Lecture 8 - recap and controversies

Question 1

how to explain infant ToM

Answer 1

modularity / early competence
theory-theory / late competence / conceptual change
two-systems theory
not ToM: behavioural rules, teleology, submentalizing
replicability of some paradigms

Question 2

implicit infant FB understanding: there is a wide range of ages at which infants pass various paradigms. what does this mean

Answer 2

there may be a theoretical significance to this

Question 3

what is the importance of the dissociation between identity and location fals ebelief understanding (and what is the dissociation)

Answer 3

importance: supports two-systems theory
14month - 2.5 year olds can pass identity FB as well as location FB (Scott et al 2009, Buttelmann et al, 2019)
2-3 year olds fail identity FB but pass location FB (low and watts, 2013, Fizke et al 2017)

Question 4

implicit mechanisms

Answer 4

mentalistic: minimal ToM (registrations, coding relations; Apperly, Butterfill, Low)
non-mentalistic: Behaviour rules (completely non-mentalistic or including only non-representational mental states like seeing; perner)
sub-mentalising (not even behavioural rules; heyes)

Question 5

explicit mechanisms

Answer 5

(Meta)representational theory of mind (perner)

teleology?

Question 6

Perner and Roessler (2012) on impliict knowledge in behaviour rule

Answer 6

behaviour rules leave the mind implicit: they capture the causal relations between situations and actions coded by the mind (eg FB situation) without representing the mind
implicit knowledge: a regularity (if x then y) can be implicitly known by inferring y whenever x is known without representing the conditional (false belief) that licenses this inference
explicit knowledge: a regularity (if x then y) is explicitly known if the inference from x to y is informed by a representation of the conditional that licenses it (in contrast to implicit knowledge)

Question 7

Two systems theory (Butterfill & Apperly, 2013)

-explain the two systems

Answer 7

system 1 (implicit): automatic, fast, efficient, limited mentalising
system 2 (explicit): voluntary, slow, inefficient, flexible, not limited mentalising

Question 8

explain minimal ToM from butterfill and apperly

Answer 8

the implicit system = minimal ToM
registration of situations is a condition and a cause of successful goal directed action - proxy for FB allowing success in location FB (but not identity B). types o computation:
1. goal directedness (agents persue goals)
2. encountering (proxy for perception)
3. registering (where an object last encountered)
4. causal registering (goal directed actions to objects are adressed tonplaces where objects were last registeres - proxy for belief)

Question 9

evidence in favour of two-systems theory

Answer 9

signature blind spots (no identity FB?) - low, watts and fizke et al
frequent lack of correlation between emplicit and explicit tasks (Grosse-Wiesmann)

Question 10

evidence against two-systems theory

Answer 10

wang and leslie: inhibition demands affect performance in omplicit visual anticipation FB similarly to explicit FB
ability to pass identity FB tests by infants and toddlers (controversial) Scott & Baillargeon, Buttelmann et al
variability in age for passing different implicit tests
some infant tests may not be so implicit - Buttelmann helping paradigm?

Question 11

what are the two different two-systems possibilities

Answer 11

two completely independent systems working in parallel and co-existing in adulthood
interdependent systems: explicit developmentally built upon implicit

Question 12

name the three this is not ToM options

Answer 12

teleology (perner) - debate whether this is mentalistic or not
sub-mentalising (heyes)
behaviour rules (Povinelli and vonk; perner)

Question 13

explain teleology (priewasser and perner)

Answer 13

by 9-18 months children become teleologists able to derive an agent’s objective reason for an action without concren for the subjective views provided by mental states
teleology = objective facts that provide reason for an action without needing to infer the mental state of another

Question 14

explain sub-mentalising

Answer 14

Heyes: well documented domain general processes that have empirical support from cognitive sceince, but are not evident to common sense (attention priming, retroactive interference, distraction)
not reasoning, but automatic reactions to colours, shapes and movements. eg automatic attentional orienting, encoding specificity, or retroactive intereference

Question 15

explain behaviour reading

Answer 15

based on common sense categories (agents, objects, locations)
very difficult to test empirically as one can always imagine a behaviour rules explanation

Question 16

Sb+ms Povinelli and vonk explanation

Answer 16

Sb = behaviour reading system producing behavioural abstractions to be applied through a rule based system
ms = mentalistic concepts too
it is a combinations of these two which humans have but have to be careful as many paradigms can be explained by sb alone, must have ms to infer ToM
claims behavioural abstractions (ie sb) can explain all primate data)

Question 17

explain the 3 components of Sb

Answer 17

1. a databse of representations of both specific behaviours and statistical invariants which are abstracted across multiple instances of specific behaviours (behaviorual abstractions)
2. a network of statistical relationships between such behavioural abstractions and objective situations
3. use the statistical regularities to compute the likelihood of the specific future actions of others

Question 18

is ToM more parsimonious than behaviour reading

Answer 18

yes mind reading is often the simpler explanation and have to watch can prove behavioru reading to be wrong so is careful to make sure a circular argument is avoided
but no
ToM is not more parsimonious than behaviorual rules becuase you still need all behavioural rules to use ToM

Question 19

intervening variable approach (whiten, 1994)

Answer 19

the advantage of a mind reading over a behavioru reading explanation
translating behaviours into mentalistic constructs might facilitate learning and adpatation, as connections between specific situations and reactions need not be learned individually

Question 20

see essay for ways round povinelli and vonk problem

Answer 20

goggles etc paradigms
so no sb to rely on
then can only infer ms