Dissemin is shutting down on January 1st, 2025

Published in

Open Science Framework, 2022

DOI: 10.17605/osf.io/g2pq4

Elsevier, Journal of Memory and Language, (104), p. 1-24

DOI: 10.1016/j.jml.2018.08.007

Links

Tools

Export citation

Search in Google Scholar

Social and configural effects on the cognitive dynamics of perspective-taking

Journal article published in 2017 by Alexia Galati ORCID, Rick Dale, Nicholas D. Duran ORCID
This paper is made freely available by the publisher.
This paper is made freely available by the publisher.

Full text: Download

Question mark in circle
Preprint: policy unknown
Question mark in circle
Postprint: policy unknown
Question mark in circle
Published version: policy unknown

Abstract

How do environmental cues and social perspectives influence perspective selection? Listeners responded to instructions (e.g., “Give me the folder on the right”) from a simulated partner, selecting from two objects consistently aligned with themselves (ego-aligned; Experiment 1a) or the speaker (other-aligned; Experiment1b). In Experiment 2, listeners selected from triangular 3-object configurations whose orientation varied (ego-, other-, or neither-aligned). When the configural cue was other-aligned (consistently or inconsistently: Experiments 1b and 2), listeners were more likely to be other-centric. Other-centric responders stabilized their strategy more quickly when the cue was other-aligned, but their mouse trajectories did not exhibit facilitation (Experiment 1b vs. 1a). In Experiment 2, other-centric responders showed sensitivity to the configural cue, making longer and more complex trajectories on neither-aligned configurations. That cue also influenced how listeners interpreted the front-back terms. Our findings suggest that configural cues can promote an other-centric strategy and its stabilization, influence response dynamics selectively, and impact the interpretation of spatial language.