Social Cognition
False Belief Stories
Also called: false belief task, false photograph task, theory of mind stories
Measure how adults keep track of what someone wrongly believes: after each short story, participants mark a statement true or false, with matched photo, map and sign stories as controls.
8 minUntimed
Free to start: 10 free participants per account, then $0.99 per participant for academic research, or any yearly plan. Preview any test free after you sign up.
- Papers, 2021 to 2025
- 253
- Evidence grade
- C
- Registered clinical studies
- 7
Ana left her hat on the bench and went to swim. A friend moved it to the car.
Ana left her hat on the bench and went to swim. A friend moved it to the car.
Ana thinks the hat is on the bench.What it measures
Measures how well adults keep track of what someone wrongly believes. Participants read short stories in which a person's belief, or a photo, map or sign, goes out of date, and mark one statement after each story as true or false. The main score is percent correct on the belief stories. The stories are in English.
Constructs
- Theory of mind
- False belief reasoning
- Perspective taking
- Social cognition
Research uses
- Theory of mind research in adults
- Aging and social cognition research
- Perspective taking studies
- Within-study group comparison
How the paradigm works
False Belief Stories measures how well adults keep track of what someone wrongly believes. In each of 12 belief stories, a person's belief goes out of date when the world changes without the person knowing, the situation Wimmer and Perner (1983) used with children. In each of 12 control stories, a photo, map or sign goes out of date the same way, with no one's mind involved, after the false photograph of Zaitchik (1990). The adult form, short stories with a matched control, follows Saxe and Kanwisher (2003), and the true or false statement after each story follows Dodell-Feder and colleagues (2011). Adults can pass such tasks and still show the pull of what they know themselves (Birch and Bloom, 2007; Apperly, Samson and Humphreys, 2009).
More about the paradigm
Each story stays on screen for 10 seconds by default, and one statement follows with 4 seconds to answer, the times in Dodell-Feder and colleagues (2011). In each story type, half of the statements ask what the person thinks or what the picture shows, and half ask how things are now. Half of all statements are true. Stories have 33 to 36 words and the same mean length in both types. The last sentence of every story names neither version, so a person who reads only the end cannot answer the reality checks. The session's seed draws and orders the stories, with no more than 3 of one type in a row, and all of it is saved. Two practice stories, one of each type, have feedback. The stories were written for this test; no published story is used.
The main score is belief accuracy: percent correct on the belief stories, with a missed answer counted as not correct. The test also reports control accuracy, belief minus control accuracy, the same difference in median answer time, and accuracy on the reality checks. A session needs answers on at least 75% of the stories set and at least two thirds of the reality checks correct. The stories are English; sessions run in other languages are flagged for review. Scores support research and do not diagnose.
Scores
- Belief Accuracy%
- Percent correct on belief stories. A missed answer is not correct.
- Higher is better
- Control Accuracy%
- Percent correct on control stories, where a photo, map or sign goes out of date.
- Higher is better
- Belief Minus Control Accuracy%
- Belief accuracy minus control accuracy.
- Below zero means belief stories were harder than controls
- Belief Minus Control Timems
- Median answer time on belief stories minus control stories, over correct answers.
- Above zero means belief stories took longer
- Reality Check Accuracy%
- Percent correct on the statements about how things are now, in both story types.
- Below two thirds invalidates
- Belief Question Accuracy%
- Percent correct on belief stories, over the statements about what the person thinks.
- Higher is better
- Picture Question Accuracy%
- Percent correct on control stories, over the statements about what the picture shows.
- Higher is better
- Median Answer Time, Beliefms
- Median answer time on belief stories, over correct answers.
- Informational
- Median Answer Time, Controlms
- Median answer time on control stories, over correct answers.
- Informational
- Answer Rate%
- Answers as a percent of the stories set.
- Below 75% invalidates
- Missed Answerscount
- Statements with no answer in the time allowed.
- Lower supports interpretation
- Stories Shownitems
- Statements the session reached.
- Informational
- Stories Setitems
- Stories the session set out to show.
- Informational
- Anticipationscount
- Answers under 100 ms.
- Lower supports interpretation
Use and evidence
253 papers from 2021 to 2025 name this task in their title or abstract, down 22% compared with 2016 to 2020. That ranks it 98 of 395 test families in our census. See the counts for every test.
