Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Mind-Reading in Altruists and Psychopaths

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Neuroscience and Social Science

Abstract

Due to its importance in political, cultural, and clinical spheres, adult mind-reading needs to be investigated (and understood) in depth. This chapter introduces the various meanings of “mind-reading” in neurotypical adults. We highlight philosophical and psychological implications of this construct for a wide variety of specifically human social interactions, such as play, acting, and manipulation. As a general rule, humans see one another as centres of intentional gravity and are very good folk psychologists (i.e. predictors of others’ behaviours). These predictive powers rest in no small part on our various abilities to mind-read. A centre of intentional gravity can be decomposed into concepts such as beliefs, desires, and motives and can have multiple orders of understanding (e.g. “he believes that she desires him to wish for…”). Such multilayered abilities underwrite a vast range of human cognitive and affective domains such as mimicry, altruism, empathy, psychopathy, and learning. Our ability to attribute independent mental states and processes to others, as well as to animals and inanimate objects, is an integral part of human social behaviour, but mind-reading alone has no necessary internal moral compass, as seen in the behaviour of altruists and psychopaths. Rather, mind-reading is presented here as an all-encompassing toolkit that enables us to navigate our Umwelt as effectively as possible.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 129.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. von Uexküll J. Theoretical biology. New York: Harcourt, Brace & Co; 1926.

    Google Scholar 

  2. McCarthy J, Hayes PJ. Some philosophical problems from the standpoint of artificial intelligence. In: Ginsberg ML, editor. Readings in nonmonotonic reasoning. Los Altos, CA: Morgan Kaufmann; 1987. p. 26–45.

    Google Scholar 

  3. King RI. Can’t get no (Boolean) satisfaction: a reply to Barrett et al. (2015). Front Psychol. 2016;7:1880.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  4. Ryle G. The concept of mind. London: Hutchinson; 1949.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Simpson GG. The Baldwin effect. Evolution. 1953;7(2):110–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Dennett DC. The intentional stance. Cambridge: MIT Press; 1989.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Wilson EO. Consilience: the unity of knowledge. New York: Vintage; 1999.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Minsky M. Society of mind. New York: Simon and Schuster; 1988.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Zaki J, Ochsner K. The neuroscience of empathy: progress, pitfalls and promise. Nat Neurosci. 2012;15(5):675–80.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Leslie AM. Pretense and representation: the origins of “Theory of Mind”. Psychol Rev. 1987;95(4):412–26.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Wimmer H, Perner J. Beliefs about beliefs: representation and constraining function of wrong beliefs in young children’s understanding of deception. Cognition. 1983;13:103–l28.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Ináncsi T, Láng A, Bereczkei T. Machiavellianism and adult attachment in general interpersonal relationships and close relationships. Europe J Psychol. 2015;11(1):139–54.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Kinderman P, Dunbar RIM, Bentall RP. Theory-of-mind deficits and causal attributions. Br J Psychol. 1998;89:191–204.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. de Bruin L, Strijbos D, Slors M. Early social cognition: alternatives to implicit mindreading. Rev Philos Psychol. 2011;2:499–517.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  15. Gallagher S. Simulation trouble. Soc Neurosci. 2007;2:353–65.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Wittgenstein L. In: PMS H, Schulte J, editors. Philosophical investigations. 4th ed. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell; 2009.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Waytz A, Gray K, Epley N, Wegner DM. Causes and consequences of mind perception. Trends Cogn Sci. 2010;14(8):383–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Eyssel FA, Pfundmair M. Predictors of psychological anthropomorphization mind perception and the fulfillment of social needs: a case study with a zoomorphic robot. In: 24th IEEE International Symposium 2015; 2015. pp. 827–32.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Nejati V, Zabihzadeh A, Maleki G, Tehranchi A. Mind reading and mindfulness deficits in patients with major depression disorder. Procedia Soc Behav Sci. 2012;32:431–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Tan LBG, Lo BCY, Macrae CN. Brief mindfulness meditation improves mental state attribution and empathizing. PLoS One. 2014;9(10):e110510.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  21. Sebastian CL, Fontaine NMG, Bird G, Blakemore S-J, De Brito SA, McCrory EJP, et al. Neural processing associated with cognitive and affective theory of mind in adolescents and adults. Soc Cogn Affect Neurosci. 2012;7:53–63.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Shamay-Tsoory SG, Aharon-Peretz J. Dissociable prefrontal networks for cognitive and affective theory of mind: a lesion study. Neuropsychologia. 2007;45:3054–67.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Kalbe E, Schlegel M, Sack AT, Nowak DA, Dafotakis M, Bangard C, et al. Dissociating cognitive from affective theory of mind: a TMS study. Cortex. 2010;46(6):769–80.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Henry JD, von Hippel W, Molenberghs P, Lee T, Sachdev PS. Clinical assessment of social cognitive function in neurological disorders. Nat Rev Neurol. 2016;12(1):28–39.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Liddle B, Nettle D. Higher-order theory of mind and social competence in school-age children. J Cult Evol Psychol. 2006;4:231–46.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Duval C, Piolino P, Bejanin A, Eustache F, Desgranges B. Age effects on different components of theory of mind. Conscious Cogn. 2011;20:627–42.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Brothers L, Ring B. A neuroethological framework for the representation of minds. J Cogn Neurosci. 1992;4:107–18.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Castelli F, Happe F, Frith U, Frith C. Movement and mind: a functional imaging study of perception and interpretation of complex intentional movement patterns. NeuroImage. 2000;12:314–25.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Singer T. The neuronal basis and ontogeny of empathy and mind reading: review of literature and implications for future research. Neurosci Biobehav Rev. 2006;30:855–63.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Suddendorf T, Whiten A. Mental evolution and development: evidence for secondary representation in children, great ages, and other animals. Psychol Bull. 2001;127(5):629–50.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Decety J, Cowell JM. The complex relation between morality and empathy. Trends Cogn Sci. 2014;18(7):337–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Bloom P. Empathy and its discontents. Trends Cogn Sci. 2016;21(1):24–31.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Prinz JJ. Is empathy necessary for morality? In: Coplan A, Goldie P, editors. Empathy: philosophical and psychological perspectives. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2011.

