Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2012;7(11):e49859.
doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0049859. Epub 2012 Nov 30.

Can people guess what happened to others from their reactions?

Affiliations

Can people guess what happened to others from their reactions?

Dhanya Pillai et al. PLoS One. 2012.

Abstract

Are we able to infer what happened to a person from a brief sample of his/her behaviour? It has been proposed that mentalising skills can be used to retrodict as well as predict behaviour, that is, to determine what mental states of a target have already occurred. The current study aimed to develop a paradigm to explore these processes, which takes into account the intricacies of real-life situations in which reasoning about mental states, as embodied in behaviour, may be utilised. A novel task was devised which involved observing subtle and naturalistic reactions of others in order to determine the event that had previously taken place. Thirty-five participants viewed videos of real individuals reacting to the researcher behaving in one of four possible ways, and were asked to judge which of the four 'scenarios' they thought the individual was responding to. Their eye movements were recorded to establish the visual strategies used. Participants were able to deduce successfully from a small sample of behaviour which scenario had previously occurred. Surprisingly, looking at the eye region was associated with poorer identification of the scenarios, and eye movement strategy varied depending on the event experienced by the person in the video. This suggests people flexibly deploy their attention using a retrodictive mindreading process to infer events.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1. Mean percentage of total gaze time (square root transformed) at the eye and mouth across four scenarios.
Error bars report standard errors of the mean.

References

    1. Gallese V, Goldman A (1998) Mirror neurons and the simulation theory of mind-reading. Cognition 2 (12) 493–501. - PubMed
    1. Robinson EJ, Mitchell P (1995) Masking of children early understands of the representational mind: Backwards explanation versus prediction. Child Dev 66 (4) 1022–1039.
    1. Baron-Cohen S, Jolliffe T, Mortimore C, Robertson M (1997) Another advanced test of theory of mind: evidence from very high functioning adults with autism or Asperger Syndrome. Journal of Child Psychol and Psychi 38: 813–822. - PubMed
    1. Goldman A, de Vignemont F (2009) Is social cognition embodied? Trends in Cog Sci 13 (4) 154–159. - PubMed
    1. Ekman P, Friesen WV (1976) Pictures of Facial Affect. Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press.