Show the numbers
| Year | Papers |
|---|---|
| 2025 | 68 |
| 2024 | 45 |
| 2023 | 48 |
| 2022 | 32 |
| 2021 | 60 |
| 2020 | 65 |
| 2019 | 47 |
| 2018 | 80 |
| 2017 | 66 |
| 2016 | 66 |
| 2015 | 58 |
| 2014 | 84 |
| 2013 | 61 |
| 2012 | 60 |
| 2011 | 57 |
| 2010 | 56 |
| 2009 | 37 |
| 2008 | 32 |
| 2007 | 41 |
| 2006 | 29 |
| 2005 | 41 |
| 2004 | 38 |
| 2003 | 27 |
| 2002 | 19 |
| 2001 | 14 |
| 2000 | 30 |
Use grade C
100 to 299 papers from 2021 to 2025.
Evidence grade C
At least 2 test-retest papers, 30 reliability or validity papers or 3 registered clinical studies.
- Papers on test-retest reliability
- 2
- Papers on reliability or validity
- 48
- Registered clinical studies using it as an outcome
- 7
Note on the counts: includes studies in children.
How the grades work
Use: A is 1,000 or more papers from 2021 to 2025, B 300 to 999, C 100 to 299, D 30 to 99 and E fewer than 30. Evidence: A means at least 25 papers report its test-retest reliability and at least 25 registered clinical studies use it as an outcome; B, at least 8 test-retest papers, and either 5 registered clinical studies or 150 reliability or validity papers; C, at least 2 test-retest papers, 30 reliability or validity papers or 3 registered clinical studies; D, little published measurement evidence found. The counts measure use. They include every paper that names the task in its title or abstract. Grades describe the published research on this task, not ConductCognition's version of it.
Source: ConductCognition test census 0.14.0, counted 31 October 2026 from OpenAlex and ClinicalTrials.gov.
Task design
The trial sequence as the test runs in ConductCognition.
- Stories
- 24 stories written for this test: 12 belief stories, in which a person's belief goes out of date, and 12 controls, in which a photo, map or sign goes out of date the same way.
- Length
- 33 to 36 words each, with the same mean length in both story types.
- Session
- 24 stories by default, or 12, 16 or 20 as a setting, balanced by story type, kind of statement and answer. The session's seed orders them, with no more than 3 of one type in a row, and all of it is saved.
- Reading time
- 10 seconds per story by default, 8 to 20 as a setting. 10 seconds is the time in Dodell-Feder and colleagues (2011).
- Statement
- One statement after each story, marked True or False within 4 seconds by default, 3 to 10 as a setting. 4 seconds is the time in Dodell-Feder and colleagues (2011). Half are true.
- Reality checks
- Half of the statements ask how things are now, and half ask what the person thinks or the picture shows. The last sentence of a story names neither version, so reading only the end does not help.
- Practice
- 2 stories, one of each type, with feedback. The test has no feedback.
The stories were written for this test; no published story is used. The stories are English; sessions run in other languages are flagged for review.
Quality checks
Each session is marked valid, needs review or invalid, with the reason, before you see its scores.
Scored rows: false_belief_statement from the scored run, one True or False statement per story, half of them true, so chance is 50%. Accuracy significantly below chance invalidates. One answer on at least 90% of statements invalidates unless accuracy is above chance. Answers under 200 ms on at least half of 4 or more answers invalidate. Answers on fewer than 75% of the stories set invalidate. Fewer than two thirds of the reality checks correct invalidates. A session run in another language is flagged for review. A hidden tab withholds the percentile.
Why these rules
Accuracy significantly below chance (one-sided exact test, p < .05) cannot come from guessing; it means the response mapping was reversed or the task was not followed (Slick, Sherman and Iverson 1999 treat below-chance forced-choice performance as definite response bias). Chance-level accuracy can be a real result in impaired participants, so it is only flagged. One option on at least 90% of answered trials, when the correct options are balanced and accuracy is not above chance, means the answers did not depend on the items (the task counterpart of long-string responding in surveys; Curran 2016). An answer under 200 ms is faster than a simple visual reaction, so it cannot reflect the item. Following response-time effort screening for untimed tests (Wise and Kong 2005), the session is invalid only when at least half the answers are that fast. A missed statement gives no answer to score, and with fewer than three quarters of the stories answered the accuracies rest on too few statements to compare with a full session. A reality check asks how things are now, which needs no reasoning about a belief, and the last sentence of every story names neither version, so a person who did not read the story scores near chance on these statements. Below two thirds correct, the answers do not show that the stories were followed. The stories are English; a session in another language shows them to a participant who may not read English fluently, so it is flagged for review. A hidden tab lets the study, delay or response timers run without the participant, so a percentile is withheld after one.
Running this test
Settings you can change
| Setting | Standard | Allowed |
|---|---|---|
| Stories | 24 stories (standard) | 12 stories, 16 stories, 20 stories, 24 stories (standard) |
| Reading time (seconds) | 10 | 8 to 20 |
| Answer time (seconds) | 4 | 3 to 10 |
Yearly plans can change settings within these limits. Free and pay-as-you-go studies use the standard settings.