    Google Scholar 

  34. Kang M, Camerer C. fMRI evidence of a hot-cold empathy gap in hypothetical and real aversive choices. Front Neurosci. 2013;7:104.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  35. Macknik S, Martinez-Conde S, Blakeslee S. Sleights of mind: what the neuroscience of magic reveals about our everyday deceptions. New York: Henry Holt and Company; 2010.

    Google Scholar 

  36. Gerrans P, Stone VE. Generous or parsimonious cognitive architecture? Cognitive neuroscience and theory of mind. Br J Philos Sci. 2008;59:121–41.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Carrington SJ, Bailey AJ. Are there theory of mind regions in the brain? A review of the neuroimaging literature. Hum Brain Mapp. 2009;30:2313–35.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Vogeley K, Bussfeld P, Newen A, Herrmann S, Happé F, Falkai P, et al. Mind reading: neural mechanisms of theory of mind and self-perspective. NeuroImage. 2001;14:170–81.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Lindquist KA, Barrett LF. A functional architecture of the human brain: emerging insights from the science of emotion. Trends Cogn Sci. 2012;16(11):533–40.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  40. Lieberman MD. Social cognitive neuroscience: a review of core processes. Annu Rev Psychol. 2007;58:259–89.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Decety J, Jackson PL, Sommerville JA, Chaminade T, Meltzoff AN. The neural bases of cooperation and competition: an fMRI investigation. NeuroImage. 2004;23(2):744–51.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  42. Amodio DM, Frith CD. Meeting of minds: the medial frontal cortex and social cognition. Nat Rev Neurosci. 2006;7:268–77.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Young L, Camprodon JA, Hauser M, Pascual-Leone A, Saxe R. Disruption of the right temporoparietal junction with transcranial magnetic stimulation reduces the role of beliefs in moral judgments. Proc Natl Acad Sci. 2010;107(15):6753–8.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  44. FeldmanHall O, Mobbs D, Dalgleish T. Deconstructing the Brain’s moral network: dissociable functionality between the temporoparietal junction and ventro-medial prefrontal cortex. Soc Cogn Affect Neurosci. 2013;9(3):297–306.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  45. Saxe R, Kanwisher N. People thinking about thinking people: the role of the temporo-parietal junction in “theory of mind”. NeuroImage. 2003;19(4):1835–42.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  46. Bzdok D, Langner R, Hoffstaedter F, Turetsky BI, Zilles K, Eickhoff SB. The modular neuroarchitecture of social judgments on faces. Cereb Cortex. 2012;22(4):951–61.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  47. Kobayashi C, Temple E. Cultural effects on the neural basis of theory of mind. Prog Brain Res. 2009;178:213–23.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  48. Singer T, Kiebel SJ, Winston JS, Dolan RJ, Frith CD. Brain responses to the acquired moral status of faces. Neuron. 2004;41:653–62.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  49. Kanske P, Böckler A, Trautwein F-M, Singer T. Dissecting the social brain: Introducing the EmpaToM to reveal distinct neural networks and brain–behavior relations for empathy and theory of mind. NeuroImage. 2015;122:6–19.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  50. Singer T, Lamm C. The social neuroscience of empathy. Ann N Y Acad Sci. 2009;1156:81–96.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  51. Pati I, Zanon M, Novembre G, Zangrando N, Chittaro L, Silani G. Neuroanatomical basis of concern-based altruism in virtual environment. Neuropsychologia. 2017. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2017.02.015.

