When engaging in social interaction, people rely on their ability to reason about unobservable mental content of others, which includes goals, intentions, and beliefs. This so-called theory of mind ability allows them to more easily understand, predict, and influence the behavior of others. People even use their theory of mind to reason about the theory of mind of others, which allows them to understand sentences like Alice believes that Bob does not know about the surprise party'. But while the use of higher orders of theory of mind is apparent in many social interactions, empirical evidence so far suggests that people do not use this ability spontaneously when playing strategic games, even when doing so would be highly beneficial. In this paper, we attempt to encourage participants to engage in higher-order theory of mind reasoning by letting them play a game against computational agents. Since previous research suggests that competitive games may encourage the use of theory of mind, we investigate a particular competitive game, the Mod game, which can be seen as a much larger variant of the well-known rock-paper-scissors game. By using a combination of computational agents and Bayesian model selection, we simultaneously determine to what extent people make use of higher-order theory of mind reasoning, as well as to what extent computational agents can encourage the use of higher-order theory of mind in their human opponents. Our results show that participants who play the Mod game against computational theory of mind agents adjust their level of theory of mind reasoning to that of their computer opponent. Earlier experiments with other strategic games show that participants only engage in low orders of theory of mind reasoning. Surprisingly, we find that participants who knowingly play against second- and third-order theory of mind agents apply up to fourth-order theory of mind themselves, and achieve higher scores as a result.
DOCUMENT
In social settings, people often need to reason about unobservablemental content of other people, such as their beliefs, goals, orintentions. This ability helps them to understand, to predict, and evento influence the behavior of others. People can take this ability furtherby applying it recursively. For example, they use second-order theory ofmind to reason about the way others use theory of mind, as in ‘Alicebelieves that Bob does not know about the surprise party’. However,empirical evidence so far suggests that people do not spontaneously usehigher-order theory of mind in strategic games. Previous agent-basedmodeling simulations also suggest that the ability to recursively applytheory of mind may be especially effective in competitive settings. Inthis paper, we use a combination of computational agents and Bayesianmodel selection to determine to what extent people make use of higherordertheory of mind reasoning in a particular competitive game, theMod game, which can be seen as a much larger variant of the well-knownrock-paper-scissors game.We let participants play the competitive Mod game against computationaltheory of mind agents. We find that people adapt their level oftheory of mind to that of their software opponent. Surprisingly, knowinglyplaying against second- and third-order theory of mind agents enticeshuman participants to apply up to fourth-order theory of mindthemselves, thereby improving their results in the Mod game. This phenomenoncontrasts with earlier experiments about other strategic oneshotand sequential games, in which human players only displayed lowerorders of theory of mind.
DOCUMENT
This paper examines how the learning environment in primary education can be enhanced by stimulating the use of innovative ICT applications. In particular, this discussion focuses on mind tools as a means of leveraging ICT for the development of cognitive skills. The stimulating effect of mind tools on the thinking skills and thinking attitudes of students is examined. The various types of mind tools and a number of specific examples are closely examined. We consider how mind tools can contribute to the establishment of an ICT-rich learning environment within the domain of technology education in primary schools. We illustrate two specific applications of such mind tools and discuss how these contribute to the development of thinking skills.
DOCUMENT
DOCUMENT
Dit artikel bespreekt ontwikkelingspatronen van externaliserend probleemgedrag en aangrijpingspunten voor interventie.
