Lecture 7

Question 1

Describe which features lead people to confer agency to objects

Answer 1

Contingent responding: objects that respond appropriately to external stimuli, especially in a contingent manner, a often perceived as more agent-like

Goal-directed behaviour: objects exhibiting purposeful, goal-oriented actions are more likely to be attributed agency

Predictability: objects that behave predictably, following a pattern of actions that align with a goal, are seen as more intentional

Adaptability: the ability of an object to adapt its actions based on changes in the environment of stimuli enhances the perception of agency

Consistency: consistent and coherent behaviour over time contributes to the perception of agency

Question 2

Describe which features are most central (e.g., contingent responidng)

Answer 2

Central feature:
Contingent responding: the feature is often considered the most central. Objects responding appropriately to external cues strongly influence the perception of agency

Question 3

Describe which features are less informative (e.g., irregular path)

Answer 3

Less informative feature
Irregular path of travel: movements that lack a clear purpose or goal, such as irregular paths of travel, may be less informative and contribute less to the perception of agency

Question 4

How easily do children identify objects as agents?

Answer 4

Developmental progression: children ability to identify objects as agents undergoes developmental progression

Early sensitivity: infants show early sensitivity to features like contingent responding and goal-directed behaviour

Gradual improvement: as children age, there is a gradual improvement in recognizing more complex signs of agency

Emergence of theory of mind: the development of theory of mind contributes to a more sophisticated understanding of objects agency

Question 5

How easily do adults identify objects as agents

Answer 5

Efficient recognition: adults generally identify objects as agents efficiently

Integration of cues: adults integrate various cues, including contingent responding

Experience-based: past experience play a role in the quick and accurate recognition of agency

Higher level inferences: adults can make higher-level inferences about an object’s intentions and adaptability based on observed behaviour

Question 7

Describe the implications of perceiving an object as agentic

Answer 7

Creating connections: treating objects as agentic helps us feel more connected to them. It’s like turning a regular objects into a friend or a playmate

Emotional bond: we start to attach emotions to objects. They can make us happy, comfort us when we’re sad, or even feel like they understand us

Enhanced play: objects become more than just things. They become part of our games and adventures, making playtime more enjoyable and imaginative

Influence on feelings: seeing objects as agentic can affect our emotions. We might feel different things depending on how we perceive the objects in that moment

Learning engagement: The idea of objects having agency can make learning more interesting. It’s like turning them into teachers or helpers in our learning journey

Interactive actions: we might interact with objects as if they can respond, like giving them high fives or imagining them participating in actions with us

Shared decision making: when objects have agency, we might consider what they would like or prefer. Its like involving them in decision, especially during play

Boosting courage: objects with agency can provide comfort or bravery, especially in moments of fear. It’s like having a supportive companion

Storytelling magic: our stories and imaginative play become more vibrant. Objects take on roles and contribute to exciting narratives when seen as agentic

Adventure companions: everyday objects transform into companions on our adventures. They add an extra layers of fun and excitement to our play experiences

In a nutshell, perceiving objects as agentic brings a touch of magic to our interactions. Its like unlocking a world where even ordinary things can become extraordinary friends in our imaginative journey

Question 8

In what ways do we children make specical assumptions about social stimuli?

Answer 8

Face preference: from a very early age infants display a preference for faces. They often gaze longer at faces than non-face stimuli, suggesting an innate attraction to facial features

Social referencing: Children, even in infancy, tend to look to their caregivers for cues about how to interpret ambiguous situations. This social referencing helps them make sense of their environment by relying on the reactions of familiar individuals

Joint Attention: Infants engage in joint attention, where they share attention with others toward a common object or event. This is an early sign of social interaction and communication

Emotion recognition: Infants begin to recognize and respond to basic emotions in others, such as happiness, sadness, and fear. This ability contributes to early social bonding

Attachment behaviour: Attachment behaviours, like seeking proximity to caregivers when distressed, demonstrate the child’s reliance on specific individuals for comfort and security

Question 9

Explain why the Woodward (1998) reaching experiment provides evidence that infants are encoding the underlying intentions of other’s actions

Answer 9

Main experiment: infants as young as 6 months showed a preference for looking at the object that the experimenter reached for when it was consistent with their prior preferences. This suggests that infants were sensitive to the underlying intentions guiding the experimenter’s actions

Question 10

Why was the “new side” trial well-designed as a control condition?

