Perspective Getting

Last updated

Perspective Getting is an approach towards understanding the mind of another person by directly getting information about that person's perspective. [1] [2] It is directly related to another approach towards interpersonal understanding called perspective taking, which involves making inferences about another person's perspective by adopting that person's point of view. [3] Perspective Getting was conceptually developed after research on perspective taking found that perspective taking did not increase a person's ability to accurately understand the mind of another person. [1] Subsequent research concluded that Perspective Getting, although a typically underestimated approach, does increase a person's ability to accurately understand another person's psychological experience. [4] [2] [1] Although Perspective Getting is a relatively new approach to interpersonal understanding in the fields of Social Psychology and Social Neuroscience, scholars within these fields have placed an emphasis on social cognition processes that facilitate interpersonal accuracy [5] [6] and subsequently highlight the importance of Perspective Getting as an approach to accurately understand another person. [7] [4] [2] [1]

Contents

Definition

Theory

Perspective Getting is defined as an approach towards understanding the mental states, traits, and psychological experiences of another that involves directly getting information about that person's perspective, which can occur through simulation or direct inquiry. [1] [2] [4] Perspective Getting as a formal concept was developed in contrast to perspective taking—which involves making inferences about the mental state, traits, and psychological experiences of another person by thinking about social situations from that person's point of view. [1] [4] If taking the perspective of another person is not enough to facilitate an accurate understanding of their perspective, then getting explicit information about that person's perspective intuitively is enough to facilitate an accurate understanding of their perspective. [1] [7] Perspective Getting, in addition to perspective taking, also relates to the concept of theory of mind, which is the assessment of a person's ability to empathize and understand others, because it is an approach towards understanding the mind of others. [7]

Perspective Getting via simulation and direct inquiry are both considered bottom-up cognitive processes. [1] Direct information that is new to a person is perceived via a person's sensory system and then works its way up to the brain where that information is processed. [8] This is in contrast to perspective taking, which is considered a top-down cognitive process because it requires a person to shift cognitive attention from their own perspective in an effort to understand another person's perspective. [8] [1]

Perspective Getting—simulation

Perspective Getting can be achieved through what researchers refer to as 'simulation'. [4] An individual can get the perspective of another person by putting themselves in the exact same situation as the person they are perceiving. Once they have directly simulated another's situation, they can use information about their own experience in that simulated situation to gain an understanding of the other person's perspective, what social psychologists refer to as 'effective egocentric projection.' [2] For example, if a person is attempting to understand the emotional reactions another person had after viewing a picture, they could get the perspective of that person by viewing the same picture. [4] Although this is a basic and feasible example, some situations might be increasingly difficult for some people to successfully simulate—such as the experience of homelessness, which some researchers have attempted to virtually simulate through the use of virtual reality technology. [9]

Perspective Getting—direct inquiry

Perspective Getting can also be achieved through direct inquiry. A very intuitive and practical way of getting the perspective of another person is by directly asking that person about their perspective. In the context of close relationships, for example, if a person is attempting to understand how their partner feels in a particular situation, they can get an understanding of their partner's perspective by directly asking their partner how they felt in that particular situation. [1] Seeing as direct inquiry involves the simple act of asking another person about their perspective, it is generally more feasible than the simulation approach for certain situations that are difficult for people to simulate. [2]

Conceptual background

Perspective taking and accuracy

Perspective Getting developed within the social psychological context of perspective taking and interpersonal accuracy. [1] Interpersonal accuracy is defined as a person's ability to accurately assess the traits, mental states, and psychological experiences of others. [10] Prior to the formal conceptualization of Perspective Getting, research on perspective taking alluded to perspective taking's ability to increase interpersonal accuracy. Thinking about the perspective of another person has, for example, the potential to focus a person's attention on situational cues that facilitate the accurate judgement of that other person and the situation they are in. [11] [12] Embodying or mimicking another person's bodily movements or facial expressions has similarly been found to potentially increase a person's ability to accurately recognize the emotions of those they are mimicking. [13] [14] [15] [16] [17] Perspective taking can also create a sense of similarity between the thoughts, feelings, motivations and behaviors of the person taking the perspective and the person whose perspective is being taken, strengthening their interpersonal connection. [18] [19] Although this research alludes to perspective taking's ability to increase interpersonal accuracy, researchers note that this research does not explicitly measure interpersonal accuracy. [1] [20] [21]

