Investigating the Neural and Behavioral Association of Spatial, Cognitive, and Affective Perspective Taking
Genre
Thesis/DissertationDate
2022Advisor
Chein, Jason M.Newcombe, Nora
Committee member
Marshall, Peter J.Olson, Ingrid R.
Helion, Chelsea
Shipley, Thomas F.
Chein, Jason M.
Newcombe, Nora
Department
PsychologySubject
Cognitive psychologyNeurosciences
Psychology
Affective perspective taking
Cognitive perspective taking
Empathy
Perspective taking
Spatial perspective taking
Theory of mind
Permanent link to this record
http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12613/8278
Metadata
Show full item recordDOI
http://dx.doi.org/10.34944/dspace/8249Abstract
Perspective taking (PT) is the ability to imagine perspectives that differ from our own. Understanding what others believe (cognitive PT) and feel (affective PT) allows us to better navigate social situations, and understanding what others see (spatial PT) allows us to better navigate spatial environments. Deficits in spatial, cognitive, and affective PT are apparent in several DSM–5 categorized clinical populations including autism spectrum disorder (ASD) and major depressive disorder (MDD). Further, differences in the severity of PT impairments may be related to general mechanisms that support this ability rather than diagnostic categories. However, the general cognitive mechanisms that support PT and whether spatial, cognitive, and affective PT share behavioral co-variance and rely on common neural mechanisms is not yet understood. There are at least two theoretical accounts regarding the association of spatial, cognitive, and affective PT. Common mechanisms accounts propose that the three types of PT are associated because all rely on manipulation of frame-of-reference representations coordinated by dorsal and ventral attentional networks. Alternative proposals suggest that attentional mechanisms support spatial PT, but cognitive and affective PT are supported by a distinct module for mental state reasoning. In this dissertation, I begin by summarizing prior evidence from studies which examined the developmental emergence of PT abilities, behavioral co-variance of PT in neurotypical and clinically diagnosed adults, and neuroimaging studies of PT. Review of the literature indicates mixed findings with support for both common and distinct mechanisms accounts. Thus, the present work probes the association of spatial, cognitive, and affective PT across two experiments. In Experiment 1, a systematic activation likelihood estimation meta-analysis of spatial, cognitive, and affective PT and attention switching was conducted. Results indicated no single neural region that was commonly associated with all three types of PT, but several overlapping regions among cognitive and affective PT, and separately among spatial PT and attention switching. In Experiment 2, two behavioral tasks and one self-report measure each of spatial, cognitive, and affective PT, a behavioral measure of attention and general reasoning ability were administered to large sample of young adults. Performance on spatial PT tasks did not significantly covary with cognitive PT, attention, nor two of the three affective PT measures in neurotypical adults. In sum, neural and behavioral experiments provided substantial support for distinct mechanisms accounts and only limited support for common mechanisms accounts of PT in neurotypical adults.ADA compliance
For Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) accommodation, including help with reading this content, please contact scholarshare@temple.eduCollections
Related items
Showing items related by title, author, creator and subject.
-
Picturing perspectives: Development of perspective-taking abilities in 4- to 8-year-oldsFrick, A; Möhring, W; Newcombe, NS (2014-01-01)Although the development of perspective taking has been well researched, there is no uniform methodology for assessing this ability across a wide age span when frames of reference conflict. To address this gap, we created scenes of toy photographers taking pictures of layouts of objects from different angles, and presented them to 4- to 8-year-olds (N = 80). Children were asked to choose which one of four pictures could have been taken from a specific viewpoint. Results showed that this new technique confirmed the classic pattern of developmental progress on this kind of spatial skill: (1) 4-year-olds responded near chance level, regardless of layout complexity, (2) there was a growing ability to inhibit egocentric choices around age 6 with layouts of low complexity (one object), (3) performance increased and egocentric responses decreased dramatically around age 7, (4) even at age 8, children still showed considerable individual variability. This perspective taking task can thus be used to address important questions about the supports for early spatial development and the structure of early intellect. © 2014 Frick, Möhring and Newcombe.
-
A complex systems perspective on policy standards for teacher learning and developmentGarner, Joanna K.; Kaplan, Avi; 0000-0002-2898-0085 (2020-09)In the United States, the Interstate Teacher Assessment Consortium (InTASC) Standards and Learning Progressions inform pre-service teacher curricula and in-service teacher professional development and evaluation policies (Council of Chief State School Officers, CCSSO, 2013). We apply a complex dynamic systems (CDS) lens to analyze the Standards document’s ontological assumptions about the nature of teaching and teachers’ professional learning. Our inductive and model-guided content analysis revealed that the Standards’ representation of effective teaching highlights the contextual and iterative, feedback-driven nature of teacher learning and change. Teachers’ learning is described as non-linear and as requiring qualitative reconfigurations of expertise. The development of critical teaching dispositions reflects processes typically associated with identity system exploration. These ideas are congruent with complex dynamic systems theories of teachers’ learning and identity formation such as the Dynamic Systems Model of Role Identity (DSMRI). We derive two conceptual behavioral landscapes for teachers’ practices and for their means of learning. We close by proposing that the findings underscore the importance of partnerships among researchers, practitioners, and policymakers in the use, application, and revision of policy.
-
A complex dynamic systems perspective on identity and its development: The dynamic systems model of role identityKaplan, Avi; Garner, Joanna K.; 0000-0002-2898-0085 (2017)Current prominent models of identity face challenges in bridging across divergent perspectives and apparent dichotomies such as personal or social-collective, conscious or unconscious, and epigenetic or discursive-relational, and affording pursuit of research questions that allows integrative answers. This article presents a coherent theoretical perspective on the integrative nature of identity and its developmental mechanisms. Adopting the contextual social role as a primary unit of analysis, the Dynamic Systems Model of Role Identity (DSMRI) conceptualizes role identity as a Complex Dynamic System (CDS) anchored in action that comprises the actor’s ontological and epistemological beliefs, purpose and goals, self-perceptions and self-definitions, and perceived action possibilities in the role. These system components are conceptualized as interdependent, and identity development is viewed as emergent, continuous, nonlinear, contextualized, and given to influences from within and without the system. The role identity itself constitutes an element within a multilevel hierarchy, which at the unit of analysis of the individual reflects a CDS of the multiple roles that constitute the person’s psychosocial identity. Identity development involves the formation and restructuring of relations within and among role identities through intra- and interpersonal processes that are mediated by sociocognitive and cultural means, and framed by the context as well as by implicit dispositions. The DSMRI provides a framework to conceptualize and investigate the nature of the identity system, its development, and the relationship between identity development and psychological functioning at different units of-analysis, across different developmental stages and contexts, and using quantitative and qualitative methodologies.