Answer 10

“New side” Trial as control → control condition: The “new side” trial involved introducing a new object to one side of the actor, and the infants did not show a consistent preference. This trial served as a control condition because it ruled out the possibility that infants were simply attracted to the side where the action occurred. The lack of a consistent response in the “new side” trial strengthened the interpretation that infants were indeed responding to the actor’s intentions

Question 11

What happened when infants were instead shown the same actions performed by a mechanical claw?

Answer 11

Mechanical claw control condition → mechanical claw experiment: when the same actions were performed by a mechanical claw instead of a human actor, infants did not show the same preference. This result suggested that the ability to attribute intentions was specific to human agents, highlighting the role of social cues in intentions understanding

Question 12

Why was the mechanical claw a well-designed control condition?

Answer 12

Well-designed control → significance of mechanical control: the use of the mechanical claw as a control condition was crucial because it controlled for the visual and motor features of the actions while removing the social and intentional cues. The contrast between the infant’s responses to human actions and mechanical actions supported the idea that infants were specifically attributing intentions to human actors

Question 13

Connecting to Lecture 10, what kinds of experiences facilitate children “passing?”

Answer 13

Facilitating “passing” → connection to lecture 10: the ability to “pass” such tasks and attribute intentions develops over time. Experiences involving social interactions, exposure to intentional actions, and social cues likely contribute to the development of infant’s ability to understand and attribute intentions. As infants gain more experience with observing and engaging in social interactions, they become more proficient in decoding other’s intentions

Question 14

Explain the significance of pointing in ambiguous situations

Answer 14

Pointing: significant communicative gesture, especially in ambiguous situations where individuals seek clarification or share attention. Serves as a non-verbal cue to direct someone’s focus toward a specific object or event

Question 15

Explain the significance of social referencing in ambiguous situations

Answer 15

Social referencing: involves seeking information from others in uncertain or ambiguous situations. individuals look to social cues, often from trusted others, to interpret and respond appropriately to a novel or ambiguous stimulus

Question 16

How does pointing and social referencing connect to joint attention

Answer 16

Joint attention → example: a mother and her infant are playing with a toy. The mother looks at the toy, then looks at the infant, and back to the toy. The infant follows the mother’s gaze, establishing joint attention on the toy. This early from of joint attention is crucial for the development of shared attentional gesture

Pointing → example: a toddler sees a bird outside the window and points to it while looking at their caregiver. By pointing, the child directs the caregiver’s attention to the bird, establishing joint attention on the external stimulus

Social referencing → example: a child encounters a new and potentially frightening object in the environment. The child looks at their parents facial expression for cues on how to react. If the parent smiles and appears calm, the child may interpret the object as safe, facilitating social referencing in an ambiguous situation

Question 17

How does pointing and social referencing facilitate children’s learning in at least two different situations?

Answer 17

Language acquisition → pointing: children often point to objects of interest, and caregivers, in turn, label those objects. This reciprocal interaction contributes to language acquisition as children associate words with the objects they are pointing to

Emotional regulation → social referencing: in situations of ambiguity or novelty, social referencing helps children regulate their emotions. By observing a caregiver’s emotional expression, a child may decide how to interpret and respond to a situation. This is a form of learning emotional cues from others

Question 18

What was the difference between Repacholi & Gopnik (1997) and Kushnir et al. (2010)? What did each study find regarding children’s understanding of others’ desire?

Answer 18

Repacholi & Gopnik (1997)
Difference:
This study focused on investigating children’s understanding of desires and how it relates to emotional expressions. The primary emphasis was on the influence of emotional cues on attributing desires to others

Findings
They found that by the age of 18 months, children could use emotional expressions as cues to infer other’s desires. Specifically, they observed that children attributed different desires to characters based on the characters emotional reactions to a particular objects or event

Kushnir et al (2010)
Difference:
Kushnir et al. extended the exploration of children’s understanding of desires by investigating the role of probabilistic information. The study delved into how children use statistical sampling information to infer the preferences of others

Findings:
They discovered that children as young as 14 months could use statistical information to make inferences about other’s desires. The study presented scenarios where an individual consistently chose one object over another, and children were able to pick up on this statistical regularity to infer the person’s preference or desire

Repacholi & Gopnik (1997) focused on emotional cues and their impact on desire attribution, finding that by 18 months, children could use emotional expressions to infer others’ desires
Kushnir et al. (2010) extended this exploration by introducing probabilistic information, revealing that children as young as 14 months could utilize statistical sampling to infer the preferences or desires of others. Both studies contribute to our understanding of the early development of social cognition and the ability to attribute desires to others

Question 19

Indicate why the study of conflicting desires or false beliefs is particularly important for understanding whether children are actually representing others’ mental states.

