Cargando…

A Cognitive Ethology Study of First- and Third-Person Perspectives

The aim of the present study was to test the cognitive ethology approach, which seeks to link cognitions and behaviours as they operate in everyday life with those studied in controlled lab-based investigations. Our test bed was the understanding of first-person and third-person perspectives, which...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Chisholm, Joseph D., Chapman, Craig S., Amm, Marvin, Bischof, Walter F., Smilek, Dan, Kingstone, Alan
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Public Library of Science 2014
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3966828/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24671136
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0092696
_version_ 1782308950100672512
author Chisholm, Joseph D.
Chapman, Craig S.
Amm, Marvin
Bischof, Walter F.
Smilek, Dan
Kingstone, Alan
author_facet Chisholm, Joseph D.
Chapman, Craig S.
Amm, Marvin
Bischof, Walter F.
Smilek, Dan
Kingstone, Alan
author_sort Chisholm, Joseph D.
collection PubMed
description The aim of the present study was to test the cognitive ethology approach, which seeks to link cognitions and behaviours as they operate in everyday life with those studied in controlled lab-based investigations. Our test bed was the understanding of first-person and third-person perspectives, which in lab-based investigations have been defined in a diverse and multi-faceted manner. We hypothesized that because these lab-based investigations seek to connect with how first- and third-person perspective operates in everyday life, then either some of the divergent lab-based definitions are missing their mark or the everyday conceptualization of first- and third-person perspective is multi-faceted. Our investigation revealed the latter. By applying a cognitive ethology approach we were able to determine that a) peoples’ everyday understanding of perspective is diverse yet reliable, and b) a lab-based investigation that applies these diverse understandings in a controlled setting can accurately predict how people will perform. These findings provide a ‘proof of concept’ for the cognitive ethology approach. Moreover, the present data demonstrate that previous lab-based studies, that often had very different understandings of first- and third-person perspective, were each in and of themselves valid. That is, each is capturing part of a broader understanding of perspective in everyday life. Our results also revealed a novel social factor not included in traditional conceptualizations of first-person third-perspective, that of eye gaze, i.e., eye contact is equated strongly with first-person perspective and the lack of eye-contact with third-person perspective.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-3966828
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2014
publisher Public Library of Science
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-39668282014-03-31 A Cognitive Ethology Study of First- and Third-Person Perspectives Chisholm, Joseph D. Chapman, Craig S. Amm, Marvin Bischof, Walter F. Smilek, Dan Kingstone, Alan PLoS One Research Article The aim of the present study was to test the cognitive ethology approach, which seeks to link cognitions and behaviours as they operate in everyday life with those studied in controlled lab-based investigations. Our test bed was the understanding of first-person and third-person perspectives, which in lab-based investigations have been defined in a diverse and multi-faceted manner. We hypothesized that because these lab-based investigations seek to connect with how first- and third-person perspective operates in everyday life, then either some of the divergent lab-based definitions are missing their mark or the everyday conceptualization of first- and third-person perspective is multi-faceted. Our investigation revealed the latter. By applying a cognitive ethology approach we were able to determine that a) peoples’ everyday understanding of perspective is diverse yet reliable, and b) a lab-based investigation that applies these diverse understandings in a controlled setting can accurately predict how people will perform. These findings provide a ‘proof of concept’ for the cognitive ethology approach. Moreover, the present data demonstrate that previous lab-based studies, that often had very different understandings of first- and third-person perspective, were each in and of themselves valid. That is, each is capturing part of a broader understanding of perspective in everyday life. Our results also revealed a novel social factor not included in traditional conceptualizations of first-person third-perspective, that of eye gaze, i.e., eye contact is equated strongly with first-person perspective and the lack of eye-contact with third-person perspective. Public Library of Science 2014-03-26 /pmc/articles/PMC3966828/ /pubmed/24671136 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0092696 Text en © 2014 Chisholm et al http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are properly credited.
spellingShingle Research Article
Chisholm, Joseph D.
Chapman, Craig S.
Amm, Marvin
Bischof, Walter F.
Smilek, Dan
Kingstone, Alan
A Cognitive Ethology Study of First- and Third-Person Perspectives
title A Cognitive Ethology Study of First- and Third-Person Perspectives
title_full A Cognitive Ethology Study of First- and Third-Person Perspectives
title_fullStr A Cognitive Ethology Study of First- and Third-Person Perspectives
title_full_unstemmed A Cognitive Ethology Study of First- and Third-Person Perspectives
title_short A Cognitive Ethology Study of First- and Third-Person Perspectives
title_sort cognitive ethology study of first- and third-person perspectives
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3966828/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24671136
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0092696
work_keys_str_mv AT chisholmjosephd acognitiveethologystudyoffirstandthirdpersonperspectives
AT chapmancraigs acognitiveethologystudyoffirstandthirdpersonperspectives
AT ammmarvin acognitiveethologystudyoffirstandthirdpersonperspectives
AT bischofwalterf acognitiveethologystudyoffirstandthirdpersonperspectives
AT smilekdan acognitiveethologystudyoffirstandthirdpersonperspectives
AT kingstonealan acognitiveethologystudyoffirstandthirdpersonperspectives
AT chisholmjosephd cognitiveethologystudyoffirstandthirdpersonperspectives
AT chapmancraigs cognitiveethologystudyoffirstandthirdpersonperspectives
AT ammmarvin cognitiveethologystudyoffirstandthirdpersonperspectives
AT bischofwalterf cognitiveethologystudyoffirstandthirdpersonperspectives
AT smilekdan cognitiveethologystudyoffirstandthirdpersonperspectives
AT kingstonealan cognitiveethologystudyoffirstandthirdpersonperspectives