Seeing through the Eyes of Others: Social Interaction Perception in Normal and Schizophrenia Subjects

What cognitive processes specify understanding of humans’ behavior in communicative situations? 51 healthy controls and 50 schizophrenia patients were presented with social “silent” video clips and then they performed flicker task and predicted characters’ behavior. During the experiment eye movements were recorded. Observers, who have made successful predictions, evaluated the characters’ actions, specified how they categorized the objects and events, and then profiled the objects’ features, on which just these categorizations were based. Information about these features remained in working memory and directed a communicative situation’s perception. Observers noticed the events, relevant to the viewpoints of the characters, and understood their gazes, gestures and actions. Those, who have made unsuccessful predictions, advanced hypotheses about how the characters categorized the objects and events, but they did not profile the objects’ features, on which categorizations were based. They demonstrated “blindness” to the events, relevant to the viewpoints of the characters, and did not understand a coherence of their actions.

1. Gippenreyter Yu.B. Dvizheniya chelovecheskogo glaza [Human eye movements]. Moscow, MGU,1978. 256 p.  
2. Zotov M.V., Andrianova N., Voyt A.P. The Role of Polyperspective Representations in Joint Attention Processes. Kul’turno-istoricheskaya psikhologiya = Cultural-Historical Psy­ chology, 2015. Vol. 11, no. 2, pp. 16—27. (In Russ., аbstr. in Engl.).
3. Leont’ev A.A. Lev Semenovich Vygotskii. [Lev Vy­ goysky]. Moscow: Prosveshenije, 1990. 158 p.
4. Polyakov Yu.F. Patologiya poznavatel’noi deyatel’nosti pri shizofrenii [Pathology of Cognitive Activity in Case of Schizophrenia]. Moscow, Meditsina Publ., 1974. 167 p.
5. Rzheshevskaya A.A. Yazykovye sredstva postroeniya perspektivy v diskurse konflikta: na materiale angliyskoy dramy: avtoref. kand.diss [Language means of building per spectives in the discourse of conflict: on a material of English drama. Ph. D (philology) Thesis]. Moscow, 2014. 24 p.
6. Rubinshtein S.Ya. Eksperimental’nye metodiki patop sihologii i opyt ih primeneniya v klinike: Prakticheskoe rukovodstvo [Experimental methods abnormal psychology and experience of their use in the clinic]. Moscow, Meditsina Publ., 1970. 215 p.
7. Rychkova O.V., Kholmogorova A.B. The main theo­retical approaches to the study of disorders of social cognition in schizophrenia: current status and prospects of development. Konsul’tativnaia psikhologiia i psikhoterapiia = Counseling Psychology and Psychotherapy, 2014, no. 4, pp. 30—43. (In Russ., аbstr. in Engl.).
8. Sergienko E.A., Lebedeva E. I., Prusakova O. A. Model’ psikhicheskogo v ontogeneze cheloveka. [Theory of mind in human ontogenesis]. Moscow: Institut psikhologii RAN, 2009. 415 p.
9. Kholmogorova A.B. The Role of L.S. Vygotsky’s Ideas in the Development of Social Cognition Paradigm in Modern Psychology: A Review of Foreign Research and Discussion on Perspectives. Kul’turno-istoricheskaya psikhologiya = Cultur­al-Historical Psychology, 2015. Vol. 11, no. 3, pp. 25—43. (In Russ., аbstr. in Engl.).
10. Andreasen N.C. The Scale for the Assessment of Nega­tive Symptoms (SANS): conceptual and theoretical founda­tions. British Journal of Psychiatry, 1989. Vol. 155, pp. 49—52.
11. Baron-Cohen S. Mindblindness: An essay on autism and theory of mind. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. 1995. 183 p.
12. Baron-Cohen S., Leslie A.M., Frith U. Does the autis­tic child have a ‘theory of mind’? Cognition, 1985. Vol. 21 (1), pp. 37—46.