Answer 19

The study of conflicting desires or false beliefs is crucial for understanding whether children are genuinely representing others’ mental states because it provides insights into the development of theory of mind. Theory of mind refers to the ability to attribute mental states, such as beliefs, desires, and intentions, to oneself and others. Investigating how children handle conflicting desires or false beliefs helps researchers and psychologists assess the sophistication of children’s mental state understanding.

Here are key reasons why the study of conflicting desires or false beliefs is particularly important:

Indicator of Theory of Mind Development:
Understanding conflicting desires or false beliefs requires recognizing that individuals can have mental states different from one’s own. This recognition is a fundamental aspect of theory of mind. Children’s ability to navigate situations involving conflicting desires or false beliefs reflects the development of their understanding of the richness and diversity of others’ mental lives.

Insight into Perspective-Taking:
Handling conflicting desires or false beliefs involves considering things from another person’s perspective. This ability to take others’ perspectives is foundational for successful social interactions. Studying how children handle conflicting desires or false beliefs provides insights into their capacity for perspective-taking, a crucial aspect of theory of mind.

Prediction and Explanation of Behavior:
The ability to attribute conflicting desires or false beliefs allows children to predict and explain the behaviour of others in a more nuanced way. It goes beyond merely observing actions and involves understanding the mental processes that drive behaviour. This skill is essential for forming accurate expectations about others’ actions and responding appropriately in social situations.

Foundation for Social Interaction:
Recognizing conflicting desires or false beliefs is essential for navigating social relationships effectively. It enables children to understand and respond to the intentions, motivations, and emotions of others, contributing to successful social interactions. This aspect of theory of mind is critical for developing and maintaining positive social relationships.

Question 20

Define theory of mind

Answer 20

Theory of mind: refers to the cognitive ability to attribute mental states, including beliefs, desires, intentions, and emotions, to oneself and others. It involves understanding that different individuals can have different thoughts, knowledge, and perspectives and that these mental states influence behaviour

Question 21

Which tasks are traditionally used to assess explicit theory of mind?

Answer 21

False belief task: individuals are presented with a situation where a character holds a belief that contradicts reality. The individual is then asked to predict how the character will behave based on their false belief. Success in false belief task is considered a key indicator of explicit theory of mind

Appearance-reality: assess the ability to differentiate between an object’s superficial appearance and its actual properties. This task helps researchers understand whether an individual can recognize that appearances can be deceiving and that there is a distinction between how things seem and how they really are

Question 22

Responses expected at different ages (theory of mind)

Answer 22

2.5 years: at this age, children typically struggle with false belief tasks. They often fail to attribute beliefs that differ from their own or the current state of reality. Predictions based on the character’s false belief may not align with the actual situation

3.5 years: around this age, there is often evidence of improvement. Children may start to grasp the concept of false beliefs, showing a better understanding that others can have beliefs different from their own

4.5 years by this age, children usually demonstrate a more advanced understanding of false beliefs. They can predict and explain behaviour based on other’s false beliefs, indicating a more mature theory of mind

Question 23

Appearance-reality tasks (theory of mind)

Answer 23

2.5 years: children may struggle to differentiate between appearance and reality. Their responses may be more influenced by the objects immediate, visible features rather than its actual properties

3.5 years: improvement is often seen, with children becoming more capable of considering the distinction between appearance and reality. However, some challenges may still persist

4.5 years: by this age, children are expected to more reliably distinguish between appearance and reality. They can understand that an object may look different from what it truly is

Question 24

Evidence of qualitative and quantitative change (theory of mind)

Answer 24

Qualitative change: A qualitative change would involve a shift in the nature of children’s reasoning. For example, moving from a complete lack of understanding of false beliefs to a basic recognition that others can have different beliefs. It represents a fundamental shift in cognitive processing

Quantitative change: A quantitative change involves incremental improvements in existing abilities. For instance, progressing from a partial understanding of false beliefs to a more sophisticated and accurate prediction of behaviour based on others’ beliefs. It represents a gradual refinement and enhancement of cognitive skills.