The limited amount of perspective taking research that explicitly investigates perspective taking's connection to interpersonal accuracy reveals entirely different results. [1] [4] [22] When studying perspective taking's effect on interpersonal accuracy, researchers found that perspective taking did not increase interpersonal accuracy. [23] [1] In fact, research concluded that perspective taking can reduce interpersonal accuracy. [1] Part of this research found that perspective taking drives a distinction between how accurate people think they are in understanding another person (perceived accuracy) and how accurate they actually are in understanding another person. [24] [22] [4] For example, in intimate relationships, engaging in perspective taking creates the tendency for an individual to overestimate how transparent they think they are in the eyes of their partner. [25]

After research revealed that perspective taking did not increase interpersonal accuracy, despite the fact that previous research suggested it did, social psychologists theorized Perspective Getting as an approach towards interpersonal understanding that would increase interpersonal accuracy. [1] [5] [6] Nicholas Epley and his colleagues were the first to specifically refer to the idea of directly getting information about another's perspective as 'Perspective Getting'. [1] [2] They have conducted experimental research explicitly on Perspective Getting which they connect to additional social psychological research that involves people directly getting information about another person's perspective as a means of gaining an understanding of that person—although this work does not directly use 'Perspective Getting' as a key term. [1] [2] [4] [7]

Experimental findings

Perspective Getting—simulation

Getting another's perspective through simulation has been found to have a positive effect on interpersonal accuracy. People are, for example, more likely to accurately predict the social pain of those who have been excluded in a social situation after they themselves have been socially excluded in the same way. [26] People are also more likely to accurately predict another person's experience during a physically painful procedure after being subjected to that same physically painful procedure. [27] Research also reveals that Perspective Getting through simulation leads people to more accurately understand their own minds in future situations: a person can more accurately predict how they themselves will feel in a given situation after they get the perspective of someone who has already experienced that situation. [2] Despite the benefits of Perspective Getting via simulation, studies have found that people tend to underestimate it as an approach to successfully understand the mind of another. [4]

Research also outlines the conditions that make Perspective Getting through simulation successful at increasing interpersonal accuracy. [4] Getting the perspective of another person by directly experiencing the situation that person is in increases interpersonal accuracy because it creates similarity between the perspectives of the perceiver (the person attempting to understand another person) and target (the person attempting to understand another person). It is only when a perceiver experiences a situation in the exact same way as the target that the perceiver can reliably use their personal experience in that situation to accurately understand the target's experience. [2] This creates a limitation for Perspective Getting through simulation if not enough similarity between two perspectives is generated when one person engages in Perspective Getting via simulation. Perspective Getting via simulation in these cases is not effective at increasing interpersonal accuracy and has even been shown to decrease accuracy. [28] For example, able-bodied individuals attempting to understand the experience of those who are blind by simulating blindness were more likely to inaccurately perceive the adaptability and capability of those who are blind. [29]

Perspective Getting—direct inquiry

Getting another person's perspective by directly asking that person about their perspective also has a positive effect on interpersonal accuracy. [2] Research has, for example, measured the effectiveness of Perspective Getting against perspective taking in increasing interpersonal accuracy between romantic partners. Participants were able to more accurately predict their partner's reaction to opinion statements after they directly got a sense of the range of their partner's opinions (Perspective Getting via direct inquiry) as opposed to predicting their partner's reactions after attempting to see the world through their partner's eyes (perspective taking); this was true even for married couples of over 10 years who presumably have come to know their partners well. Although Perspective Getting made couples more accurate at understanding each other, the study also revealed the participants were less confident using the Perspective Getting strategy because they underestimated it as an approach to accurately understand their partner's mind. [1]

Additional studies have also confirmed the efficacy of direct inquiry as a measure of people's attitudes: perspectives people have about specific objects, events, ideas, or other people. [30] Measuring participant attitudes through direct self-report (where a participant is directly asked to report their attitude towards something) proves to be effective in getting an understanding of participant attitudes which resulted in accurate prediction of participant behavior based on those attitudes. [31] Similarly, in the context of racial attitudes, self-report measures involving more direct assessments of people's racial attitudes prove to be the best method of measuring people's racial attitudes. [32]

