In a follow-up study using the same paradigm, Qureshi, Apperly, and Samson (2010) presented participants with an additional cognitive load during the experiment, and found that the interference from the avatar’s perspective increased. The authors interpret this as evidence that participants calculated what the avatar could see (level-1 perspective taking) automatically, in parallel to the calculation of what the subject herself could see. As the authors put it: ‘This is the first direct evidence of a cognitively efficient process for “theory of mind” in adults that operates independently of executive function’ (Qureshi et al., 2010: 230). In contrast, the selection of which perspective to draw upon in judging the number of discs is a controlled process requiring executive resources, and is therefore impaired by the cognitive load manipulation.
In a follow-up study using the same paradigm, Qureshi, Apperly, and Samson (2010) presented participants with an additional cognitive load during the experiment, and found that the interference from the avatar’s perspective increased. The authors interpret this as evidence that participants calculated what the avatar could see (level-1 perspective taking) automatically, in parallel to the calculation of what the subject herself could see. As the authors put it: ‘This is the first direct evidence of a cognitively efficient process for “theory of mind” in adults that operates independently of executive function’ (Qureshi et al., 2010: 230). In contrast, the selection of which perspective to draw upon in judging the number of discs is a controlled process requiring executive resources, and is therefore impaired by the cognitive load manipulation.
การแปล กรุณารอสักครู่..