adult false belief, kevin thinks milk rebecca thinks juice- either fb or tb where observer sees b changed - what did they believe? If FB usually believe kevin
1 of 14
Apperly er al., (2006)
swap which bucket the bowl is in when not looking - length of time to respond longer with FB dont think about belief question until asked but always thinking of reality
2 of 14
results more
condition 2 pretty much just as quick about belief and state of reality- preparation to answer question leads to them responding - pp hadnt been considering state of belief of protag when asked question then have to work and get right answer...
3 of 14
...
bias process- need t make shift from own position when asked about someone elses belief
4 of 14
Baron-Cohen et al., (1997)
reading the mind in the eyes
5 of 14
West and Kenny, (2011)
failure to satisfy the truth condition- inapprop stim posed static not caused by anything
6 of 14
Pillai et al., (2012)
ASD vs neurotypical- joke, waiting, story and compliments- 4 scenarios that person did the subjects- those without autism have this skill more so
7 of 14
Edey et al., (2016)
Heider and Simmel procedure give human properties coaxing mocking seducing and surprising much more acc when target is typ not ASD, when ASD enact state dif to read- autistic people have minds that are not readable
8 of 14
Faso et al., (2015)
pp instructed to pose facial expressiosn- autism as expressive as typ
9 of 14
Brewer et al., (2016)
though quality and form of their expressions might be dif
10 of 14
Sheppard et al., (2016)
wagners unbiased hit rat, joke waiting story compliments for joke and waiting scenario targets signif readable- ASD less expressive/reactive, Typical good deal more expressive in compliments- bashful embarrassed. ASD- less embarrassed more accepting
11 of 14
...
Just because expressive difficult to interpret because they weren’t sure what they were feeling They were not as readable
12 of 14
Teoh et al., (2017)
targets looked at photographs that caused them +/-, perceivers asked to judge whether target was alone or accomp, and how expressive targets were higher rates for negative for accompanied, neg more express if alone, pos more expressive if accomp
13 of 14
Valanides et al., (2017)
study autobio mem- pride, excitement, shame, guilty- when perceivers med more likely mind reading judgement, med more expressive brits stoic and blank, collectivist better perceive self as belonging to collective mind
14 of 14
Other cards in this set
Card 2
Front
Apperly er al., (2006)
Back
swap which bucket the bowl is in when not looking - length of time to respond longer with FB dont think about belief question until asked but always thinking of reality
Comments
No comments have yet been made