Overview

Perspective Getting through simulation and direct inquiry both increase interpersonal accuracy, but in different ways. Perspective Getting via simulation is only successful when enough similarity is generated between the perspective of the perceiver and the target. Perspective Getting through direct inquiry is considered a more feasible approach in situations involving perspectives that are difficult to simulate. Despite the fact that Perspective Getting via simulation and direct inquiry both increase interpersonal accuracy compared to perspective taking, people still tend to underestimate Perspective Getting as an approach towards accurately understanding the minds of others. [2] [7]

Implications

Emphasis on accuracy

Social psychologists and social neuroscientists interested in social cognition emphasize the implications of research that centers interpersonal accuracy. Social cognition researchers are mainly interested in how people make sense of the minds of other people because such research provides insight into how accurately people do so. [5] This insight allows researchers to understand the social and cognitive conditions that enable people to accurately understand the minds of others, subsequently leading to useful predictions of when individuals accurately understand each other during interpersonal interaction (and when they do not). [6]

Interpersonal accuracy affects the outcomes of interpersonal interactions. The extent to which people accurately understand each other when interacting with one another is related to how positive the outcome of the interaction is. [10] For social cognition researchers, this further highlights the importance of approaches that properly facilitate interpersonal accuracy. [7] The benefit of Perspective Getting as an approach that allows people to accurately understand the psychological experience of others therefore carries important implications for the ways people interact with each other.

Challenges of introspective approaches

The scientific literature on Perspective Getting sheds additional light on the difficulties associated with top-down processes involving introspection, like perspective taking, compared to bottom-up processes like Perspective Getting. Perspective taking is a top-down cognitive process involving introspection that requires an individual to rely on their own mental state to infer the mental states of others. [33] It is difficult for a person to have an accurate sense of how much their own perspective effects their inferences and general understanding of another's perspective. [34] [35] Researchers claim this is likely one of the reasons people tend to overestimate top-down approaches to understanding others, like perspective taking, and underestimate bottom-up approaches like Perspective Getting. [4] People's general underestimation of Perspective Getting implies people are more inclined to use strategies that do not necessarily promote accurate interpersonal understanding, which can negatively impact the way people interact with each other as well as the outcomes of those interactions. Social psychologists therefore find it important to study and communicate findings on Perspective Getting as an approach to accurately understand the psychological experiences of others. [7]

See Also

Related Research Articles

Social psychology is the scientific study of how the thoughts, feelings, and behaviors of individuals are influenced by the actual, imagined, and implied presence of others. In this definition, scientific refers to empirical investigation using the scientific method, while the terms thoughts, feelings, and behaviors refer to the psychological variables that can be measured in humans. Imagined and implied presences refer to the internalized social norms that humans are influenced by even when alone.

Empathy The capacity to understand or feel what another person is experiencing

Empathy is the capacity to understand or feel what another person is experiencing from within their frame of reference, that is, the capacity to place oneself in another's position. Definitions of empathy encompass a broad range of emotional states. Types of empathy include cognitive empathy, emotional empathy, and somatic empathy.

In sociology, social distance describes the distance between individuals or groups in society, including dimensions such as social class, race/ethnicity, gender or sexuality. Members of different groups mix less than members of the same group. It is the measure of nearness or intimacy that an individual or group feels towards another individual or group in a social network or the level of trust one group has for another and the extent of perceived likeness of beliefs.

Social cognition is a sub-topic of various branches of psychology that focuses on how people process, store, and apply information about other people and social situations. It focuses on the role that cognitive processes play in social interactions.

Theory of mind (ToM) is a popular term from the field of psychology as an assessment of an individual human's degree of capacity for empathy and understanding of others. ToM is one of the patterns of behavior that is typically exhibited by the minds of neurotypical people, that being the ability to attribute—to another or oneself—mental states such as beliefs, intents, desires, emotions and knowledge. Theory of mind as a personal capability is the understanding that others have beliefs, desires, intentions, and perspectives that are different from one's own. Possessing a functional theory of mind is considered crucial for success in everyday human social interactions and is used when analyzing, judging, and inferring others' behaviors. Deficits can occur in people with autism spectrum disorders, genetic-based eating disorders, schizophrenia, attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, cocaine addiction, and brain damage suffered from alcohol's neurotoxicity; deficits associated with opiate addiction reverse after prolonged abstinence.

Diffusion of responsibility is a sociopsychological phenomenon whereby a person is less likely to take responsibility for action or inaction when other bystanders or witnesses are present. Considered a form of attribution, the individual assumes that others either are responsible for taking action or have already done so.

