The Role of Comparison in Social Cognition
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
The Role of Comparison in Social Cognition Organizers: Christian Hoyos & Dedre Gentner Northwestern University, choyos@u.northwestern.edu, gentner@northwestern.edu Discussant: Theodore Bach Department of Philosophy, Bowling Green State University Firelands, Huron, OH, USA Contributors: Andrew N. Meltzoff Institute for Learning & Brain Sciences, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA Stella Christie, Zachary Murphy, & Averill Obee Department of Psychology, Swarthmore College, Swarthmore, PA, USA Valerie San Juan 1 , Kelly O’Driscoll 2 , & Patricia Ganea 2 Department of Psychology, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada Dr. Eric Jackman Institute of Child Study, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada Christian Hoyos, William S. Horton, & Dedre Gentner Department of Psychology, Northwestern University, Evanston, IL, USA Keywords: comparison; analogy; theory of mind; social cognition; imitation; like me hypothesis implications of this work for social cognition and theories of comparison. Motivation Infant Imitation and the “Like-Me” Hypothesis for Developing Human Social Cognition How does comparison affect the way we think of others? Comparison has been shown to be a powerful learning tool in a variety of conceptual domains, ranging from basic spatial relations, to concepts in algebra and heat flow (e.g., Gentner, 2010). Comparison recruits a structure-mapping process that highlights common relational structure between two situations. It helps novice learners see meaningful similarities and differences which can then be transferred to novel situations. This process can help infants and children move beyond the particular features of any one situation and gain a more abstract understanding of complex concepts. While comparison has been established as an important tool in cognitive development, less work has illustrated how it may function as a key process in the social domain. The goal of this symposium will be to show how these benefits of comparison can also influence the development of social cognition. We bring together empirical work addressing comparison in infancy through early childhood to illustrate how this basic process has profound effects throughout social cognitive development. A. Meltzoff will discuss the kinds of mapping processes that underpin the “Like me” hypothesis. S. Christie will show how comparison can guide imitation in young children. C. Hoyos will present work showing that explicitly asking children to compare mental states can aid false belief understanding. V. San Juan will examine how language can invite comparison across instances to improve false belief reasoning. We will end with a discussion by T. Bach on the Andrew N. Meltzoff Newborn humans imitate facial gestures they have never seen themselves make. There is a tight coupling between perception and production that allows newborns to cross- modally map gestures they see another perform and their own unseen acts. I will explore the mechanisms underlying such interpersonal mapping, and articulate the “Like-Me” hypothesis about the roots of human social cognition. According to this view, preverbal social learning is facilitated by infants’ identification of others as “like me.” This allows human infants to rapidly learn about physical laws and social conventions through observing the actions of other people. In addition to manipulating the world themselves, children learn simply from watching and imitating experts in their culture. Human infants exploit others as proxies, a strategy that multiplies their learning opportunities prior to taking action themselves. They learn from the trial and error and insights of others. I will draw on various research studies in developmental psychology to make these ideas concrete, and will discuss more general theoretical lessons for the formation of human social cognition.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,002 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».