13. Baron-Cohen S., Tager-Flusberg H., Cohen D. (Eds). Understanding Other Minds: Perspective from Developmen­tal Social Neuroscience. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2013. 498 р.
14. Bora E., Yucel M., Pantelis C. Theory of mind impair­ment in schizophrenia: Meta-analysis. Schizophrenia Research, 2009. Vol. 109, pp. 1—9.
15. Brune M. «Theory of Mind» in Schizophrenia: A Re­view of the Literature. Schizophrenia Bulletin, 2005. Vol. 31(1), pp. 21—42.
16. Bruner J. Beyond the information given: studies in the psychology of knowing. New York: W.W. Norton, 1973. 230 p.
17. Devine R.T., Hughes C. Silent films and strange stories: Theory of mind, gender and social experiences in middle childhood. Child Development, 2013. Vol. 84 (3), pp. 989—1003
18. 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.
19. Fauconnier G., Turner M. The way we think: Concep­tual blending and the mind’s hidden complexities. N.Y.: Basic Books, 2008. 441 p.
20. Fiszdon J.M., Reddy L.F. Review of social cognitive treatments for psychosis. Clinical Psychology Review, 2012. Vol. 32, pp. 724—740.
21. Frith C.D., Corcoran R. Exploring ‘theory of mind’ in people with schizophrenia. Psychological Medicine, 1996. Vol. 26, pp. 521—530.
22. Happй F. G. E. An advanced test of theory of mind: Un­derstanding of story characters’ thoughts and feelings by able, mentally handicapped and normal children. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 1994. Vol. 24 (2), pp. 129—154.
23. Jolliffe T., Baron-Cohen S. The Strange Stories Test: A Replication with High-Functioning Adults with Autism or Asperger Syndrome. Journal of Autism and Developmental Dis­orders, 1999. Vol. 29 (5), pp. 395—406.
24. Komogortsev O., Jayarathna U., Koh D., Gowda M. Qualitative and Quantitative Scoring and Evaluation of the Eye Movement Classification Algorithms. Proceedings of ACM Eye Tracking Research & Applications Symposium. Austin: TX, 2010, pp. 1—4.
25. Lakoff G., Johnson M. Metaphors We Live By. Chi­cago: University of Chicago Press, 2003. 256 p.
26. 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 (2), pp. 50—59.
27. Leslie A. Pretense and Representation: The Origins of ‘Theory of Mind’. Psychological Review, 1987. Vol. 94, pp. 412—26.
28. Leslie A., Roth D. What autism teaches us about meta­representation. Understanding other minds: Perspectives from autism / Baron-Cohen S. (еds.), Tager-Flusberg H., Cohen D. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1993, pp. 83—111.
29. Olivers C. N. L., Meijer F., Theeuwes J. Feature-based memory-driven attentional capture: Visual working memory content affects visual attention. Journal of Experimental Psy­chology: Human Perception and Performance, 2006. Vol. 32, pp. 1243—1265.
30. Premack D., Woodruff G. Does the chimpanzee have a theory of mind? Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 1978. Vol. 4, pp. 515—526.
31. 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 (5), pp. 368—373.
32. Shepherd S.V. Following gaze: gaze-following behavior as a window into social cognition. Frontiers in Integrative Neu­roscience. 2010. no. 4: 5.
33. Soto D., Hodsoll J., Rotshtein P., Humphreys G.W. Au­tomatic guidance of attention from working memory. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 2008. Vol. 12, pp. 342—348.
34. Sprong M., Schothorst P., Vos E., Hox J., Van Enge­land H. Theory of mind in schizophrenia: meta-analysis. British Journal of Psychiatry, 2007. Vol. 191, pp. 5—13.
35. Walther D., Koch Ch. Modeling attention to salient proto-objects. Neural Networks, 2006. Vol. 19, pp. 1395—1407.