Dehumanization Behavior or process that undermines individuality of and in others

Dehumanization is the denial of full humanness in others and the cruelty and suffering that accompanies it. A practical definition refers to it as the viewing and treatment of other persons as though they lack the mental capacities that are commonly attributed to human beings. In this definition, every act or thought that regards a person as "less than" human is dehumanization.

Sympathy is the perception, understanding, and reaction to the distress or need of another life form. According to David Hume, this sympathetic concern is driven by a switch in viewpoint from a personal perspective to the perspective of another group or individual who is in need. David Hume explained that this is the case because "the minds of all men are similar in their feelings and operations" and that "the motion of one communicates itself to the rest" so that as affectations readily pass from one to another, they beget corresponding movements.

Thomas Gilovich American psychologist (born 1954)

Thomas Dashiff Gilovich is the Irene Blecker Rosenfeld Professor of Psychology at Cornell University. He has conducted research in social psychology, decision making, behavioral economics, and has written popular books on these subjects. Gilovich has collaborated with Daniel Kahneman, Richard Nisbett, Lee Ross and Amos Tversky. His articles in peer-reviewed journals on subjects such as cognitive biases have been widely cited. In addition, Gilovich has been quoted in the media on subjects ranging from the effect of purchases on happiness to perception of judgment in social situations. Gilovich is a fellow of the Committee for Skeptical Inquiry.

Social perception is the study of how people form impressions of and make inferences about other people as sovereign personalities. Social perception refers to identifying and utilizing social cues to make judgments about social roles, rules, relationships, context, or the characteristics of others. This domain also includes social knowledge, which refers to one’s knowledge of social roles, norms, and schemas surrounding social situations and interactions. People learn about others' feelings and emotions by picking up information they gather from physical appearance, verbal, and nonverbal communication. Facial expressions, tone of voice, hand gestures, and body position or movement are a few examples of ways people communicate without words. A real-world example of social perception is understanding that others disagree with what one said when one sees them roll their eyes. There are four main components of social perception: observation, attribution, integration, and confirmation.

Interpersonal perception is an area of research in social psychology which examines the beliefs that interacting people have about each other. This area differs from social cognition and person perception by being interpersonal rather than intrapersonal, and thus requiring the interaction of at least two actual people. There are three stages of the perception process including selection, organization, and interpretation.

In psychology, empathic accuracy is how accurately one person can infer the thoughts and feelings of another person. It was first introduced in conjunction with the term empathic inference, which was presented by psychologists William Ickes and William Tooke in 1988. Since then research on empathic accuracy has explored its relationship with the concepts of affect sharing and mentalizing. In order to accurately infer another's psychological state, one must be able to both share that state, and understand cognitively how to label that state (mentalizing). Neuroscience research has shown that brain activation associated with empathic accuracy overlaps with both the areas responsible for affect sharing and mentalizing.

Situational strength is defined as cues provided by environmental forces regarding the desirability of potential behaviors. Situational strength is said to result in psychological pressure on the individual to engage in and/or refrain from particular behaviors. A consequence of this psychological pressure to act in a certain way is the likelihood that despite an individual's personality, they will act in a certain manner. As such, when strong situations exist, the relationship between personality variables and behaviors is reduced, because no matter what the personality of the individual is, they will act in a way dictated by the situation. When weak situations exist, there is less structure and more ambiguity with respect to what behaviors to perform. In sum, situations have the ability to restrict the expression of individual differences in terms of actual behaviors.

Interpersonal communication

Interpersonal communication is an exchange of information between two or more people. It is also an area of research that seeks to understand how humans use verbal and nonverbal cues to accomplish a number of personal and relational goals.

Personality judgment is the process by which people perceive each other's personalities through acquisition of certain information about others, or meeting others in person. The purpose of studying personality judgment is to understand past behavior exhibited by individuals and predict future behavior. Theories concerning personality judgment focus on the accuracy of personality judgments and the effects of personality judgments on various aspects of social interactions. Determining how people judge personality is important because personality judgments often influence individuals' behaviors.

Role-taking theory is the social-psychological concept that one of the most important factors in facilitating social cognition in children is the growing ability to understand others’ feelings and perspectives, an ability that emerges as a result of general cognitive growth. Part of this process requires that children come to realize that others’ views may differ from their own. Role-taking ability involves understanding the cognitive and affective aspects of another person's point of view, and differs from perceptual perspective taking, which is the ability to recognize another person's visual point of view of the environment. Furthermore, albeit some mixed evidence on the issue, role taking and perceptual perspective taking seem to be functionally and developmentally independent of each other.