    Google Scholar 

  52. Zaki J, Weber J, Bolger N, Ochsner K. The neural bases of empathic accuracy. Proc Natl Acad Sci. 2009;106:11382–7.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  53. Baron-Cohen S, Jolliffe T, Mortimore C, Robertson M. Another advanced test of theory of mind: evidence from very high functioning adults with autism or Asperger syndrome. J Child Psychol Psychiatry. 1997;38(7):813–22.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  54. Baron-Cohen S, Bowen DC, Holt RJ, Allison C, Auyeung B, Lombardo MV, Smith P, Lai M-C. The “reading the mind in the eyes” test: complete absence of typical sex difference in ~400 men and women with autism. PLoS One. 2015;10(8):e0136521.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  55. Adolphs R, Baron-Cohen S, Tranel D. Impaired recognition of social emotions following amygdala damage. J Cogn Neurosci. 2002;14:1264–74.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  56. Gray K, Jenkins AC, Heberlein AS, Wegner DM. Distortions of mind perception in psychopathology. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2010;108:477–9.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  57. Mitchell RLC, Phillips LH. The overlapping relationship between emotion perception and theory of mind. Neuropsychologia. 2015;70:1–10.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  58. Dennett DC. Beliefs about beliefs. Behav Brain Sci. 1978;1:568–70.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  59. Baron-Cohen S, Leslie AM, Frith U. Does the autistic child have a “theory of mind”? Cognition. 1985;21(1):37–46.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  60. Bloom P, German TP. Two reasons to abandon the false belief task as a test of theory of mind. Cognition. 2000;77(1):25–31.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  61. Dana S, Apperly IA, Chiavarino C, Humphreys GW. Left temporoparietal junction is necessary for representing someone else’s belief. Nat Neurosci. 2004;7(5):499–500.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  62. Abu-Akel A, Shamay-Tsoory S. Neuroanatomical and neurochemical bases of theory of mind. Neuropsychologia. 2011;49(11):2976.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  63. Heider F, Simmel M. An experimental study of apparent behavior. Am J Psychol. 1944;57:243–59.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  64. Norenzayan A, Gervais WM, Trzesniewski KH. Mentalizing deficits constrain belief in a personal God. PLoS One. 2012;7(5):e36880.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  65. Ryan C, Stafford M, King RJ. Seeing the man in the moon: do children with autism perceive pareidolic faces? A pilot study. J Autism Dev Disord. 2016;46(12):3838–43.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  66. Baron-Cohen S, Wheelwright S, Hill J, Raste Y, Plumb I. The “reading the mind in the eyes” test revised version: a study with normal adults, and adults with Asperger syndrome or high-functioning autism. J Child Psychol Psychiatry. 2001;42(2):241–51.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  67. Dziobek I, Fleck S, Kalbe E, Rogers K, Hassenstab J, Brand M, et al. Introducing MASC: a movie for the assessment of social cognition. J Autism Dev Disord. 2006;36:623–36.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  68. Gęsiarz F, Crockett MJ. Goal-directed, habitual and Pavlovian prosocial behaviour. Front Behav Neurosci. 2015;9:135.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  69. Hamilton WD. The genetical evolution of social behaviour. I. J Theor Biol. 1964;7(1):1–16.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  70. Batson CD, Lishner DA, Stocks EL. The empathy–altruism hypothesis. In: Schroeder DA, Graziano WG, editors. The Oxford handbook of prosocial behavior. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2015. p. 259–81.

    Google Scholar 

  71. Smith JM. Group selection and kin selection. Nature. 1964;201(4924):1145–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  72. Trivers R. The evolution of reciprocal altruism. Q Rev Biol. 1971;46:35–57.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  73. de Vignemont F, Singer T. The empathic brain: how, when and why? Trends Cogn Sci. 2006;10(10):435–41.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  74. Lockwood PL, Apps MA, Valton V, Viding E, Roiser JP. Neurocomputational mechanisms of prosocial learning and links to empathy. Proc Natl Acad Sci. 2016;113(35):9763–8.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  75. Tankersley D, Stowe CJ, Huettel SA. Altruism is associated with an increased neural response to agency. Nat Neurosci. 2007;10(2):150–1.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  76. Tomasello M. Why we cooperate. Cambridge: MIT Press; 2009.