Question 25

Explain why Onishi & Baillargeon (2005) provides evidence of implicit false belief understanding

Answer 25

Onishi & Baillargeon, researchers aimed to investigate whether infants as young as 15 months old could demonstrate implicit false belief understanding. Implicit false belief understanding refers to an individual’s ability to anticipate and respond to other’s actions based on the recognition that the others hold false beliefs about a situation

Key findings: In the experiment, infants were shown scenarios involving a character who held a false belief about the location of an object. The researchers found that infants as young as 15 months exhibited a longer looking time when the character’s actions violated the character’s false belief, suggesting that they anticipated the character’s behaviour based on the false belief

Question 26

Control for superficial features: to ensure that infants were responding to the underlying false belief rather than superficial features, the researchers implemented controls:

Answer 26

Control conditions: The study included both True Belief (TB) conditions, where the character’s belief was accurate, and False Belief (FB) conditions, where the character held a false belief. Comparing infants’ responses in both conditions allowed the researchers to distinguish between responses driven by the character’s actual belief and those influenced by the false belief

Counterbalanced design: The order of events and scenarios was counterbalanced across participants to control for any potential biases introduced by the sequence of events

Matching events: The researchers ensured that the events leading up to the false belief and true belief conditions were matched in all aspects except for the characters’ beliefs. This helped isolate the influence of belief states on infants’ expectations and responses

Question 27

Create a more robust task by using both TB and FB conditions?

Answer 27

By incorporating both TB and FB conditions, Onishi & Baillargeon created a more robust task that allowed them to disentangle infants’ responses to the characters’ actual knowledge from their responses to false beliefs. The longer looking times in the FB conditions suggested that infants were sensitive to the incongruence between the characters’ actions and their false beliefs

Question 28

Be able to contrast performance on explicit false belief tasks and implicit false belief tasks.

Answer 28

Two dominant accounts:
One system account: suggests that there is a single, unified system underlying both implicit and explicit false belief understanding. Differences in performance are attributed to task demands and cognitive resources
Two system account: proposes that implicit and explicit false belief tasks tap into distinct cognitive systems with different developmental trajectories and neural bases

Question 29

How does the “one system” account explain failure on explicit tasks, and how does the false photograph task relate?

Answer 29

One system account:
Failure on explicit tasks: according to this account, young children may fail explicit false belief tasks due to the demands on working memory, inhibition, and language processing. Explicit tasks often involve verbal communication and understanding complex narratives

False photograph task: in the false photograph task, children are shown a photograph that misrepresents the current state of affairs. Failure on this task is explained by the cognitive demands of reconciling the photograph with reality, requiring more advanced cognitive skills

Task demands: explicit tasks often demand higher-order cognitive processes, including verbal reasoning, memory, and narrative comprehension. These demands can overwhelm young children, leading to performance failures

Question 30

How does the “two system” account explain failure on explicit tasks?

Answer 30

Two system account:
Failure on explicit tasks: the two system accounts posit that explicit false belief tasks and implicit false belief tasks involve different cognitive systems. Explicit tasks require a developed theory of mind, while implicit tasks rely on more basic, automatic processes
Neural systems: implicit false belief tasks are associated with brain regions linked to automatic processing, such as the right temporo-parietal junction (RTPJ). Explicit false belief tasks involve additional cortical regions associated with controlled, reflective processing

Question 31

Which neural systems appear to be activated for implicit tasks, and which for explicit tasks?

Answer 31

Neural systems activation:
Implicit tasks: activation of the RTPJ, a region specialised for mental state reasoning, is observed during implicit false belief tasks. This region is implicated in processing other’s thoughts and intentions

Explicit tasks: in explicit false belief task, additional prefrontal regions associated with cognitive control and working memory are activated

Question 32

What is the right temporo-parietal junction?

Answer 32

Right temporo-parietal junction:
RTPJ: a brain region located in the right hemisphere, situated at the junction of the temporal and parietal lobes

Question 33

Once specialized, how does it activate when reading stories describing someone’s physical appearance, bodily sensations, or thoughts?