Interpersonal emotion regulation is the process of changing the emotional experience of one's self or another person through social interaction. It encompasses both intrinsic emotion regulation, in which one attempts to alter their own feelings by recruiting social resources, as well as extrinsic emotion regulation, in which one deliberately attempts to alter the trajectory of other people's feelings.

Perspective-taking is the act of perceiving a situation or understanding a concept from an alternative point of view, such as that of another individual. There is a vast amount of scientific literature that has looked at perspective-taking and suggests that it is crucial to human development, and that it may lead to a variety of beneficial outcomes. Perspective-taking is related to other theories and concepts including theory of mind and empathy. Both theory and research have suggested ages when children are able to begin to perspective-take and how that ability develops over time. Research has also suggested that there may be deficits in people with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder and autism on the ability of individuals to engage in perspective-taking. Additionally, studies have been conducted to assess the brain regions involved in perspective-taking. These studies suggest that several regions may be involved, including the prefrontal cortex and the precuneus. Additionally, studies suggest that perspective-taking may be possible in some non-human animals.

Intention is a mental state that represents a commitment to carrying out an action or actions in the future. Intention involves mental activities such as planning and forethought.

In psychology, interpersonal accuracy (IPA) refers to an individual's ability to make correct inferences about others’ internal states, traits, or other personal attributes. For example, a person who is able to correctly recognize emotions, motivation, or thoughts in others demonstrates interpersonal accuracy. IPA is an important skill in everyday life and is related to many positive social interaction outcomes.

