Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30250437›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in psychology2018

Interacting Timescales in Perspective-Taking.

Rick Dale, Alexia Galati, Camila Alviar, Pablo Contreras Kallens, Adolfo G Ramirez-Aristizabal, Maryam Tabatabaeian, David W Vinson

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in psychology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
–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

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
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

7 authors.

Rick DaleDepartment of Communication, University of California, Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA, United States.
Alexia GalatiDepartment of Communication, University of California, Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA, United States.
Camila AlviarDepartment of Communication, University of California, Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA, United States.
Pablo Contreras KallensDepartment of Communication, University of California, Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA, United States.
Adolfo G Ramirez-AristizabalCognitive and Information Sciences, University of California, Merced, Merced, CA, United States.
Maryam TabatabaeianCognitive and Information Sciences, University of California, Merced, Merced, CA, United States.
David W VinsonCognitive and Information Sciences, University of California, Merced, Merced, CA, United States.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Through theoretical discussion, literature review, and a computational model, this paper poses a challenge to the notion that perspective-taking involves a fixed architecture in which particular processes have priority. For example, some research suggests that egocentric perspectives can arise more quickly, with other perspectives (such as of task partners) emerging only secondarily. This theoretical dichotomy-between fast egocentric and slow other-centric processes-is challenged here. We propose a general view of perspective-taking as an emergent phenomenon governed by the interplay among cognitive mechanisms that accumulate information at different timescales. We first describe the pervasive relevance of perspective-taking to cognitive science. A dynamical systems model is then introduced that explicitly formulates the timescale interaction proposed. This model illustrates that, rather than having a rigid time course, perspective-taking can be fast or slow depending on factors such as task context. Implications are discussed, with ideas for future empirical research.

Indexed as

dynamical systemsempathyinteractionjoint actionperspective-takingsocial cognition

Identifiers

PMID30250437
PMCPMC6139380

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.