Answer 33

Specialization for representing other’s thoughts:
The RTPJ became specialised for representing others’ thoughts during childhood and adolescence. Neurodevelopmental changes contribute to the refinement and specilization of this region

Question 34

Watch Rebecca Saxe’s TED Talk: what evidence do we have that the activation of the RTPJ causes differences in processing of others’ mental states (especially intentions)?

Answer 34

Activation during story processing:
Once specialized, the RTPJ activates differently when processing stories describing various aspects of individuals, such as physical appearances bodily sensations, or thoughts
Physical appearance: when processing information related to physical appearance, the RTPJ may engage in recognizing and representing visual characteristics
Bodily sensation: in the context of bodily sensations, the RTPJ might be involved in processing and understanding sensory experiences and emotions
Thoughts and intentions: when reading stories describing someone’s thoughts and intentions, the RTPJ is particularly active. This activation reflects the regions role in mentalizing or attributing mental states to others

Rebecca Saxe’s TED Talk:
In her TED Talk, Rebecca Saxe discusses her research on the RTPJ and its involvement in theory of mind and understanding others intentions

Evidence for RTPJ activation
Saxe’s work includes neuroimaging studies where the RTPJ is observed to be activated when individuals engage in tasks requiring the understanding of others mental states, especially their intentions
Lesion studies and neuroimaging experiments involving moral judgments task provide evidence of the RTPJ role in processing information related to intentions and beliefs

Casual role of RTPJ activation:
Saxe’s research contributes to the understanding that the activation of the RTPJ is not merely correlated with mentalizing but plays a causal role. This is supported by experiments using non-invasive brain stimulation techniques, demonstrating changes in social cognition when manipulating RTPJ activity

Question 35

Be able to describe how children who pass explicit false beliefs tasks (e.g., 5-year-olds) would perform on other more “generalization-based” tasks: considering intentions in moral evaluations (e.g., the “sandwich” scenario in Saxe’s Talk), linking false belief and emotion, or cheating/lying

Answer 35

Considering intentions in moral evaluation (e.g., “sandwich” scenario in Saxe’s talk)
Children who pass explicit false belief tasks tend t be more adept at considering intentions in moral evaluations
In the “sandwich” scenario, where intentions matter for moral judgments, these children are likely to focus on the actor intentions rather than just the outcomes
They recognize that actions driven by good intentions, even if resulting in a negative outcome, may be judged more leniently in moral terms

Linking false belief and emotions:
Children who successfully navigate explicit false beliefs tasks demonstrate an understanding of the distinction between what others believe and the true state of affairs
In tasks linking false belief and emotion, they are likely to showcase an ability to connect someone’s emotional responses to their beliefs, even if those beliefs are not aligned with reality
For example, they might understand why a character feels disappointed based on their false beliefs

Cheating/Lying
Children passing explicit false beliefs tasks are more likely to comprehend to the concept of deception and recognize situations involving cheating or lying
They understand that deceiving others involves manipulating their beliefs, which aligns with the cognitive skills developed in false beliefs tasks
When faced with scenarios involving cheating or lying, these children may demonstrate an understanding of the deceptive nature of such actions and the potential impact on other’s beliefs

Question 36

Describe traditional views of autism

Answer 36

Traditional views of autism:
Often perceived through a deficit model, emphasizing impairments and challenges in social communication, repetitive behaviours, and restricted interests

The focus was on observable behaviours and difficulties in understanding and engaging in social interactions, with an assumption on a lack on interest in others

Question 37

Why was the empathizing-systemizing model a major advance?

Answer 37

Empathizing-systemizing model as a major advance:
The empathizing-systemizing model, proposed by Simon Baron-Cohen, represented a major advance in understanding autism

It introduced the idea that individuals with autism may have a cognitive style characterised by strengths in systemizing (analyzing and constructing systems) and challenges in empathizing (understanding and responding to other’s emotions)

Question 38

In what ways was it thought to explain symptomatology well?

Answer 38

Explanation of symptomatology
Empathizing aspect: individuals with autism were seen as having challenges in recognizing and responding to emotional cues, leading to difficulties in social interactions and understanding others perspective

Systemizing aspect: the model highlighted strengths in areas like attention to detail, pattern recognition, and adherence to routines which could contribute to the intense focus on specific interests seen in individual with autism

Question 39

In what ways was this limited and how has our understanding changed?

