Unveiling the Dot-Perspective Task: Integrating Implicit-Mentalistic with Sub-Mentalistic Processes

Psych Pub Date : 2023-11-02 DOI:10.3390/psych5040078
Cong Fan, Tirta Susilo, Jason Low
{"title":"Unveiling the Dot-Perspective Task: Integrating Implicit-Mentalistic with Sub-Mentalistic Processes","authors":"Cong Fan, Tirta Susilo, Jason Low","doi":"10.3390/psych5040078","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Adults’ performances on the dot-perspective task showed a consistency effect: participants were slower to judge their own visual perspective when their own perspective and others’ perspective were different compared to when both perspectives were the same. This effect has been explained by two competing accounts: the implicit mentalising account suggests the effect arises from relatively automatic tracking of others’ visual perspectives, whereas the submentalising account suggests the effect arises from domain-general attentional orienting. We conducted three experiments to adjudicate between the two competing accounts. Experiment 1 manipulated eye–head directional cues (gaze-averted-face versus head-averted-face) and measured its effect on implicit mentalising (in the dot-perspective task) and attentional orienting (in the Posner task). Eye–head directional cues modulated attentional orienting but not implicit mentalising, supporting the importance of visual access and the existence of implicit mentalising in the dot-perspective task. Experiment 2 compared the effect of gaze-averted versus finger-pointing agents. Finger-pointing direction might induce attentional orienting effects on both tasks. Experiment 3 combined finger-pointing with manipulation of the agent’s visual access (eyes-sighted versus eyes-covered) on the dot-perspective task. Visual access did not modulate the consistency effect when finger-pointing was simultaneously displayed. The findings of Experiments 2 and 3 indicated the contribution of the sub-mentalistic process to the dot-perspective task. Overall, the findings suggest that implicit mentalising and submentalising may co-exist in human social perceptual processes. Visual access appears to play a dominant role in modulating implicit mentalising on the dot-perspective task, but the process may be interfered with by finger-pointing cues (more salient than gaze cues) via a sub-mentalistic attentional-orienting mechanism.","PeriodicalId":93139,"journal":{"name":"Psych","volume":"44 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Psych","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3390/psych5040078","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Adults’ performances on the dot-perspective task showed a consistency effect: participants were slower to judge their own visual perspective when their own perspective and others’ perspective were different compared to when both perspectives were the same. This effect has been explained by two competing accounts: the implicit mentalising account suggests the effect arises from relatively automatic tracking of others’ visual perspectives, whereas the submentalising account suggests the effect arises from domain-general attentional orienting. We conducted three experiments to adjudicate between the two competing accounts. Experiment 1 manipulated eye–head directional cues (gaze-averted-face versus head-averted-face) and measured its effect on implicit mentalising (in the dot-perspective task) and attentional orienting (in the Posner task). Eye–head directional cues modulated attentional orienting but not implicit mentalising, supporting the importance of visual access and the existence of implicit mentalising in the dot-perspective task. Experiment 2 compared the effect of gaze-averted versus finger-pointing agents. Finger-pointing direction might induce attentional orienting effects on both tasks. Experiment 3 combined finger-pointing with manipulation of the agent’s visual access (eyes-sighted versus eyes-covered) on the dot-perspective task. Visual access did not modulate the consistency effect when finger-pointing was simultaneously displayed. The findings of Experiments 2 and 3 indicated the contribution of the sub-mentalistic process to the dot-perspective task. Overall, the findings suggest that implicit mentalising and submentalising may co-exist in human social perceptual processes. Visual access appears to play a dominant role in modulating implicit mentalising on the dot-perspective task, but the process may be interfered with by finger-pointing cues (more salient than gaze cues) via a sub-mentalistic attentional-orienting mechanism.
点阵视角任务的揭示:内隐心理过程与次心理过程的整合
成年人在点视角任务中的表现表现出一致性效应:当自己和他人的视角不同时,参与者判断自己的视觉视角的速度要慢于两种视角相同时的速度。这种效应有两种相互竞争的解释:内隐心智化解释认为,这种效应源于对他人视觉视角的相对自动跟踪,而潜意识化解释认为,这种效应源于领域一般注意力导向。我们进行了三次实验来判断这两种相互竞争的说法。实验1操纵眼-头方向线索(凝视-脸与头-脸),并测量其对内隐心智化(点-透视任务)和注意定向(波斯纳任务)的影响。眼-头方向线索调节注意定向,但不调节内隐心智化,支持视觉通路的重要性和内隐心智化在点-透视任务中的存在。实验2比较了避视剂和指指剂的效果。手指指向可能会在两个任务中引起注意定向效应。实验3在点透视任务中,将手指指向与操纵代理的视觉访问(眼睛看到与眼睛覆盖)相结合。当手指同时显示时,视觉访问不调节一致性效果。实验2和实验3的结果表明,次心理过程对点视角任务的贡献。总的来说,研究结果表明内隐心智化和潜意识化可能在人类社会知觉过程中共存。在点透视任务中,视觉通路似乎在调节内隐心智化中起主导作用,但这一过程可能通过亚心理注意导向机制受到手指指向线索(比凝视线索更突出)的干扰。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信