| Title |
Early Social Cognition: Alternatives to Implicit Mindreading
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Review of Philosophy and Psychology, September 2011
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s13164-011-0072-1 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Leon de Bruin, Derek Strijbos, Marc Slors |
| Abstract |
According to the BD-model of mindreading, we primarily understand others in terms of beliefs and desires. In this article we review a number of objections against explicit versions of the BD-model, and discuss the prospects of using its implicit counterpart as an explanatory model of early emerging socio-cognitive abilities. Focusing on recent findings on so-called 'implicit' false belief understanding, we put forward a number of considerations against the adoption of an implicit BD-model. Finally, we explore a different way to make sense of implicit false belief understanding in terms of keeping track of affordances. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 8 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Italy | 1 | 13% |
| Canada | 1 | 13% |
| United States | 1 | 13% |
| Unknown | 5 | 63% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 5 | 63% |
| Scientists | 2 | 25% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 13% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 65 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Netherlands | 2 | 3% |
| Hungary | 1 | 2% |
| Germany | 1 | 2% |
| Italy | 1 | 2% |
| United States | 1 | 2% |
| Poland | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 58 | 89% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 13 | 20% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 12 | 18% |
| Student > Bachelor | 7 | 11% |
| Student > Master | 7 | 11% |
| Professor | 6 | 9% |
| Other | 17 | 26% |
| Unknown | 3 | 5% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Psychology | 25 | 38% |
| Philosophy | 17 | 26% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 3 | 5% |
| Computer Science | 3 | 5% |
| Linguistics | 2 | 3% |
| Other | 9 | 14% |
| Unknown | 6 | 9% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 19 December 2017.
All research outputs
#5,644,613
of 22,844,985 outputs
Outputs from Review of Philosophy and Psychology
#124
of 425 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#32,403
of 125,269 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Review of Philosophy and Psychology
#1
of 4 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,844,985 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 75th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 425 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.0. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 71% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 125,269 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 74% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 4 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them