Need a setting this test does not have?
Devices and languages
- Untimed test: runs on desktops, laptops, tablets and phones. Participant devices
- Instructions and screens: English, Spanish, French, German, Italian, Portuguese (Brazil), Chinese (Simplified) and Japanese. Words and sentences: English.
- Available on: Every plan, including the free plan.
- Recruiting online? See the setup guides for Prolific, Sona Systems, CloudResearch Connect and Qualtrics.
Cite and describe
Participants completed the False Belief Stories task in a web browser (ConductCognition task version 1.0.0, scoring version 1.0.0; Wimmer H, Perner J, 1983; Zaitchik D, 1990; Saxe R, Kanwisher N, 2003; Dodell-Feder D, Koster-Hale J, Bedny M, Saxe R, 2011), with the standard settings (stories: 24 stories; reading time (seconds): 10; answer time (seconds): 4). The main score was belief accuracy (percent correct on belief stories).
ConductCognition versions: task version 1.0.0, scoring version 1.0.0. Every export records the versions each session used, for a methods section.
- 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. https://doi.org/10.1016/0010-0277(83)90004-5Reasoning about a false belief.
- Zaitchik, D. (1990). When representations conflict with reality: The preschooler's problem with false beliefs and "false" photographs. Cognition, 35(1), 41-68. https://doi.org/10.1016/0010-0277(90)90036-JThe false photograph control.
- Saxe, R., & Kanwisher, N. (2003). People thinking about thinking people: The role of the temporo-parietal junction in "theory of mind". NeuroImage, 19(4), 1835-1842. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1053-8119(03)00230-1Adult stories with a matched control.
- Dodell-Feder, D., Koster-Hale, J., Bedny, M., & Saxe, R. (2011). fMRI item analysis in a theory of mind task. NeuroImage, 55(2), 705-712. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2010.12.040Reading and answer times, and statements about reality or the false version.
- Apperly, I. A., Samson, D., & Humphreys, G. W. (2009). Studies of adults can inform accounts of theory of mind development. Developmental Psychology, 45(1), 190-201. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0014098Belief tasks in adults.
- Birch, S. A. J., & Bloom, P. (2007). The curse of knowledge in reasoning about false beliefs. Psychological Science, 18(5), 382-386. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9280.2007.01909.xFalse belief errors in adults.
Source papers
- Dodell-Feder D, Koster-Hale J, Bedny M, Saxe R (2011). fMRI item analysis in a theory of mind task. NeuroImage, 55(2):705-712.Paradigm source, Adults
Questions
How long does the False Belief Stories take?
About 8 minutes, as listed in the test library.
What device does a participant need?
Untimed test: runs on desktops, laptops, tablets and phones. The browser must be Chrome, Edge, Firefox or Safari.
What scores does it produce?
Belief Accuracy, Control Accuracy, Belief Minus Control Accuracy, Belief Minus Control Time, Reality Check Accuracy, Belief Question Accuracy, Picture Question Accuracy, Median Answer Time, Belief, Median Answer Time, Control, Answer Rate, Missed Answers, Stories Shown, Stories Set and Anticipations. Each session is also marked valid, needs review or invalid, with the reason.
How widely is the False Belief Stories used in research?
253 papers from 2021 to 2025 name it in their title or abstract, down 22% compared with 2016 to 2020. That ranks it 98 of 395 test families in the ConductCognition test census (use grade C). Source: ConductCognition test census 0.14.0, counted 31 October 2026 from OpenAlex and ClinicalTrials.gov.
How much reliability evidence does the False Belief Stories have?
In the published research, 2 papers report its test-retest reliability and 7 registered clinical studies use it as an outcome (evidence grade C in the ConductCognition test census).
Which settings can a researcher change?
Stories (12 stories, 16 stories, 20 stories, 24 stories (standard)), reading time (seconds) (8 to 20) and answer time (seconds) (3 to 10). Settings can be changed on yearly plans; free and pay-as-you-go studies use the standard settings.
Which languages can participants use?
The instructions and screens are in English, Spanish, French, German, Italian, Portuguese (Brazil), Chinese (Simplified) and Japanese. The words and sentences stay in English, so sessions in other languages are flagged for review. English is on every plan, and the other languages come with yearly plans. Have a native speaker read the machine-translated text before launch.
Is this a clinical test?
No. ConductCognition is for research use only. It runs, scores and exports the test; clinical interpretation is outside the platform.
Every test: the full test list.
Run this test in your next study
Start free with 10 free participants on any test, then use participant credits or a yearly plan.