[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [xmca] Origin of infant communication
Bill,
I'm responding on-list since this doesn't take up much bandwidth and it may be of interest to others, Janet Astington has been exploring a sociocultural approach to ToM. Some recent work:
Astington, J. W. (2006). The developmental interdependence of theory of mind and language. In N. J. Enfield & S. C. Stevenson (Eds.), Roots of human sociality: Culture, cognition, and interaction. Oxford: Berg.
Astington, J. W. & Baird, J. A. (2005). Introduction: Why language matters. In J. W. Astington & J. A. Baird (Eds.), Why language matters for theory of mind. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Some of her earlier work:
Astington, J. W. (1996). What is theoretical about the child's theory of mind? A Vygotskian view of its development. In P. Caruthers & P. K. Smith (Eds.), Theories of theories of mind. (pp. 184-99). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Astington, J. W. (1993). The child's discovery of the mind. Harvard Univ Press.
Martin
On May 5, 2010, at 1:54 PM, Bill Sandoval wrote:
> I have recently been delving into ToM research and its potential relation to folk epistemology and epistemic cognition, and have been struck by the seeming absence of situated or sociocultural perspectives. The pointer to Reddy is helpful, but I'd greatly appreciate pointers to research on older children, say 2 - 8 years, that's framed from cultural perspectives.
>
> You can reply to me off-list to save bandwidth.
>
> Thanks in advance,
> Bill
> ______
> William A. Sandoval, Associate Professor
> Graduate School of Education & Information Studies
> Moore Hall 2335, PO Box 951521
> UCLA, Los Angeles, CA 90095-1521
> 310.794.5431 (voice) 310.206.6293 (fax)
> http://www.gseis.ucla.edu/faculty/sandoval/
> ___________________________________________
>
> On Apr 30, 2010, at 11:25 AM, Rod Parker-Rees wrote:
>
>> Thanks Eric.
>>
>> It is interesting that the ToM approach to explaining how we know about the hidden workings of other minds, described by Vasu Reddy as a third person approach, can itself be seen as being towards the systemising end of the spectrum proposed by Simon Baron-Cohen between the 'hyper-male', hyper systemising pole of extreme autism and the 'hyper-female', hyper empathising extreme seen in people with Williams syndrome - especially when compared with the more empathising model described by Reddy as a second-person approach.
>>
>> All the best,
>>
>> Rod
>>
>> ________________________________________
>> From: xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu [xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of ERIC.RAMBERG@spps.org [ERIC.RAMBERG@spps.org]
>> Sent: 30 April 2010 18:50
>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
>> Subject: RE: [xmca] Origin of infant communication
>>
>> Hey Rod:
>>
>> Your post got me thinking about the "theory of mind" regarding autism and
>> the belief that people who are autistic lack the understanding that others
>> have beliefs, attitudes and in behavior separate from the autistic person.
>> The landmark study has the autistic in the room with someone else with a
>> ball and a cap. The autistic person is asked to leave the room and when
>> they return the ball is gone. The autistic person is asked where the ball
>> has gone and without fail they do not know where it is. Then when the hat
>> is lifted and the ball is revealed the autistic person cannot even answer
>> how the ball got under the hat. They lack the ability to place abilities
>> onto the other person apart from themselves. That said here is a link to
>> a perspective written by a person with autism regarding the "theory of
>> mind":
>>
>> http://iautistic.com/autism-myths-theory-of-mind.php
>>
>> eric
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Rod Parker-Rees <R.Parker-Rees@plymouth.ac.uk>
>> Sent by: xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu
>> 04/30/2010 12:14 PM
>> Please respond to "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity"
>>
>>
>> To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" <xmca@weber.ucsd.edu>
>> cc:
>> Subject: RE: [xmca] Origin of infant communication
>>
>>
>> Another (older) book which makes a similar case for a direct 'getting' of
>> intersubjectivity, unmediated by what might be described as more cognitive
>> processes, is Peter Hobson's 'The Cradle of Thought'. Hobson uses
>> comparisons between chimpanzees, normally developing children and children
>> with autism to argue that one of the major differences in the social
>> experiences of autistic children is that although they may be able to work
>> out what other people's expressions, intonation, gestures etc. reveal
>> about their inner processes, they have to work this out, whereas normally
>> developing (or 'neurotypical') children have a much more immediate
>> knowledge - akin to empathy and mirror neuron responses. Interestingly,
>> one of Hobson's experiments involved asking children to 'read' STILL
>> photographs of faces showing emotional expressions (sometimes upside down,
>> sometimes showing only eyes) even though, I would argue, the ability to
>> read photographs and the ability to read moving faces would seem to be
>> very different kinds of skills.
>>
>> All the best,
>>
>> Rod
>>
>> ________________________________________
>> From: xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu [xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu] On Behalf
>> Of Larry Purss [lpurss@shaw.ca]
>> Sent: 30 April 2010 14:32
>> To: Activity eXtended Mind, Culture,
>> Subject: [xmca] Origin of infant communication
>>
>> Avis and Mike and Martin [and others on the infant theme]
>>
>> What are the origins of infant engagement? I want to give some ideas from
>> Vasudevi Reddy. She writes
>> "A second-person approach [being addressed by a YOU] seems not only
>> explain infant behavior better than either a first person {I position} or
>> a third person "spectator" approach. It also changes the lens through
>> which we PERCEIVE the problem of other minds that is expressed in much of
>> the developmental literature. [that is, as a spectatorial process of
>> observation of mere behavior across a gap] The important difference
>> between a 2nd person approach and a 1st person approach is that the
>> emphasis here is NOT on recognition of the SIMILARITY to self of other
>> peoples acts, but, crucially, of the EXPERIENCE of a RECIPROCAL RESPONSE
>> to the others acts. The gap between minds becomes hard to find in this
>> re-embodiment and this re-embedding.
>> Infants are capable of entering into dialogue [recognition and response]
>> with other people remarkably early in life. {I would add this dialogical
>> process EXPERIENCED recognition and response continues to INFORM
>> communication throughout the lifespan}.
>>
>> Reddy points out many philosophers take this 2nd person perspective [or
>> lens]: W. James called it "being noticed", Bahktin, the recognition of an
>> "answering consciousness", Hegel, the awareness of recognition, and Buber,
>> the experience of the I-thou relation.
>>
>> This 2nd person concept refers to more than just "interpersonal
>> attraction", more than just a recognition of a SIMILARITY of another
>> person to the self, and more than just an INFERENCE from observation of
>> movements.
>> THE YOU is radically implicated in a 2nd person stance.
>>
>> Larry
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> xmca mailing list
>> xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
>> http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca_______________________________________________
>> xmca mailing list
>> xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
>> http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> xmca mailing list
>> xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
>> http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca_______________________________________________
>> xmca mailing list
>> xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
>> http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
>
> _______________________________________________
> xmca mailing list
> xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
> http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
_______________________________________________
xmca mailing list
xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca