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

Taylor, Tokiko; Edwards, Timothy L.

doi:10.1007/s40614-021-00307-w

Cited by 5 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 133 publications

(172 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This might be due to a training effect, because the most complex version of the question (double reversed) is usually provided last. However, it may also be indicative of the participants' reliance upon simple discriminative stimuli, such as the length of the conditional statement (which is the longest in the case of double-reversals) to complete the tasks accurately (Taylor & Edwards, 2021). If participants do come to rely on such strategies to solve the BH protocol tasks then, at face value, this type of behavior appears to have very little to do with what can meaningfully be described as perspective taking.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Deictic Framing Performance Fails to Generalize to Other Perspective-Taking Tasks

2023

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The behavioral processes underlying perspective taking have not been studied extensively. One approach to understanding and enhancing perspective taking, deictic framing, has been proposed. Proponents of this approach have suggested that deictic framing is a core property of perspective taking. A training protocol based on deictic framing has been developed and tested, but researchers generally evaluate the effectiveness of the protocol using tasks that have a similar format to the training protocol. Little research has examined the protocol’s effectiveness for improving performance in different perspective-taking tasks. We investigated generalization of the performance of three groups of university students trained with a deictic-framing protocol (or not) and tested with two other perspective-taking tasks: a visuospatial perspective taking using a cupboard containing a range of objects and a version of the implicit relational assessment procedure specifically designed to measure perspective taking. The first group was trained with the original verbal protocol with deictic expressions; the second group with the same protocol involving nondeictic words; and the third group was merely exposed to deictic expressions as a control condition. The results suggested that deictic framing is not fundamental to perspective taking, as the performance of the two experimental groups was not significantly different from the control group’s performance. Identification of specific stimulus functions involved in successful perspective taking and how those functions can be established should be addressed in future research.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Deictic Framing Performance Fails to Generalize to Other Perspective-Taking Tasks

2023

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Linked to the observation in (ii) that the origin of perspective is not necessarily an animate person but can also be a rather abstract functional instance within the text, cognitive and linguistic perspectivization do not necessarily have to be the result of a perceptual process. Rather, the notion of perspective is extended to all kinds of mental states, such as knowledge, desires, beliefs, or emotions [for an overview see e.g., Taylor and Edwards (2021) who distinguish between visual perspective taking (VPT) vs. mental state attribution, typically referred to as theory of mind (ToM)]. As a result, cognitive and linguistic perspectivization are also not necessarily directed at a perceptible object that one is taking a perspective on.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%