Avatars and arrows in the brain

  • Caroline Catmur*
  • , Idalmis Santiesteban
  • , Jane R. Conway
  • , Cecilia Heyes
  • , Geoffrey Bird
  • *Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalComment/debatepeer-review

15 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

In this Commentary article we critically assess the claims made by Schurz, Kronbichler, Weissengrubler, Surtees, Samson and Perner (2015) relating to the neural processes underlying theory of mind and visual perspective taking. They attempt to integrate research findings in these two areas of social neuroscience using a perspective taking task contrasting mentalistic agents ('avatars'), with non-mentalistic control stimuli ('arrows'), during functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging. We support this endeavour whole-heartedly, agreeing that the integration of findings in these areas has been neglected in research on the social brain. However, we cannot find among the behavioural or neuroimaging data presented by Schurz et al. evidence supporting their claim of 'implicit mentalizing'-the automatic ascription of mental states to another representing what they can see. Indeed, we suggest that neuroimaging methods may be ill-suited to address the existence of implicit mentalizing, and suggest that approaches utilizing neurostimulation methods are likely to be more successful.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)8-10
Number of pages3
JournalNeuroImage
Volume132
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 15 May 2016

Bibliographical note

Publisher Copyright:
© 2016 Elsevier Inc.

Keywords

  • Attentional orienting
  • Domain-general
  • Implicit mentalizing
  • Theory of mind
  • Visual perspective taking

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Neurology
  • Cognitive Neuroscience

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Avatars and arrows in the brain'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this