2011
DOI: 10.5840/philtopics201139113
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Social Understanding without Mentalizing

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
8
0

Year Published

2014
2014
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
8

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 12 publications
(8 citation statements)
references
References 54 publications
0
8
0
Order By: Relevance
“…To allow comparison between virtual and real-life scenarios, we rooted our framework for social presence in the "interaction theory, " which currently is the most dominant theory in the social sciences to understand social cognition and sense-making (Gallagher, 2001;De Jaegher and Di Paolo, 2007;Kiverstein, 2011;Froese and Fuchs, 2012;Gallotti and Frith, 2013;Schilbach et al, 2013;Fogel, 2017). Proponents of the interaction theory consider social cognition essentially as an embodied and participatory practice, emerging in real-time co-regulated interaction and not reducible to individual processes.…”
Section: A Methodological Framework To Assess Social Presence In Vrmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…To allow comparison between virtual and real-life scenarios, we rooted our framework for social presence in the "interaction theory, " which currently is the most dominant theory in the social sciences to understand social cognition and sense-making (Gallagher, 2001;De Jaegher and Di Paolo, 2007;Kiverstein, 2011;Froese and Fuchs, 2012;Gallotti and Frith, 2013;Schilbach et al, 2013;Fogel, 2017). Proponents of the interaction theory consider social cognition essentially as an embodied and participatory practice, emerging in real-time co-regulated interaction and not reducible to individual processes.…”
Section: A Methodological Framework To Assess Social Presence In Vrmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…There is a rich literature discussing whether perceiving another's behaviour as intentional requires attributing something psychological to them, so premise one is clearly controversial (De Jaegher et al 2010;Hutto 2008Hutto , 2017Kiverstein 2011). However, as the current aim is to assess whether we can dismiss differences in folk-explanation as irrelevant to mindreading, let's allow that premise to stand uncontested.…”
Section: Recognising Another Person's Behaviour As Intentional Requirmentioning
confidence: 96%
“…These are cases where the broad explanandum is the same: 5 Spaulding (chapter one) does engage with accounts of social cognition which give mindreading a much less central role in social cognition than is typically recognised by more traditional accounts, e.g. 'Interactive' social cognition (Gallagher 2008;De Jaegher et al 2010) and 'Enactive' social cognition (Hutto 2008(Hutto , 2017Kiverstein 2011). However, these accounts aim to describe the mechanisms of social interaction at a more fine-grained level than discussed in this section, e.g.…”
Section: Cultural Differences In Whether Mindreading Is a Goal At Allmentioning
confidence: 99%
“… 1 Compare the views advanced here with Kiverstein (2011) on the role of ‘mentalizing’ in social understanding. …”
mentioning
confidence: 88%