Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31429057›Full record

ArticlePsychonomic bulletin & review2020

Does interference between self and other perspectives in theory of mind tasks reflect a common underlying process? Evidence from individual differences in theory of mind and inhibitory control.

Adam W Qureshi, Rebecca L Monk, Dana Samson, Ian A Apperly

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Psychonomic bulletin & review, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing 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

18 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. It's Not You, It's Me: A Review of Individual Differences in Visuospatial Perspective Taking.Perspectives on psychological science : a journal of the Association for Psychological Science · 2023
    Review
  11. Article
  12. Regulating mirroring of emotions: A social-specific mechanism?Quarterly journal of experimental psychology (2006) · 2022
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. 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

4 authors.

Adam W QureshiEdge Hill University, Ormskirk, L39 4PY, UK. qureshia@edgehill.ac.uk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7698-2691
Rebecca L MonkEdge Hill University, Ormskirk, L39 4PY, UK.
Dana SamsonUniversité Catholique de Louvain, L0.01.03, 1348, Louvain-la-Neuve, Belgium.
Ian A ApperlyUniversity of Birmingham, Edgbaston, B15 2TT, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Theory of mind (ToM), the ability to understand that other agents have different beliefs, desires, and knowledge than oneself, has been extensively researched. Theory of mind tasks involve participants dealing with interference between their self-perspective and another agent's perspective, and this interference has been related to executive function, particularly to inhibitory control. This study assessed whether there are individual differences in self-other interference, and whether these effects are due to individual differences in executive function. A total of 142 participants completed two ToM (the director task and a Level 1 visual perspective-taking task), which both involve self-other interference, and a battery of inhibitory control tasks. The relationships between the tasks were examined using path analysis. Results showed that the self-other interference effects of the two ToM tasks were dissociable, with individual differences in performance on the ToM tasks being unrelated and performance in each predicted by different inhibitory control tasks. We suggest that self-other differences are part of the nature of ToM tasks, but self-other interference is not a unitary construct. Instead, self-other differences result in interference effects in various ways and at different stages of processing, and these effects may not be a major limiting step for adults' performance on typical ToM tasks. Further work is needed to assess other factors that may limit adults' ToM performance and hence explain individual differences in social ability.

Indexed as

Executive FunctionIndividualityInhibition, PsychologicalTheory of MindAdolescentAdultComprehensionFemaleHumansKnowledgeMaleYoung AdultExecutive functionPath analysisSelf–other interferenceTheory of mind

Identifiers

PMID31429057
PMCPMC7000534

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.