The Study of Perspective-Taking: Contributions from Mainstream Psychology and Behavior Analysis

The Shape of Relations to Come: Multidimensional Analyses of Complex Human Behavior

Science, understood to be the behavior of scientists, falls within the purview of behavior analysis. All scientists use scientific instruments to study a natural phenomenon, and for the behavior analyst, perhaps no tool is more important than the graph used to show changes in level, trend, and variability, and upon which behavior analysts make data-based decisions. Modern behaviorism as we know it dates back to the development of the cumulative recorder first developed in the 1930s. Though revolutionary to the science of behavior, two-dimensional graphs may be limited in application for analyzing complex human behavior. In the current article, we conceptualize verbal behavior as a multidimensional field of environmental relations, and introduce the use of multi-axial radar charts for its visual and quantitative analysis. From there, we survey the use of radar charts toward advancing a behavior-analytic understanding of human language and cognition. We demonstrate the use of radar charts for calculating simple shape descriptors as a quantitative measure of dynamic interactants, and show how they can be used to measure change over time.

A relational frame approach to perspective taking in persons with Borderline Personality Disorder

Perspective taking is important for effective interpersonal functioning. According to Relational Frame Theory (RFT), perspective taking is underpinned by deictic relational framing. It has been proposed that individuals with Borderline Personality Disorder (BPD) may have deficits in perspective taking. A mixed experimental design (N = 112) was used to assess whether individuals with a diagnosis of BPD displayed impaired perspective taking on a computerised RFT deictic relational task (DRT) and a self-report measure, compared to a control sample. There was no significant difference between groups on the computerised DRT. Within the clinical group, overall distress and relational distress were not found to be significantly associated with DRT performance or self-reported perspective taking. However, those with BPD self-reported significantly worse perspective taking ability compared to the control sample. This finding indicates a discrepancy between perceived perspective taking ability and direct perspective taking performance in persons with BPD.

Deictic Relational Responding and Perspective-Taking in Autistic Individuals: A Scoping Review

Perspective-taking skills are crucial for successful social interactions and some autistic individuals seem to demonstrate great difficulty in this area. The concept continues to generate clinical and research interest across mainstream psychology and within behavior analysis. Within behavior analysis, relational frame theorists have argued that deictic relational responding is critically involved in perspective-taking. We conducted a systematic search of the behavior analytic studies on deictic relational responding and perspective-taking in autistic individuals to highlight methods used to test perspective-taking and deictic relations, methods to train these if deficits were observed, and evidence for a relationship between deictic relational responding and perspective-taking. Seven studies met inclusion criteria and we conducted a descriptive analysis of these studies. We found some variation in the methods used to test and train perspective-taking through deictic relations. Only three of the studies attempted to demonstrate a link between deictic relational responding and perspective-taking. Overall, our review highlighted a need for more research into deictic relational responding and perspective-taking in autistic individuals, and we discussed specific areas for future research.

A Systematic Review of Derived Relational Responding Beyond Coordination in Individuals with Autism and Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities

As interest in derived relational responding has increased, so have the number of investigations evaluating interventions to promote the emergence of derived responding for individuals with autism, as well as other intellectual and developmental disabilities. However, much of the literature has focused on the relation of sameness, and less is known about interventions to facilitate derived responding in other relations. Systematic searches identified 38 studies contained in 30 articles that met inclusion criteria. These studies were analyzed according to their participants, assessment methods, experimental design, content taught, setting, teaching procedures, derived responses, outcomes, and reliability measures. The quality of the studies was measured using the Single Case Analysis and Research Framework (SCARF). The results of the current review indicate that many learners with autism spectrum disorder and other intellectual and developmental disabilities demonstrate derived relational responding beyond the relation of coordination across varied instructional content and teaching methodologies, but the quality and rigor of the published literature requires the results be interpreted with caution, leading to recommendations for future research.

Relational frame theory 20 years on: The Odysseus voyage and beyond

The seminal text on relational frame theory (RFT) was published 20 years ago and purported to offer a single overarching behavior-analytic account of human language and cognition. In the years thereafter, an increasing number of empirical and conceptual articles, book chapters in edited volumes, and whole volumes devoted to the account emerged. In recent years, RFT has experienced a period of intense empirical and conceptual development, facilitated in part by a research grant awarded by the Flanders Science Foundation, under its Odysseus program. This research program aimed to advance and extend the RFT account beyond the rendition presented in the seminal Hayes et al. (2001) volume. The current article aims to provide an overview of this research program, the empirical work and concepts it gave rise to, and their implications for an RFT account of human symbolic language and cognition. Overall, therefore, the article provides an account of relatively recent developments in RFT that extend beyond the 2001 volume and thus will, we hope, inform future research and critiques of the theory going forward.

What Can We Learn by Treating Perspective Taking as Problem Solving?

Perspective taking has been studied extensively using a wide variety of experimental tasks. The theoretical constructs that are used to develop these tasks and interpret the results obtained from them, most notably theory of mind (ToM), have conceptual shortcomings from a behavior-analytic perspective. The behavioral approach to conceptualizing and studying this class of behavior is parsimonious and pragmatic, but the body of relevant research is currently small. The prominent relational frame theory (RFT) approach to derived perspective taking asserts that "deictic framing" is a core component of this class of behavior, but this proposal also appears to be conceptually problematic. We suggest that in many cases perspective taking is problem solving; when successful, both classes of behavior involve the emission of context-appropriate precurrent behavior that facilitates the appropriate response (i.e., the "solution"). Conceptualizing perspective taking in this way appears to have many advantages, which we explore herein.

Perspective taking effects are modulated by the valence of stimuli

Previously we found perspective taking (PT) influenced affect ratings of negative pictures more than neutral pictures. The current follow-up experiments extend that research to explore effects of perspective taking with positive valence pictures. We used stimuli consisting of neutral, happy and sad pictures. Stimuli were presented either mixed within blocks (Experiment 1) or separated by emotion (neutrals + happy/sad) into two separate blocks (Experiment 2). Participants rated (from 1- to 7 based on emotional strength) stimuli from different perspectives (sensitive/tough/their own, i.e., "me"). Emotional strength rating was a dependent variable. A significant interaction between valence and PT was found in both experiments. The difference between adopting sensitive and tough perspectives toward sadness was larger than toward the neutral condition, replicating our results from the previous study. The same difference (sensitive-tough) was larger toward the happiness condition than toward the neutral one (this was a trend in Experiment 1 and was significant in Experiment 2) and toward the sadness condition than toward the happy one. These results suggest that PT effects on emotional ratings are modulated by valence of stimuli.