    Google Scholar 

  77. Olson KR, Spelke ES. Foundations of cooperation in preschool children. Cognition. 2008;108(1):222–31.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  78. Phillips A, Wellman H, Spelke E. Infants’ ability to connect gaze and emotional expression as cues to intentional action. Cognition. 2002;85(1):53–78.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  79. Furnham A, Richards SC, Paulhus DL. The dark triad of personality: a 10 year review. Soc Pers Psychol Compass. 2013;7(3):199–216.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  80. Paulhus DL, Williams KM. The dark triad of personality: narcissism, Machiavellianism, and psychopathy. J Res Pers. 2002;36:556–63.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  81. Damasio AR. A neural basis for sociopathy. Arch Gen Psychiatry. 2000;57(2):128–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  82. Hare RD. Comparison of procedures for the assessment of psychopathy. J Consult Clin Psychol. 1985;53:7–16.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  83. Gray K, Jenkins AC, Heberlein AS, Wegner DM. Distortions of mind perception in psychopathology. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2011;108(2):477–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  84. Skeem JL, Polaschek DLL, Patrick CJ, Lilienfeld SO. Psychopathic personality: bridging the gap between scientific evidence and public policy. Psychol Sci Public Interest. 2011;12(3):95–162.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  85. Frith CD, Frith U. How we predict what other people are going to do. Brain Res. 2006;1079:36–46.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  86. Craig MC, Catani M, Deeley Q, Latham R, Daly E, Kanaan R, et al. Altered connections on the road to psychopathy. Mol Psychiatry. 2009;14:946–53.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  87. Overwalle FV. Social cognition and the brain: a meta-analysis. Hum Brain Mapp. 2009;30:829–58.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  88. Ibanez A, Huepe D, Gempp R, Gutierrez V, Rivera-Rei A, Toledo MI. Empathy, sex and fluid intelligence as predictors of theory of mind. Personal Individ Differ. 2013;54(5):616–21.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  89. Byrne RW, Whiten A. Machiavellian intelligence: social expertise and the evolution of intellect in monkeys, apes, and humans. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 1988. p. 73–5.

    Google Scholar 

  90. Wilson DS, Near D, Miller RR. Machiavellianism: a synthesis of the evolutionary and psychological literatures. Psychol Bull. 1996;119(2):285–99.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  91. Repacholi B, Slaughter V, Pritchard M, Gibbs V. Theory of mind, Machiavellianism, and social functioning in childhood. In: Individual differences in theory of mind: implications for typical and atypical development. New York: Psychology Press; 2003.

    Google Scholar 

  92. Andrew J, Cooke M, Muncer SJ. The relationship between empathy and Machiavellianism: an alternative to empathizing – systemizing theory. Personal Individ Differ. 2008;44:1203–11.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  93. Paal T, Bereczkei T. Adult theory of mind, cooperation, Machiavellianism: the effect of mindreading on social relations. Personal Individ Differ. 2007;43:541–51.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  94. Bereczkei T, Szabo ZP, Czibor A. Abusing good intentions: Machiavellians strive for exploiting cooperators. SAGE Open. 2015;5(2):1–5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  95. Barry CT, Frick PJ, Killian AL. The relation of narcissism and self-esteem to conduct problems in children: a preliminary investigation. J Clin Child Adolesc Psychol. 2003;32(1):139–52.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  96. Gomez JC. Nonhuman primate theories of (non-human primate) minds: some issues concerning the origins of mind-reading. In: Carruthers P, Smith PK, editors. Theories of theories of mind. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 1996. p. 330–43.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Psychology Department, Kingston University London, Penrhyn Road, London, KT1 2EE, UK

    Fatima Maria Felisberti

  2. Applied Psychology, University College Cork, Cork, T12 YN60, Ireland

    Robert King

Authors
  1. Fatima Maria Felisberti
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Robert King
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Fatima Maria Felisberti .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Laboratory of Experimental Psychology and Neuroscience (LPEN), Institute of Cognitive and Translational Neuroscience (INCYT) INECO Foundation, Favaloro University, Buenos Aires, Argentina

    Agustín Ibáñez

  2. Laboratory of Experimental Psychology and Neuroscience (LPEN), Institute of Cognitive and Translational Neuroscience (INCYT) INECO Foundation, Favaloro University, Buenos Aires, Argentina

    Lucas Sedeño

  3. Laboratory of Experimental Psychology and Neuroscience (LPEN), Institute of Cognitive and Translational Neuroscience (INCYT) INECO Foundation, Favaloro University, Buenos Aires, Argentina

    Adolfo M. García

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2017 Springer International Publishing Switzerland

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Felisberti, F.M., King, R. (2017). Mind-Reading in Altruists and Psychopaths. In: Ibáñez, A., Sedeño, L., García, A. (eds) Neuroscience and Social Science. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-68421-5_6

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation