Contextual influence over deriving another's false beliefs using a relational triangulation perspective taking protocol (RT‐PTP‐M2)

Abstract

The original relational triangulation perspective taking protocol (RT‐PTP‐M1; Guinther, ) was extended with a second training and testing module (RT‐PTP‐M2) showing contextual influence over derivation of another's “false beliefs” during an analog of the Sally‐Anne test for Theory of Mind (Baron‐Cohen, Leslie, & Frith, ; Wimmer & Perner, ) in verbally competent adults. Under the respective contextual control of experimental stimuli X2 and X3, participants first learned through direct conditioning procedures that avatars A2 and A3 “behave the same way” towards target stimuli. Participants then made object discriminations under X2 according to the spatial perspective of A2, who saw an initial target at a particular location but could not see that the target was later swapped with a second target; reporting the identity of the initial target was reinforced for participants. Among participants who had failed baseline testing, this directly trained “false belief attribution” repertoire was then spontaneously emitted by participants relative to the perspective of A3 under X3 during the final test for derivation. Other participants were able to derive false belief under X3 without the X2 attribution training. These results suggest the RT‐PTP procedures were successful in causing X3 to acquire context‐of‐relating functions for exerting control over perspectival relational triangulation.

Teoria das Molduras Relacionais e a tomada de perspectiva: Uma revisão dos protocolos de treinamento

“…Os resultados da presente revisão, no geral, sobre as MDR indicam que o treino das relações reversas aparenta possuir maior relevância clínica, pois as relações no nível simples já costumam estar estabelecidas e os repertórios duplo-reversos são muito complexos e não participam de maneira significativa das tarefas em ToM. Referente aos procedimentos de aplicação dos protocolos com os participantes, foi registrada uma tendência geral em direção aos procedimentos vivenciais e interativos (Barbero-Rubio et al, 2016;Barron et al, 2018;Belisle et al, 2016;Guinther, 2017Guinther, , 2018Kavanagh et al, 2018;Montoya-Rodriguez & Molina-Cobos, 2016) e um distanciamento de aplicações envolvendo somente instruções orais ou escritas (Arango & Baquero, 2017;Hendriks et al, 2016). Tal foco tem por objetivo garantir que repertórios associados à tomada de perspectiva estejam participando das respostas às tentativas e não somente comportamentos de resolução de problema e construção de sentido associados exclusivamente a outros tipos de molduras relacionais.…”

“…Somente os artigos de Guinther (2017Guinther ( , 2018) não utilizaram o conceito de MDR (McHugh et al, 2004) como fundamentação teórica para a compreensão da tomada de perspectiva e metodológica para a construção do protocolo e das tentativas, limitando a capacidade de articulação entre os resultados obtidos com os resultados dos demais estudos. Para o autor, a propriedade da bidirecionalidade do RRAA não está presente no comportamento dêitico, pois estes são comportamentos de sinalizar (pointing behavior), sendo assim, não existiriam molduras do tipo dêiticas.…”

“…O autor foi capaz de estabelecer o controle contextual sobre a tomada de perspectiva, por meio da participação do comportamento dêitico de apontar em molduras relacionais de coordenação entre as relações materiais entre si e os outros, derivando crenças falsas (Guinther, 2018) e verdadeiras (Guinther, 2017), através da triangulação relacional (RT). Os resultados registrados pelo o autor são iniciais, porém consistentes com as previsões da RT sobre o processo de derivação de respostas sobre a perspectiva dos outros.…”

What Can We Learn by Treating Perspective Taking as Problem Solving?

“…Other researchers have also modified the BH task by replacing the deictic terms with nondeictic terms, such as "yellow" and "orange" (Heagle & Rehfeldt, 2006) or "Cinderella" and "Sponge Bob" (Davlin et al, 2011;Gilroy et al, 2015), obtaining similar results in training and generalization probes as compared with results obtained in other studies implementing the original BH protocol. Guinther (2017Guinther ( , 2018 proposed an alternative RFT account of derived perspective taking, the relational triangulation framework, which does not appeal to deictic relational frames, and he produced evidence in support of this account with a novel experimental task. In the first study, a demonstration of derivation of others' "true beliefs," seven of eight participants displayed derived coordination of the perspectives of self and others following training to establish contextually controlled "pointing" responses in relation to an observer.…”

“…Therefore, in many cases, perspective taking is solving problems involving prediction of what others will do (or are currently doing privately). "Do" should be construed broadly to include what others will think or say (or what they are thinking or imagining privately), where they might go next, how they will react to questions or other stimuli (like the sight of a spider), and so on (see Guinther, 2017Guinther, , 2018. Problem solving in VPT tasks may involve control by stimuli that are predictive of others' or one's own perceptual experience if they were in a different location.…”