MULTIFILE
There are three volumes in this body of work. In volume one, we lay the foundation for a general theory of organizing. We propose that organizing is a continuous process of ongoing mutual or reciprocal influence between objects (e.g., human actors) in a field, whereby a field is infinite and connects all the objects in it much like electromagnetic fields influence atomic and molecular charged objects or gravity fields influence inanimate objects with mass such as planets and stars. We use field theory to build what we now call the Network Field Model. In this model, human actors are modeled as pointlike objects in the field. Influence between and investments in these point-like human objects are explained as energy exchanges (potential and kinetic) which can be described in terms of three different types of capital: financial (assets), human capital (the individual) and social (two or more humans in a network). This model is predicated on a field theoretical understanding about the world we live in. We use historical and contemporaneous examples of human activity and describe them in terms of the model. In volume two, we demonstrate how to apply the model. In volume 3, we use experimental data to prove the reliability of the model. These three volumes will persistently challenge the reader’s understanding of time, position and what it means to be part of an infinite field. http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.99709
DOCUMENT
To improve people’s lives, human-computer interaction researchers are increasingly designing technological solutions based on behavior change theory, such as social comparison theory (SCT). However, how researchers operationalize such a theory as a design remains largely unclear. One way to clarify this methodological step is to clearly state which functional elements of a design are aimed at operationalizing a specific behavior change theory construct to evaluate if such aims were successful. In this article, we investigate how the operationalization of functional elements of theories and designs can be more easily conveyed. First, we present a scoping review of the literature to determine the state of operationalizations of SCT as behavior change designs. Second, we introduce a new tool to facilitate the operationalization process. We term the tool blueprints. A blueprint explicates essential functional elements of a behavior change theory by describing it in relation to necessary and sufficient building blocks incorporated in a design. We describe the process of developing a blueprint for SCT. Last, we illustrate how the blueprint can be used during the design refinement and reflection process.
DOCUMENT
What comes after postmodernism and how will this affect educational theory and, I would add, educational practices? I will take up these challenging questions by interpreting present times as a period of transformation towards a new kind of awareness. Nietzsche—for some the father of postmodernity, for me a visionary thinker who ‘presenced’ what was coming—has already explored this transformation. This is an Accepted Manuscript of an article published by Taylor & Francis in "Educational Philosophy and Theory" on 11/25/2018, available online: https://doi.org/10.1080/00131857.2018.1461383. http://henriettajoosten.nl/
MULTIFILE
The concepts of metacognitive refection, refection, and metacognition are distinct but have undergone shifts in meaning as they migrated into medical education. Conceptual clarity is essential to the construction of the knowledge base of medical education and its educational interventions. We conducted a theoretical integrative review across diverse bodies of literature with the goal of understanding what metacognitive refection is. We searched PubMed, Embase, CINAHL, PsychInfo, and Web of Science databases, including all peer-reviewed research articles and theoretical papers as well as book chapters that addressed the topic, with no limitations for date, language, or location. A total of 733 articles were identified and 87 were chosen after careful review and application of exclusion criteria. The work of conceptually and empirically delineating metacognitive reflection has begun. Contributions have been made to root metacognitive refection in the concept of metacognition and moving beyond it to engage in cycles of refection. Other work has underscored its affective component, transformational nature, and contextual factors. Despite this merging of threads to develop a richer conceptualization, a theory of how metacognitive refection works is elusive. Debates address whether metacognition drives refection or vice versa. It has also been suggested that learners evolve along on a continuum from thinking, to task-related refection, to self-refection, and finally to metacognitive refection. Based on prior theory and research, as well as the findings of this review, we propose the following conceptualization: Metacognitive refection involves heightened internal observation, awareness, monitoring, and regulation of our own knowledge, experiences, and emotions by questioning and examining cognition and emotional processes to continually refine and enhance our perspectives and decisions while thoughtfully accounting for context. We argue that metacognitive refection brings a shift in perspective and can support valuable reconceptualization for lifelong learning.
LINK
This interview-based article about Hubert Hermans, founder of The Dialogical Self Theory (DST), was intended to determine the founder’s personal relationship to the construction and development of his theory and to provide a portrait of the engaged scientist and vulnerable researcher at work. DST lends itself to interdisciplinary research and practice, and is used in diverse fields and contexts (e.g. psychotherapy; bereavement scholarship; higher education). However, little has been written about the founder of the theory. I embarked on this project to illuminate the researcher and theorist as an individual who taps into personal material for practical and conceptual learning, and to honour Hermans’s contribution to the field of psychology, in the spirit of a Festschrift. Reinekke Lengelle (02 Apr 2021): Portrait of a scientist: in conversation with Hubert Hermans, founder of Dialogical Self Theory1, British Journal of Guidance & Counselling, DOI: 10.1080/03069885.2021.1900779
DOCUMENT
