Does the experimental scientist have a "Theory of Mind"?
Does the experimental scientist have a "Theory of Mind"?
复制标题
DOI：
10.1037/1089-2680.12.2.192
复制
发表时间：
2008-06-01
影响因子：
4.2
通讯作者：
Belmonte, Matthew K.
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Belmonte, Matthew K.
“心理理论”的概念在普雷马克和伍德拉夫1978年的文章“黑猩猩有心理理论吗？”之后被广泛用于发展和进化心理学以及神经科学。以及Baron-Cohen、Leslie和Frith在1985年的后续文章《自闭症儿童有“心理理论”吗？随后认知科学和叙事理论的融合为文学批评家带来了“心理理论”。然而，只有一小部分人既读过神经心理学的著作，也读过关于“心理理论”的文学作品;由于缺乏跨学科的专业知识，这个术语在文学界和神经科学界获得了微妙的不同含义。由于这种术语上的失误，神经科学家和文学评论家在“心理理论”方面的争论可能会认为他们是在互相交谈，而实际上他们是在互相交谈。如果认知文学理论的支持者要实现我们所渴望的跨学科融合，那么我们必须确保我们用同一个习语说话。
The concept of a "theory of mind" was widely used in developmental and evolutionary psychology and neuroscience in the wake of Premack and Woodruff's 1978 article "Does the Chimpanzee Have a Theory of Mind?" and Baron-Cohen, Leslie, and Frith's 1985 follow-up "Does the Autistic Child Have a 'Theory of Mind?"' The subsequent confluence of cognitive science and narrative theory brought "theory of mind" to literary critics. Only a very small set of people, however, have read both the neuropsychological and the literary texts on "theory of mind"; as a result of this lack of interdisciplinary expertise, the term has acquired subtly differing senses in the literary and neuroscientific communities. Because of this terminological slippage, neuroscientists and literary critics who argue in terms of "theory of mind" may believe that they are speaking with each other when they actually are speaking past each other. If proponents of cognitive literary theory are to realize the interdisciplinary fusion to which we aspire, then we must ensure that we speak in the same idiom.