ArticleBritish journal of psychology (London, England : 1953)2025
Anti-social learning: The impact of language on mentalizing.
Article in British journal of psychology (London, England : 1953), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Anti-social learning: The impact of language on mentalizing.British journal of psychology (London, England : 1953) · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Theories of cultural evolution suggest that humans may learn to represent others' minds through cultural practices including verbal instruction. It has been demonstrated that humans use less sophisticated mental state words when describing out-group members compared to in-group members, but whether this impacts on how out-group members' minds are represented has not yet been determined. The media is one of the main ways in which information about out-groups is shared; therefore, across three experiments we explored whether the language used in the media to describe out-groups, specifically language about mental states, shapes how recipients represent the minds of out-group members. All three experiments measured the extent to which participants represented out-group members as individuals with distinctive minds. Experiment 1 compared language in a left-leaning versus a right-leaning UK news source. Experiment 2 tested the effect of including or omitting mental states or first-person language, while Experiment 3 examined the impact of varying the amount of mental state language. We show that participants are more prone to take into account each out-group member's mind when inferring their mental states when mental state language is used to introduce them. This demonstrates the clear role of cultural learning on how people think about others' minds.
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.