Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29988515›Full record

ReviewFrontiers in neurology2018

Cognitive and Affective Perspective-Taking: Evidence for Shared and Dissociable Anatomical Substrates.

Meghan L Healey, Murray Grossman

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Frontiers in neurology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 70 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
70citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

70 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Entactogen Effects of Ketamine: A Reverse-Translational Study.The American journal of psychiatry · 2024
    Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

10 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Meghan L HealeyPenn Department of Neurology and Frontotemporal Degeneration Center, University of Pennsylvania Perelman School of Medicine, Philadelphia, PA, United States.
Murray GrossmanPenn Department of Neurology and Frontotemporal Degeneration Center, University of Pennsylvania Perelman School of Medicine, Philadelphia, PA, United States.

Funding

Transgenic Mouse Models of Tau PathologiesP01AG017586 · NIA · UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA · PI LEE, VIRGINIA M · 2000 to 2021
$37.3M
Age, Hearing Loss, and Sentence Comprehension: Neural CorrelatesR01AG038490 · NIA · UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA · PI GROSSMAN, MURRAY · 2012 to 2016
$2.1M
Language in Context: The Neural Basis of Indirect Speech Act Comprehension in Health and DementiaF31NS101863 · NINDS · UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA · PI HEALEY, MEGHAN LEIGH · 2017 to 2019
$121k
NIA NIH HHS P01 AG017586NIA NIH HHS R01 AG038490NINDS NIH HHS F31 NS101863
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Perspective-taking refers to the ability to recognize another person's point of view. Crucial to the development of interpersonal relationships and prosocial behavior, perspective-taking is closely linked to human empathy, and like empathy, perspective-taking is commonly subdivided into cognitive and affective components. While the two components of empathy have been frequently compared, the differences between cognitive and affective perspective-taking have been under-investigated in the cognitive neuroscience literature to date. Here, we define cognitive perspective-taking as the ability to infer an agent's thoughts or beliefs, and affective perspective-taking as the ability to infer an agent's feelings or emotions. In this paper, we review data from functional imaging studies in healthy adults as well as behavioral and structural imaging studies in patients with behavioral variant frontotemporal dementia in order to determine if there are distinct neural correlates for cognitive and affective perspective-taking. Data suggest that there are both shared and non-shared cognitive and anatomic substrates. For example, while both types of perspective-taking engage regions such as the temporoparietal junction, precuneus, and temporal poles, only affective perspective-taking engages regions within the limbic system and basal ganglia. Differences are also observed in prefrontal cortex: while affective perspective-taking engages ventromedial prefrontal cortex, cognitive perspective-taking engages dorsomedial prefrontal cortex and dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC). To corroborate these findings, we also examine if cognitive and affective perspective-taking share the same relationship with executive functions. While it is clear that affective perspective-taking requires emotional substrates that are less prominent in cognitive perspective-taking, it remains unknown to what extent executive functions (including working memory, mental set switching, and inhibitory control) may contribute to each process. Overall results indicate that cognitive perspective-taking is dependent on executive functioning (particularly mental set switching), while affective perspective-taking is less so. We conclude with a critique of the current literature, with a focus on the different outcome measures used across studies and misconceptions due to imprecise terminology, as well as recommendations for future research.

Indexed as

affectivecognitiveemotionempathyfrontotemporal dementianeuroimagingperspective-taking

Identifiers

PMID29988515
PMCPMC6026651

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.