ArticleQuarterly journal of experimental psychology (2006)2021
Beyond avatars and arrows: Testing the mentalising and submentalising hypotheses with a novel entity paradigm.
Article in Quarterly journal of experimental psychology (2006), 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- EEG correlates of egocentric and altercentric biases in forensic cases with borderline personality.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2025Article
- Visual perspective taking neural processing in forensic cases with high density EEG.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Patterns of multiple brain network activation in dot perspective task.Scientific reports · 2023Article
- Seeing in my way or your way: impact of intelligence, attention, and empathy on brain reactivity.Frontiers in human neuroscience · 2023Article
- Mentalizing and self-other distinction in visual perspective taking: the analysis of temporal neural processing using high-density EEG.Frontiers in behavioral neuroscience · 2023Article
- Cognitive and Emotional Determinants of Automatic Perspective Taking in Healthy Adults.Frontiers in psychology · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In recent years, there has been a heated debate about how to interpret findings that seem to show that humans rapidly and automatically calculate the visual perspectives of others. In this study, we investigated the question of whether automatic interference effects found in the dot-perspective task are the product of domain-specific perspective-taking processes or of domain-general "submentalising" processes. Previous attempts to address this question have done so by implementing inanimate controls, such as arrows, as stimuli. The rationale for this is that submentalising processes that respond to directionality should be engaged by such stimuli, whereas domain-specific perspective-taking mechanisms, if they exist, should not. These previous attempts have been limited, however, by the
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.