Action anticipation based on an agent's epistemic state in toddlers and adults

Schuwerk, Tobias; Kampis, Dora; Baillargeon, Renée; Bı́ró, Szilvia; Bohn, Manuel; Byers‐Heinlein, Krista; Csibra, Gergely; Dörrenberg, Sebastian; Fisher, Cynthia D.; Franchin, Laura; Fulcher, Tess; Garbisch, Isa; Geraci, Alessandra; Wiesmann, Charlotte Grosse; Hamlin, J. Kiley; Hepach, Robert; Hunnius, Sabine; Hyde, Daniel C.; Kármán, Petra; Kosakowski, Heather L.; Kovács, Ágnes Melinda; Kramer, Anna L.; Kulke, Louisa; Lee, Crystal; Lew‐Williams, Casey; Liszkowski, Ulf; Mahowald, Kyle; Mascaro, Olivier; Meyer, Marlene; Moreau, David; Perner, Josef; Poulin‐Dubois, Diane; Powell, Lindsey J.; Prein, Julia C.; Priewasser, Beate; Proft, Marina; Raz, Gal; Reschke, Peter J.; Ross, Josephine; Rothmaler, Katrin; Saxe, Rebecca; Schneider, Dana; Southgate, Victoria; Surian, Luca; Tebbe, Anna-Lena; Träuble, Birgit; Tsui, Angeline; Wertz, Annie E.; Yuen, Francis K.O.; Yuile, Amanda Rose; Zellner, Luise; Frank, Michael C.; Rakoczy, Hannes

doi:10.31234/osf.io/x4jbm

Cited by 18 publications

(45 citation statements)

References 76 publications

(95 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Given that we used the same stimuli as in the original study, it is possible that what was sufficient to motivate toddlers to attend to the stimuli in 2006 is different from what is sufficient to motivate them 14 years later. Moving forward, based on such considerations, new projects such as the multi-lab collaborative ManyBabies2 will present toddlers with more modern, newly devised stimuli that are designed to be more appealing [32].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A two-lab direct replication attempt of Southgate, Senju and Csibra (2007)

Kampis

Karman²,

Csibra

et al. 2021

R. Soc. open sci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The study by Southgate et al. (2007 Psychol. Sci. 18 , 587–592. ( doi:10.1111/j.1467-9280.2007.01944.x )) has been widely cited as evidence for false-belief attribution in young children. Recent replication attempts of this paradigm have yielded mixed results: several studies did not replicate the original findings, raising doubts about the suitability of the paradigm to assess non-verbal action prediction and Theory of Mind. In a preregistered collaborative study including two of the original authors, we tested one hundred and sixty 24- to 26-month-olds across two locations using the original stimuli, procedure and analyses as closely as possible. We found no evidence for action anticipation: only roughly half of the infants looked to the location of an agent's impending action when action prediction did not require taking into account the agent's beliefs and a similar number when the agent held a false-belief. These results and other non-replications suggest that this paradigm does not reliably elicit action prediction and thus cannot assess false-belief understanding in 2-year-olds. While the present results do not support any claim regarding the presence or absence of Theory of Mind in infants, we conclude that an important piece of evidence that has to date supported arguments for the existence of this competence can no longer serve that function.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A two-lab direct replication attempt of Southgate, Senju and Csibra (2007)

Kampis

Karman²,

Csibra

et al. 2021

R. Soc. open sci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…For example, an infant in a preference task might fully expect the agent to approach her preferred toy at the start of the unexpected event but still not focus on that AOI prior to the agent's action; instead, the infant might look at the unpreferred toy because that is the location the agent last approached, or the infant might simply look at the agent and wait for her to act (in the same way, an adult might be able to predict a partner's actions in a situation but not bother to anticipate them). As noted previously, infants may actively anticipate an expected outcome-by looking at the right AOI at the right time-only when features of the situation strongly elicit that response, and researchers are just beginning to understand what some of these features may be (Téglás & Bonatti, 2016;Schuwerk et al, 2022).…”

