The Role of Polyperspective Representations in Joint Attention Processes

The aim of our work was to test the hypothesis that one's identification of objects of attention in an observed individual depends on his/her understanding of the context of a communicative situation based on the comparison of the participants' points of view. In the first experimental study the subjects (N=74) carried out visual search for objects of attention of participants of non-verbal communication scenes with/without information on the communication context provided, and with short/prolonged display of information for assessing gaze direction of the participants. Understanding the context resulted in a higher efficiency of iden¬tification and saccadic detection of the participants' objects of attention in the subjects, regardless of their access to the information on gaze direction. In the second experiment the subjects (N=32), after watching videos of communication episodes, were asked to search for changes of different objects in the scenes. Those subjects who had a clear understanding of the context of communication first of all noticed the changes in the future objects of attention of the participants, in spite of the absence of any 'hints' like head or eye orientation. The outcomes of the research are discussed within the framework of concepts focusing on the significance of polyperspective representations for the understanding of communicative signals.

1. Bakhtin M.M. Antropolingvistika: Izbrannye trudy naniya AN SSSR. Moscow: Sov. entsikl., 1990. 682 p. [Anthropological linguistics: Selected works]. Moscow: 5. Paducheva E.V. Vyskazyvanie i ego sootnesennost' s Labirint, 2010. 255 p. deistvitel'nost'yu (referentsial'nye aspekty semantiki
2. Bakhtin M. M. Estetika slovesnogo tvorchestva [The mestoimenii) [The statement and its correlation with reality Aesthetics of Verbal Creativity]. Bocharov S.G. (eds.). (referential aspects of the semantics of pronouns)]. Moscow: Moscow: Iskusstvo, 1979. 424 p. Nauka, 1985. 272 p.
3. Iriskhanova O.K. Igry fokusa v yazyke. Semantika, sin-6. Tomasello M. Istoki chelovecheskogo obshcheniya taksis i pragmatika defokusirovaniya [Focus game in language. [Origins of human communication]. Moscow: Yazyki slavyan-Semantics, syntax and pragmatics of defocusing]. Moscow: skikh kul'tur, 2011. 328 p. Yazyki slavyanskoi kul'tury, 2014. 320 p.
4. Yartseva V.N.(ed.) Lingvisticheskii entsiklopedicheskii slovar' [Linguistic encyclopedic dictionary]. In-t yazykoz­
5. Falikman M.V. Vnimanie. T. 4 serii "Obshchaya psikho­logiya" [Attention. 4th tom of "General Psychology" series].Bratus' B.S. ( ed.). Moscow: Akademiya, 2006. 453 p.
6. Baron-Cohen S. Mindblindness: An essay on autism and theory of mind. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1995. 183 p.
7. Baron-Cohen S., Leslie A.M., Frith U. Does the autistic child have a 'theory of mind'? Cognition, 1985. Vol. 21, no. 1, pp. 37—46.
8. Bock S.W., Dicke P., Thier P. How precise is gaze follow­ing in humans? Vision research, 2008. Vol. 48, no. 7, pp. 946—957.
9. Butterworth G.E., Jarrett N. What minds have in com­mon is space: Spatial mechanisms serving joint attention in infancy. British Journal of Developmental Psychology, 1991. Vol. 9, pp. 55—72.
10. Crouzet S., Kirchner H., Thorpe S.J. Fast saccades toward faces: face detection in just 100 ms. Journal of Vision, 2010. Vol. 10, no. 4, pp. 1—17.
11. Emery N.J. The eyes have it: The neuroethology, func­tion and evolution of social gaze. Neuroscience and Biobehavioral Reviews, 2000. Vol. 24, pp. 581—604.
12. Fauconnier G., Turner M. The Way We Think: Conceptual Blending and the Mind's Hidden Complexities. New York: Basic Books, 2002. 441 p.
13. Friesen C.K., Kingstone A. The eyes have it! Reflexive orienting is triggered by nonpredictive gaze. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 1998. Vol. 5, pp. 490—495.
14. Friesen, C.K., Moore, C., Kingstone, A. Does gaze direction really trigger a reflexive shift of attention? Brain and Cognition, 2005. Vol. 57, no. 1, pp. 66—69.
15. Frischen A., Bayliss A.P., Tipper S.P. Gaze cueing of attention: Visual attention, social cognition, and individual dif­ferences. Psychological Bulletin, 2007. Vol. 133, pp. 694—724.
16. Langton S., Watt R., Bruce V. Do the eyes have it? Cues to the direction of social attention. Trends in cognitive sciences, 2000. Vol. 4, no. 2, pp. 50—59.
17. Levin D.T., Simons D.J. Failure to detect changes to attended objects in motion pictures. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 1997. Vol. 4, no. 4, pp. 501—506.
18. Malcolm G.L., Henderson J.M. The effects of target template specificity on visual search in real-world scenes: Evidence from eye movements. Journal of Vision, 2009. Vol. 9, no. 11:8, pp. 1—13.
19. Moll H., Tomasello M. Co-operation and human cog­nition: The Vygotskian intelligence hypothesis. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society, 2007. Vol. 362, pp. 639—648.
20. O'Regan J.K., Deubel H., Clark J.J., Rensink R.A. Picture changes during blinks: Looking without seeing and seeing without looking. Visual Cognition, 2000. Vol. 7, pp. 191—212.
21. Parrill F. Interactions between discourse status and viewpoint in co-speech gesture. In B. Dancygier & E. Sweetser (Eds.) Viewpoint in Language: A Multimodal Perspective. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2012. pp. 97—112.
22. Rensink R.A., O'Regan J.K., Clark J.J. To see or not to see: The need for attention to perceive changes in scenes. Psychological Science, 1997. Vol. 8, no. 5, pp. 368—373.
23. Simons D.J. Levin D.T. Failure to detect changes to people during a real-world interaction. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 1998. Vol. 5, no. 4, pp. 644—649.
24. Sweetser E. Introduction: viewpoint and perspective in language and gesture, from the Ground down. In B. Dancygier & E. Sweetser (Eds.) Viewpoint in Language: A Multimodal Perspective. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2012. pp. 1—24.
25. Todorovic D. Geometrical basis of perception of gaze direction. Vision research, 2006. Vol. 46, Is. 21, pp. 3549—3562.
26. Walther D., Koch Ch. Modeling attention to salient proto-objects. Neural Networks, 2006. Vol. 19, pp. 1395—1407.