Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Understanding others is an essential aspect of being human. We review research and theory on the development of a range of skills constituting social understanding beginning in infancy with gaze‐following and gestures such as pointing. Given the importance attributed to false belief understanding in preschoolers, we review accounts of this development as well as criticism of these theories. Such debates now extend to current claims that even infants understand others' false beliefs, raising questions about preconceptions of the nature and origins of social awareness. The later developing social skills we turn to next remain relatively neglected in this literature. We discuss contributions from neuroscience for understanding social cognitive development such as neuroimaging and research on mirror neurons. There are many links between social cognition and children's social relations and, in particular, we focus on the key role of language in social cognitive development. We also review ways in which social understanding may influence social conduct and this is linked to the issues of trust and deception, as well as cooperation and moral development. Throughout, we highlight ways that research traditions are influenced by worldviews or preconceptions about the nature of mind, meaning, and knowledge, and emphasize the interconnections between social understanding and all other aspects of human life.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".