What Can We Learn by Treating Perspective Taking as Problem Solving?

Abstract

Perspective taking has been studied extensively using a wide variety of experimental tasks. The theoretical constructs that are used to develop these tasks and interpret the results obtained from them, most notably theory of mind (ToM), have conceptual shortcomings from a behavior-analytic perspective. The behavioral approach to conceptualizing and studying this class of behavior is parsimonious and pragmatic, but the body of relevant research is currently small. The prominent relational frame theory (RFT) approach to derived perspective taking asserts that "deictic framing" is a core component of this class of behavior, but this proposal also appears to be conceptually problematic. We suggest that in many cases perspective taking is problem solving; when successful, both classes of behavior involve the emission of context-appropriate precurrent behavior that facilitates the appropriate response (i.e., the "solution"). Conceptualizing perspective taking in this way appears to have many advantages, which we explore herein.Keywords deictic framing . mind reading . precurrent behavior . stimulus control . theory of mind . visual perspective taking Perspective taking is an ability of critical importance that helps us establish and maintain relationships, negotiate deals, predict the actions of others, and achieve a wide variety of other valuable outcomes. This ability has been studied extensively by psychologists, who have approached the topic using many different theoretical constructs and experimental procedures. In this work, we present some common theoretical and experimental approaches to perspective taking, followed by a description of a behavioral approach to perspective taking and problem solving. In brief, problem solving relies on the emission of overt or covert behaviors that produce supplementary stimuli that in turn evoke

Deictic Framing Performance Fails to Generalize to Other Perspective-Taking Tasks

“…This might be due to a training effect, because the most complex version of the question (double reversed) is usually provided last. However, it may also be indicative of the participants' reliance upon simple discriminative stimuli, such as the length of the conditional statement (which is the longest in the case of double-reversals) to complete the tasks accurately (Taylor & Edwards, 2021). If participants do come to rely on such strategies to solve the BH protocol tasks then, at face value, this type of behavior appears to have very little to do with what can meaningfully be described as perspective taking.…”

Editorial: Perspective taking in language

“…Linked to the observation in (ii) that the origin of perspective is not necessarily an animate person but can also be a rather abstract functional instance within the text, cognitive and linguistic perspectivization do not necessarily have to be the result of a perceptual process. Rather, the notion of perspective is extended to all kinds of mental states, such as knowledge, desires, beliefs, or emotions [for an overview see e.g., Taylor and Edwards (2021) who distinguish between visual perspective taking (VPT) vs. mental state attribution, typically referred to as theory of mind (ToM)]. As a result, cognitive and linguistic perspectivization are also not necessarily directed at a perceptible object that one is taking a perspective on.…”