Abstract
We tested whether processes that evoke agency interpretations and mental state attributions also lead to adoption of the actor’s visuospatial perspective by the observer. Agency and mental state interpretations were manipulated by showing different film clips involving two triangles (the Frith-Happé animations). Participants made speeded spatial decisions while watching these films. The responses in the spatial task could be either the same or different when given from the perspective of the participant versus the perspective of one of the triangles. Reaction times were longer when the perspectives of the participants and triangles differed than when they were the same. This effect increased as the need to invoke agency interpretations in order to understand the films increased, and it increased for those films that had previously been shown to evoke mental state attributions. This demonstrates that processing of an agent’s behavior co-occurs with perspective adoption, even in the case in which triangles are the actors.
Article PDF
References
Abell, F., Happé, F., & Frith, U. (2000). Do triangles play tricks? Attribution of mental states to animated shapes in normal and abnormal development. Cognitive Development, 15, 1–16. doi:10.1016/S0885-2014(00)00014-9
Aichhorn, M., Perner, J., Kronbichler, M., Staffen, W., & Ladurner, G. (2006). Do visual perspective tasks need theory of mind? NeuroImage, 30, 1059–1068.
Apperly, I. A. (2008). Beyond simulation-theory and theory-theory: Why social cognitive neuroscience should use its own concepts to study “theory of mind”. Cognition, 107, 266–283. doi:10.1016/j.cognition.2007.07.019
Castelli, F., Happé, F., Frith, U., & Frith, C. (2000). Movement and mind: A functional imaging study of perception and interpretation of complex intentional movement patterns. NeuroImage, 12, 314–325. doi:10.1006/nimg.2000.0612
Frith, C. D., & Frith, U. (2006). How we predict what other people are going to do. Brain Research, 1079, 36–46. doi:10.1016/j.brainres.2005.12.126
Jackson, P. L., Meltzoff, A. N., & Decety, J. (2005). How do we perceive the pain of others? A window into the neural processes involved in empathy. NeuroImage, 24, 771–779. doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2004.09.006
Johnson, S. C. (2003). Detecting agents. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B, 358, 549–559. doi:10.1098/rstb.2002.1237
Klein, A., Zwickel, J., Prinz, W., & Frith, U. (2009). Animated triangles: An eye tracking investigation. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 62, 1189–1197. doi:10.1080/17470210802384214
Rosenthal, R. (1997). Meta-analytic procedures for social research. London: Sage.
Thomas, R., Press, C., & Haggard, P. (2006). Shared representations in body perception. Acta Psychologica, 121, 317–330. doi:10.1016/j.actpsy.2005.08.002
Tversky, B., & Hard, B. M. (2009). Embodied and disembodied cognition: Spatial perspective-taking. Cognition, 110, 124–129. doi:10.1016/j.cognition.2008.10.008
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
This work was supported by the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (DFG) excellence initiative “CoTeSys.”
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Zwickel, J. Agency attribution and visuospatial perspective taking. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review 16, 1089–1093 (2009). https://doi.org/10.3758/PBR.16.6.1089
Received:
Accepted:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3758/PBR.16.6.1089