehension in deaf and hard-of-hearing signing children. Frontiers in Psychology, 7, 854. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2016.00854
Skouteris, M. (2023). Theory of mind development in deaf and hard-of-hearing individuals: A systematic review. Behavioral Sciences, 15(8), 1065. https://doi.org/10.3390/bs15081065 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. DOI: 10.1016/0010-0277(83)90004-5
the Coda Counselor 
Leave a comment