Answer 39

Limitations and evolving understand
Limitations of the model: while the empathizing-systemizing model provided valuable insights, it had limitations, such as oversimplifying the heterogeneity of autism and not fully capturing the variability in cognitive profiles

Expanded perspectives: over time, research has highlighted the need for a more nuanced understanding of autism, considering individual differences and recognizing that strengths and challenges can coexist

Social motivation theory: more recent perspectives, like the social motivation theory, emphasize that individuals with autism may have social motivation but face challenges in social information processing, moving away from the notion of lack of interest in social interaction

Question 40

What is the double empathy problem?

Answer 40

Double empathy problem
The double empathy problem is a concept that challenges that traditional assumption that difficulties in social interaction are solely the result of deficits in individuals with autism. Instead, it suggests that there may be a mutual challenge in understanding between neurotypical individuals and those with autism

Question 41

How does Crompton et al.’s (2020) telephone study relate?

Answer 41

Crompton et al’s (2020) telephone study:
The study explored communication dynamics between autistic and neurotypical individuals in telephone conversation settings

Findings indicated that when communication occurred without the visual cues present in face-to-face interactions, autistic individuals were rated similarly to neurotypical individuals in terms of social communication skills

Question 42

What does this suggest for our understanding of interventions targeting autistic communication, rather than neurotypical communication or accessible design?

Answer 42

Implications for interventions:
Shift in perspective: the double empathy problem suggests a need to shift the focus of interventions from a deficit-oriented approach to a more reciprocal understanding of communication challenges

Autistic communication styles: recognizing and respecting autistic communication styles, which may differ from neurotypical norms, becomes crucial. This involves understanding and valuing the ways autistic individuals prefer to communicate

Designing accessible communication: interventions should consider designing communication environments that accommodate the diverse ways individuals with autism communicate. This may involve providing alternatives to face-to-face communication, such as text-based or visual communication methods

Question 43

Be able to describe at least three pieces of evidence in support of the double empathy problem.

Answer 43

Three pieces of evidence supporting the double empathy problem:
Mutual understanding: research has shown that when communication occurs in contexts that align with autistic individuals preferred styles, there can be a mutual understanding comparable to neurotypical interactions

Context dependence: the effectiveness of communication for individuals with autism is context-dependent. In situation where the communication demands align with their strengths, they can exhibit effective social communication skills

Societal biases: The double empathy problem highlights the role of societal biases in shaping perceptions of communication. Understanding that both neurotypical and autistic individuals bring unique strengths and challenges to communication challenges stereotypes and fosters a more inclusive perspective

Question 44

What is “autistic masking?”

Answer 44

Autistic masking: refers to the process whereby individuals with autism consciously or unconsciously suppress or modify their autistic traits in social situations to fit in or conform to neurotypical norms

Question 45

How does it “autistic masking” contribute to negative health outcomes?

Answer 45

Contribute to negative health outcomes
Physical and emotional strain: masking requires constant effort and vigilance, leading to physical and emotional strain. Individuals may experience fatigue, stress, and anxiety as they navigate social situations by suppressing their natural tendencies

Mental health challenges: prolonged masking is associated with mental health challenges, including increased risk of anxiety, depression, and burnout. The strain of concealing one’s authentic self can lead to emotional exhaustion and heightened vulnerability to mental health issues

Social isolation: masking can contribute to a sense of isolation. The effort to conform may lead individuals to avoid social situations or withdraw rom interactions, as maintaining the facade become mentally and emotionally taxing

Delayed diagnosis: the ability to mask traits effectively may result in delayed or overlooked autism diagnoses, especially individuals assigned females at birth. This delay in diagnosis can hinder access to appropriate support and accommodations

Impaired self identity: constantly masking can erode one’s sense of self. Individuals may struggle to understand and accept their authentic identify, leading to challenges in building self-esteem and self-acceptance

Exacerbation of co-occurring conditions: masking may exacerbate co-occurring conditions, such as sensory sensitivities and executive function challenges. Suppressing natural responses to sensory stimuli or adapting to neurotypical organizational patterns can intensify stress and cognitive load

Impact on relationships: masking can strain interpersonal relationships. When individuals feels compelled to conform, their true selves may remain hidden, potentially hindering the development of authentic connections and mutual understanding