References

  1. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 Eyal, Tal; Steffel, Mary; Epley, Nicholas (2018). "Perspective mistaking: Accurately understanding the mind of another requires getting perspective, not taking perspective". Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 114 (4): 547–571. doi:10.1037/pspa0000115. ISSN   1939-1315. PMID   29620401. S2CID   4657335.
  2. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Epley, Nicholas; Eyal, Tal (2019), Olson, James M. (ed.), "Chapter Two - Through a looking glass, darkly: Using mechanisms of mind perception to identify accuracy, overconfidence, and underappreciated means for improvement", Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, Academic Press, 60, pp. 65–120, doi:10.1016/bs.aesp.2019.04.002 , retrieved 2020-11-20
  3. Galinsky, Adam D.; Maddux, William W.; Gilin, Debra; White, Judith B. (2008). "Why It Pays to Get Inside the Head of Your Opponent: The Differential Effects of Perspective Taking and Empathy in Negotiations". Psychological Science. 19 (4): 378–384. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9280.2008.02096.x. ISSN   0956-7976. PMID   18399891. S2CID   34508802.
  4. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Zhou, Haotian; Majka, Elizabeth A.; Epley, Nicholas (2017). "Inferring Perspective Versus Getting Perspective: Underestimating the Value of Being in Another Person's Shoes". Psychological Science. 28 (4): 482–493. doi:10.1177/0956797616687124. ISSN   0956-7976. PMID   28406380. S2CID   3580500.
  5. 1 2 3 Zaki, Jamil; Ochsner, Kevin (2011). "Reintegrating the Study of Accuracy Into Social Cognition Research". Psychological Inquiry. 22 (3): 159–182. doi:10.1080/1047840X.2011.551743. ISSN   1047-840X. S2CID   18281281.
  6. 1 2 3 Epley, Nicholas; Eyal, Tal (2011). "Integrations Need Both Breadth and Depth: Commentary on Zaki and Ochsner". Psychological Inquiry. 22 (3): 187–192. doi:10.1080/1047840X.2011.567961. ISSN   1047-840X. S2CID   36101712.
  7. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Epley, Nicholas (2014). Mindwise : how we understand what others think, believe, feel, and want (First ed.). New York. ISBN   978-0-307-59591-1. OCLC   869739904.
  8. 1 2 Principles of cognitive neuroscience. Purves, Dale, Roberto, Cabeza, Huettel, Scott A., LaBar, Kevin S., Platt, Michael L., Woldorff, Marty G. (Second ed.). Sunderland, Mass.: Sinauer Associates Inc. Publishers. 2013. ISBN   978-0-87893-573-4. OCLC   795553755.CS1 maint: others (link)
  9. Herrera, Fernanda; Bailenson, Jeremy; Weisz, Erika; Ogle, Elise; Zaki, Jamil (2018). Bastian, Brock (ed.). "Building long-term empathy: A large-scale comparison of traditional and virtual reality perspective-taking". PLOS ONE. 13 (10): e0204494. Bibcode:2018PLoSO..1304494H. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0204494. ISSN   1932-6203. PMC   6192572 . PMID   30332407.
  10. 1 2 Mast, Marianne Schmid; Hall, Judith A. (2018). "The Impact of Interpersonal Accuracy on Behavioral Outcomes". Current Directions in Psychological Science. 27 (5): 309–314. doi:10.1177/0963721418758437. S2CID   149782011.
  11. Zhang, Yan; Epley, Nicholas (2009). "Self-centered social exchange: Differential use of costs versus benefits in prosocial reciprocity". Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 97 (5): 796–810. doi:10.1037/a0016233. ISSN   1939-1315. PMID   19857002.
  12. Yaniv, Ilan; Choshen-Hillel, Shoham (2012). "When guessing what another person would say is better than giving your own opinion: Using perspective-taking to improve advice-taking". Journal of Experimental Social Psychology. 48 (5): 1022–1028. doi:10.1016/j.jesp.2012.03.016.
  13. Oberman, Lindsay M.; Winkielman, Piotr; Ramachandran, Vilayanur S. (2007). "Face to face: Blocking facial mimicry can selectively impair recognition of emotional expressions". Social Neuroscience. 2 (3–4): 167–178. doi:10.1080/17470910701391943. ISSN   1747-0919. PMID   18633815. S2CID   14368991.
  14. Niedenthal, Paula M.; Brauer, Markus; Halberstadt, Jamin B.; Innes-Ker, Åse H. (2001). "When did her smile drop? Facial mimicry and the influences of emotional state on the detection of change in emotional expression". Cognition & Emotion. 15 (6): 853–864. doi:10.1080/02699930143000194. ISSN   0269-9931. S2CID   15974618.
  15. Cheung, Elaine O.; Slotter, Erica B.; Gardner, Wendi L. (2015). "Are you feeling what I'm feeling? The role of facial mimicry in facilitating reconnection following social exclusion". Motivation and Emotion. 39 (4): 613–630. doi:10.1007/s11031-015-9479-9. ISSN   0146-7239. S2CID   144146483.
  16. Hess, Ursula; Blairy, Sylvie (2001). "Facial mimicry and emotional contagion to dynamic emotional facial expressions and their influence on decoding accuracy". International Journal of Psychophysiology. 40 (2): 129–141. doi:10.1016/S0167-8760(00)00161-6. PMID   11165351.
  17. Stel, Mariëlle; van Knippenberg, Ad (2008). "The Role of Facial Mimicry in the Recognition of Affect". Psychological Science. 19 (10): 984–985. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9280.2008.02188.x. ISSN   0956-7976. PMID   19000207. S2CID   17178024.