Section: Evaluation Of the Three Possibilitiesmentioning

confidence: 98%

The Violation-of-Expectation Paradigm: A Conceptual Overview

Margoni¹,

Surian²,

Baillargeon³

2022

Preprint

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

For over 35 years, the violation-of-expectation (VOE) paradigm has been used to study the development, during the first three years of life, of a wide range of cognitive expectations, including physical, psychological, biological, sociomoral, numerical, statistical, probabilistic, and linguistic expectations. Surprisingly, despite the paradigm’s widespread use and the many seminal findings it has contributed to psychological science over the years, there has not yet been an attempt at providing a detailed, in-depth analysis of its development and conceptual underpinnings. Here, we attempted to do just that. We first focus on the rationale of the paradigm and discuss how it has evolved over time. Next, we show how a panoply of methodological advances and extensions has helped broaden and strengthen the paradigm. We then turn to a review of the paradigm’s main strengths and limitations. Finally, we end with a discussion of various challenges that have been leveled against the paradigm over the years. Through it all, our goal was two-fold. First, we sought to provide future generations of developmental psychologists and other social scientists with an informed and constructive introduction to the conceptual underpinnings of the VOE paradigm. Second, we wanted to take stock on what the paradigm has revealed to date about how infants form expectations about events, and about how surprise at unexpected events, in or out of the laboratory, can lead to learning, by prompting infants to revise their working model of the world so as to form more accurate expectations in the future.

show abstract

“…Early in development, a large body of studies points toward infants' sensitivity to others' visual and mental perspective (Baillargeon et al, 2010;Carruthers, 2013;. Besides direct and conceptual replications of various paradigms used with infants (Buttelmann et al, 2015;Király et al, 2018;Schneider et al, 2012;Thoermer et al, 2012), there has also been a recent increase in studies unable to replicate some of the original findings (Baillargeon et al, 2018b;Barone et al, 2019;Poulin-Dubois et al, 2018), leading to a still ongoing debate regarding the replicability of these phenomena, and giving rise to multilab collaborations aiming at large-scale studies probing infants' performance on different theory of mind tasks (Schuwerk et al, 2021). At the Q1 same time, the underlying abilities have been heavily debated, some accounts arguing that evidence on infants' mental state understanding can be explained by cognitive mechanisms that do not fully resemble those present in older children or adults (Apperly & Butterfill, 2009;Butterfill & Apperly, 2013), or do not pertain to mental state reasoning at all but are rather explained by perceptual biases (Heyes, 2014) or rule-based heuristics (Perner & Ruffman, 2005).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Seeing the World From Others’ Perspective: 14-Month-Olds Show Altercentric Modulation Effects by Others’ Beliefs

Kampis

Kovács

2021

Open Mind

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Humans have a propensity to readily adopt others’ perspective, which often influences their behavior even when it seemingly should not. This altercentric influence has been widely studied in adults, yet we lack an understanding of its ontogenetic origins. The current studies investigated whether 14-month-olds’ search in a box for potential objects is modulated by another person’s belief about the box’s content. We varied the person’s potential belief such that in her presence/absence an object was removed, added, or exchanged for another, leading to her true/false belief about the object’s presence (Experiment 1, n = 96); or transformed into another object, leading to her true/false belief about the object’s identity (i.e., the objects represented under a specific aspect, Experiment 2, n = 32). Infants searched longer if the other person believed that an object remained in the box, showing an altercentric influence early in development. These results suggest that infants spontaneously represent others’ beliefs involving multiple objects and raise the possibility that infants can appreciate that others encode the world under a unique aspect.

show abstract

Action anticipation based on an agent's epistemic state in toddlers and adults

Cited by 18 publications

References 76 publications

A two-lab direct replication attempt of Southgate, Senju and Csibra (2007)

A two-lab direct replication attempt of Southgate, Senju and Csibra (2007)

The Violation-of-Expectation Paradigm: A Conceptual Overview

Seeing the World From Others’ Perspective: 14-Month-Olds Show Altercentric Modulation Effects by Others’ Beliefs

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About