Consistency effect in Level-1 visual perspective-taking and cue-validity effect in attentional orienting: Distinguishing the mentalising account from the submentalising account. Issue 1 (2nd January 2021)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Fan, Cong; Susilo, Tirta; Low, Jason
• Is Part Of: Visual cognition. Volume 29:Issue 1(2021)
• Page Start: 22
• Page End: 37
• Publication Date: 2021-01-02
• Subjects: Consistency effect -- implicit mentalising -- submentalising -- attentional orienting -- cue-validity effect; Visual perception -- Periodicals; Cognition -- Periodicals; Vision -- Periodicals; 152.14
• DOI: 10.1080/13506285.2020.1857488
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 1350-6285

Abstract

ABSTRACT: Adults are slower to judge the number of dots they can see when an avatar sees a different number of dots. This consistency effect is interpreted as evidence of implicit mentalising – adults track others' visual perspective even when it is task-irrelevant. The submentalising account, however, argues the effect reflects domain-general attentional orienting. In Experiment 1, using a real human face, the consistency effect was elicited for sighted but not eyes-covered faces with head direction, suggesting participants tracked the agent's mental state. Experiment 2 manipulated how much direction cuing (head-front-gaze-averted vs. head-turned-gaze-maintained) was available and measured implicit mentalising (consistency effect) and attentional orienting (cue-validity effect). Neither effect was modulated by directional cue, but the directional cue's dynamic property appeared to be relevant for generation of cue-validity effect as such. Overall, implicit mentalising as revealed in consistency effect cannot be purely reduced to submentalising processes.