Home

About

Advanced Search

Browse by Discipline

Scientific Societies

E-print Alerts

Add E-prints

E-print Network
FAQHELPSITE MAPCONTACT US


  Advanced Search  

 
CORRECTED PROOF Copyright The British Psychological Society
 

Summary: CORRECTED PROOF
Copyright The British Psychological Society
Reproduction in any form (including the internet) is prohibited without prior permission from the Society
Commentary
Alternative routes to perspective-taking:
Imagination and rule use may be better
than simulation and theorising
Ian A. Apperly*
School of Psychology, University of Birmingham, Edgbaston, Birmingham, UK
This article is a commentary on `Two routes to perspective: Simulation and rule-use as
approaches to mentalizing' (Mitchell et al. in press).
Thirty years after Premack and Woodruff (1978) asked whether the chimpanzee has a
theory of mind, the literature on how humans and non-human animals explain and
predict each other's behaviour in terms of unobservable mental states is in a curious
condition. On the one hand, there are clear markers of success, such as the hundreds of
published studies on the causes and consequences of theory of mind in 3- to 5-year-old
children (e.g. Milligan, Astington, & Dack, 2007; Wellman, Cross, & Watson, 2001), and
the impact of the hypothesis that impaired theory of mind may be a core feature of some
developmental and psychiatric disorders, such as autism and schizophrenia (e.g. Baron-
Cohen, Leslie, & Frith, 1985; Frith, 1992). On the other hand, research on theory of

  

Source: Apperly, Ian - School of Psychology, University of Birmingham

 

Collections: Biology and Medicine