The presence of other‐race people disrupts spontaneous level‐2 visual perspective taking

AbstractAutistic children were assessed for their understanding of seeing and wanting. In Experiment 1, they judged whether a target was visible to each of two observers (a Level 1 task of visual perspective-taking) and which of two targets each observer would identify as “in front” (a Level 2 task). The autistic children performed as well as normal children of the same verbal mental age on both tasks. In Experiment 2, autistic children identified the emotion that familiar situations would elicit, expressed a selective preference or desire, and reidentified that desire despite an outcome that thwarted it. Their performance was similar to that of normal and retarded children equated for verbal mental age. An explanation is offered for autistic children's difficulty on some psychological tasks and their relative success on others.

Download Full-text

Autistic children understand seeing and wanting

Development and Psychopathology ◽

10.1017/s0954579400005216 ◽

1991 ◽

Vol 3 (2) ◽

pp. 163-174 ◽

Cited By ~ 2

Author(s):

Jacinta Tan ◽

Paul L. Harris

Keyword(s):

Perspective Taking ◽

Visual Perspective ◽

Autistic Children ◽

Normal Children ◽

Mental Age ◽

Relative Success ◽

Visual Perspective Taking ◽

Level 1 ◽

Psychological Tasks ◽

Level 2

AbstractAutistic children were assessed for their understanding of seeing and wanting. In Experiment 1, they judged whether a target was visible to each of two observers [a Level 1 task of visual perspective-taking] and which of two targets each observer would identify as “in front” [a Level 2 task]. The autistic children performed as well as normal children of the same verbal mental age on both tasks. In Experiment 2, autistic children identified the emotion that familiar situations would elicit, expressed a selective preference or desire, and reidentified that desire despite an outcome that thwarted it. Their performance was similar to that of normal and retarded children equated for verbal mental age. An explanation is offered for autistic children's difficulty on some psychological tasks and their relative success on others.

Download Full-text

Is Implicit Level-2 Visual perspective taking embodied? Perceptual simulation of others’ perspectives is not impaired by motor restriction.

10.31234/osf.io/84q7g ◽

2019 ◽

Author(s):

Eleanor Katherine Alice Ward ◽

Patric Bach ◽

Katrina L McDonough ◽

Giorgio Ganis

Keyword(s):

Perspective Taking ◽

Causal Explanation ◽

Body Position ◽

Causal Role ◽

Visual Perspective ◽

Visual Perspective Taking ◽

Experimental Trials ◽

Level 2 ◽

Rule Out

Embodied accounts of visual perspective taking suggest that judgements from another person’s perspective are less effortful if one’s own body position aligns with that of the other person, indicating a causal role of posture in visual perspective taking. Using our adapted mental rotation paradigm, here we tested whether movement has a causal role in perspective taking, by restricting participants’ movement in half of the experimental trials. Here we show, using our previously validated task, that the perceptual representation of another’s visual perspective is not influenced by participants’ ability to move. These data therefore rule out active physical movement as a causal explanation of visual perspective taking and instead argue that postural readjustments when making judgements from another’s perspective are a bodily consequence of the mental transformations of a person’s actual to imagined position in space.

Download Full-text

Effects of non-invasive brain stimulation on visual perspective taking: A meta-analytic study

10.1101/2021.04.24.441219 ◽

2021 ◽

Author(s):

Yuan-Wei Yao ◽

Vivien Chopurian ◽

Lei Zhang ◽

Claus Lamm ◽

Hauke R. Heekeren

Keyword(s):

Mental Rotation ◽

Brain Stimulation ◽

Perspective Taking ◽

Visual Perspective ◽

Temporoparietal Junction ◽

Non Invasive ◽

Visual Perspective Taking ◽

Level 1 ◽

Meta Analyses ◽

Level 2

Visual perspective taking (VPT) is a critical ability required by complex social interaction. Non-invasive brain stimulation (NIBS) has been increasingly used to examine the causal relationship between brain activity and VPT, yet with heterogeneous results. In the current study, we conducted two meta-analyses to examine the effects of NIBS of the right temporoparietal junction (rTPJ) or dorsomedial prefrontal cortex (dmPFC) on VPT, respectively. We performed a comprehensive literature search to identify qualified studies, and computed the standardized effect size (ES) for each combination of VPT level (Level-1: visibility judgment; Level-2: mental rotation) and perspective (self and other). Twelve studies (rTPJ: 11 studies, 20 ESs; dmPFC: 4 studies, 18 ESs) were included in the meta-analyses. Random-effects models were used to generate the overall effects. Subgroup analyses for distinct VPT conditions were also performed. We found that stimulation of rTPJ significantly improved participants' visibility judgment from the allocentric perspective, whereas dmPFC stimulation mainly influenced Level-1 performance from the egocentric perspective. For both areas, the effects of stimulation on Level-2 performance are negligible. These findings suggest that the rTPJ and dmPFC are involved in basic allocentric and egocentric perspective-taking processes, respectively. Notably, contrary to some theoretical models, neither of them appears to be necessary for more complex VPT with a higher requirement of mental rotation. These findings may help clarify the causal roles of the rTPJ and dmPFC in VPT and emphasize the importance of specifying VPT conditions in experimental designs.

Download Full-text

Level 2 visual perspective-taking at age 3 and the corresponding effect of cooperation

Acta Psychologica Sinica ◽

10.3724/sp.j.1041.2019.01028 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 51 (9) ◽

pp. 1028

Keyword(s):

Perspective Taking ◽

Visual Perspective ◽

Visual Perspective Taking ◽

Level 2

Download Full-text

Group membership and the effects on visual perspective taking

10.31234/osf.io/wnrk6 ◽

2018 ◽

Author(s):

Dana Schneider ◽

Anne Grigutsch ◽

Matthias Schurz ◽

Romi Zäske ◽

Stefan R. Schweinberger

Keyword(s):

Theory Of Mind ◽

Mental State ◽

Perspective Taking ◽

Visual Perspective ◽

Interference Effects ◽

Social Categories ◽

Visual Perspective Taking ◽

Mental State Ascription ◽

Ethnic Nationality ◽

Level 1

It has been hypothesized that visual perspective-taking, a basic Theory of Mind mechanism, might operate quite automatically particularly in terms of ´what´ someone else sees. As such we were interested in whether different social categories of an agent (e.g., gender, race, nationality) influence this mental state ascription mechanism. We tested this assumption by investigating the Samson level-1 visual perspective-taking paradigm using agents with different ethnic nationality appearances. A group of self-identified Turkish and German participants were asked to make visual perspective judgments from their own perspective (self-judgment) as well as from the perspective of a prototypical Turkish or German agent (other-judgment). The respective related interference effects - altercentric and egocentric interferences - were measured. When making other-judgments, German participants showed increased egocentric interferences for Turkish compared to German agents. Turkish participants showed no ethnic group influence for egocentric interferences and reported feeling associated with the German and Turkish nationality to a similar extent. For self-judgments, altercentric interferences were of similar magnitude for both ethnic agents in both participant groups. Overall this indicates that in level-1 visual perspective-taking, other-judgments and related egocentric interferences are sensitive to social categories and are better described as a flexible, controlled and deliberate mental state ascription mechanism. In contrast, self-judgments and related altercentric interference effects are better described as automatic, efficient and unconscious mental state ascription mechanisms. In a broader sense the current results suggest that we should stop considering automaticity an all-or-none principle when it comes theory of mind processes.

Download Full-text