  18. Davis, Mark H.; Conklin, Laura; Smith, Amy; Luce, Carol (1996). "Effect of perspective taking on the cognitive representation of persons: A merging of self and other". Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 70 (4): 713–726. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.70.4.713. ISSN   1939-1315. PMID   8636894.
  19. Galinsky, Adam D.; Ku, Gillian; Wang, Cynthia S. (2005). "Perspective-Taking and Self-Other Overlap: Fostering Social Bonds and Facilitating Social Coordination". Group Processes & Intergroup Relations. 8 (2): 109–124. doi:10.1177/1368430205051060. ISSN   1368-4302. S2CID   143540439.
  20. Gilin, Debra; Maddux, William W.; Carpenter, Jordan; Galinsky, Adam D. (2013). "When to Use Your Head and When to Use Your Heart: The Differential Value of Perspective-Taking Versus Empathy in Competitive Interactions". Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin. 39 (1): 3–16. doi:10.1177/0146167212465320. ISSN   0146-1672. PMID   23150199. S2CID   1012814.
  21. Epley, Nicholas; Keysar, Boaz; Van Boven, Leaf; Gilovich, Thomas (2004). "Perspective Taking as Egocentric Anchoring and Adjustment". Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 87 (3): 327–339. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.87.3.327. ISSN   1939-1315. PMID   15382983.
  22. 1 2 Epley, Nicholas; Caruso, Eugene M.; Bazerman, Max H. (2006). "When perspective taking increases taking: Reactive egoism in social interaction". Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 91 (5): 872–889. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.91.5.872. ISSN   1939-1315. PMID   17059307.
  23. Eyal, Tal; Epley, Nicholas (2010). "How to Seem Telepathic: Enabling Mind Reading by Matching Construal". Psychological Science. 21 (5): 700–705. doi:10.1177/0956797610367754. ISSN   0956-7976. PMID   20483849. S2CID   206585131.
  24. Ames, Daniel R.; Kammrath, Lara K.; Suppes, Alexandra; Bolger, Niall (2010). "Not So Fast: The (Not-Quite-Complete) Dissociation Between Accuracy and Confidence in Thin-Slice Impressions". Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin. 36 (2): 264–277. doi:10.1177/0146167209354519. ISSN   0146-1672. PMID   20032271. S2CID   42451603.
  25. Vorauer, Jacquie D.; Sucharyna, Tamara A. (2013). "Potential negative effects of perspective-taking efforts in the context of close relationships: Increased bias and reduced satisfaction". Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 104 (1): 70–86. doi:10.1037/a0030184. ISSN   1939-1315. PMID   23002955.
  26. Nordgren, Loran F.; Banas, Kasia; MacDonald, Geoff (2011). "Empathy gaps for social pain: Why people underestimate the pain of social suffering". Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 100 (1): 120–128. doi:10.1037/a0020938. ISSN   1939-1315. PMID   21219077.
  27. Ruben, Mollie A.; Hall, Judith A. (2013). ""I Know Your Pain": Proximal and Distal Predictors of Pain Detection Accuracy". Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin. 39 (10): 1346–1358. doi:10.1177/0146167213493188. ISSN   0146-1672. PMID   23852457. S2CID   34432875.
  28. Hodges, Sara D.; Kiel, Kristi J.; Kramer, Adam D. I.; Veach, Darya; Villanueva, B. Renee (2010). "Giving Birth to Empathy: The Effects of Similar Experience on Empathic Accuracy, Empathic Concern, and Perceived Empathy". Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin. 36 (3): 398–409. doi:10.1177/0146167209350326. ISSN   0146-1672. PMID   19875825. S2CID   23104368.
  29. Silverman, Arielle M.; Gwinn, Jason D.; Van Boven, Leaf (2015). "Stumbling in Their Shoes: Disability Simulations Reduce Judged Capabilities of Disabled People". Social Psychological and Personality Science. 6 (4): 464–471. doi:10.1177/1948550614559650. ISSN   1948-5506. S2CID   145349625.
  30. Tesser, Abraham. (2007). Blackwell Handbook of Social Psychology : Intraindividual Processes. Schwarz, Norbert. Chichester: John Wiley & Sons. ISBN   978-0-470-99850-2. OCLC   437213979.
  31. Greenwald, Anthony G.; Poehlman, T. Andrew; Uhlmann, Eric Luis; Banaji, Mahzarin R. (2009). "Understanding and using the Implicit Association Test: III. Meta-analysis of predictive validity". Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 97 (1): 17–41. doi:10.1037/a0015575. ISSN   1939-1315. PMID   19586237.
  32. Axt, Jordan R. (2018). "The Best Way to Measure Explicit Racial Attitudes Is to Ask About Them". Social Psychological and Personality Science. 9 (8): 896–906. doi:10.1177/1948550617728995. ISSN   1948-5506. S2CID   149135728.
  33. Ruby, Perrine; Decety, Jean (2001). "Effect of subjective perspective taking during simulation of action: a PET investigation of agency". Nature Neuroscience. 4 (5): 546–550. doi:10.1038/87510. ISSN   1097-6256. PMID   11319565. S2CID   3116452.
  34. Nisbett, Richard E.; Wilson, Timothy D. (1977). "Telling more than we can know: Verbal reports on mental processes". Psychological Review. 84 (3): 231–259. doi:10.1037/0033-295X.84.3.231. hdl:2027.42/92167. ISSN   1939-1471.
  35. Kruger, Justin; Dunning, David (1999). "Unskilled and unaware of it: How difficulties in recognizing one's own incompetence lead to inflated self-assessments". Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 77 (6): 1121–1134. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.77.6.1121. ISSN   1939-1315. PMID   10626367.