Spontaneous Perspective-Taking and Psychopathic Traits
Perspective-taking (i.e., Theory of Mind) is the human ability to understand the situation, beliefs, desires, or intentions of another person (Decety & Sommerville, 2003; Mead, 1934). Spontaneous perspective-taking allows for the unconscious visual tracking of where people and objects are (Drayton et al., 2018; Surtees et al., 2016). This system lays the foundation for more complex cognitive reasoning about what we think others know (Michelon & Zacks, 2006; Santiesteban et al., 2015).
Evidence supporting spontaneous perspective-taking comes from the dot perspective-taking task (Samson et al., 2010), in which an avatar stands in a room with dots on the walls. The number of dots the participant sees is either the same (consistent) or different (inconsistent) than what the avatar can “see”, and participants are asked to verify either their own perspective or the avatar’s. Previous research suggests that people are slower to verify their own perspective on inconsistent trials, indicating that they are spontaneously processing the other’s perspective (Nielsen et al., 2015; Gardner et al., 2018). However, this evidence is contested as similar effects have been found when a nonsocial stimulus (i.e., arrow) is used in place of the avatar, suggesting directional cues may be the cause of these results (Santiesteban et al., 2014). These prior studies are limited by small sample sizes of undergraduates, repeated-measures designs with participants primed by completing both the avatar and arrow conditions, and not matching the avatar to the participant on race.
Understanding individual differences in spontaneous perspective-taking can not only inform the operationalization of the concept, but advance our knowledge about many psychological conditions. Psychopathy, a disorder characterized by striking deficits in empathy and guilt, manipulativeness, deceitfulness, impulsivity, and risk-taking (Hare, 2003; Hare & Neumann, 2008), is of particular interest in regards to perspective taking. Only one prior study has employed the dot perspective-taking task to investigate spontaneous perspective-taking and psychopathy. Drayton et al. (2018) found that higher total psychopathy scores were related to faster reaction times when judging their own perspective, indicating impairment in spontaneous perspective-taking abilities. However, no study has examined psychopathic traits and spontaneous perspective taking in a community sample.
The current study seeks to address the limitations of the dot perspective-taking task in order to more accurately assess the operalization of spontaneous perspective-taking, as well as investigate individual differences in psychopathy in relation to the task.
Comments
Other causes behind task aptitude
Hi Callie, this is incredibly interesting research! Are there potential sources for faster reaction times in the dot-perspective taking task that are not linked with psychopathy? Or is the test inherently a predictor of empathetic ability?
Theory of Mind development in childhood
This is very interesting research on the relationship between perspective-taking, or Theory of Mind, and psychopathy. Because Theory of Mind typically develops and matures during childhood, I am curious if you believe that there is a link between improper or abnormal development of TOM and psychopathy. In other words, could a delay or inability to understand TOM as a child be an early sign of a psychopathic or antisocial personality?
Response to Comments
In response to:
"Other causes behind task aptitude
Hi Callie, this is incredibly interesting research! Are there potential sources for faster reaction times in the dot-perspective taking task that are not linked with psychopathy? Or is the test inherently a predictor of empathetic ability?
The dot perspective-taking task's operationalization is highly contested within its field. It was initially developed without regard to psychopathology at all--instead it was made to serve as an explanation for why young infants seem to exhibit some perspective-taking skills despite not having fully developed cognitive perspective-taking yet. The main thing that studies have said might account for faster reaction times instead of spontaneous perspective-taking is attention to directional cues. That is, the gaze of the avatar primes people to look in that direction which then accounts for the quicker reaction times on consistent trials. This study is attempting to parse out this explanation from the other by addressing prior limitations. The test is not a predictor of empathic ability--but rather the ability to automatically take on someone's visual perspective which contributes to higher level cognitive processes like understanding what somebody knows, thinks, and believes. Empathy is a separate construct, and has reliably been found to be impaired in psychopathy.
In response to:
Theory of Mind development in childhood
This is very interesting research on the relationship between perspective-taking, or Theory of Mind, and psychopathy. Because Theory of Mind typically develops and matures during childhood, I am curious if you believe that there is a link between improper or abnormal development of TOM and psychopathy. In other words, could a delay or inability to understand TOM as a child be an early sign of a psychopathic or antisocial personality?
Psychopathic traits in childhood are commonly measured as callous-unemotional (CU) traits, which are derived from the affective facet of psychopathy and include lack of empathy, guilt, etc. Perspective-taking, or TOM, has been contentious when studied in conjunction with CU traits. Studies have found evidence for impaired (ex: Milone et al., 2019) and intact (ex: Jones et al., 2010; Waller et al., 2015) cognitive perspective-taking in relation to CU traits. So to answer your question--it is possible but nobody is quite sure! Further research is needed, and hopefully this research helps by elucidating some TOM skills that might be impaired in psychopathy, which may relate to CU traits considering the developmental link there.
Thanks for the questions,
Callie Jones