A question of perspective: Target- vs. perceiver-specific dimensions of mind perception

Mind perception - the inference of mind in others - is foundational for social cognition and interaction, but previous research on its underlying dimensions has so far only produced mixed findings. In a prominent study, H.M. Gray et al. (2007) identified two dimensions of mind perception - Agency and Experience -, while more recent work instead suggests three dimensions similar to Body, Heart, and Mind (Malle, 2019; Weisman et al., 2017). Here, we provide a comprehensive account that can accommodate both dimensional structures by distinguishing target- from perceiver-specific dimensions of mind perception. These dimensions explain target- and perceiver-specific differences in mind perception that were differentially focused on by previous studies ascribing to the competing dimensional structures. To test our account empirically and compare target- vs. perceiver-specific dimensions, we gathered online survey data from two samples (N = 157, and N = 150). In both samples, exploratory factor analyses yielded two target-specific dimensions in line with Agency-Experience, and three perceiver-specific dimensions in line with Body-Heart-Mind, thereby validating our explanatory account. Further analyses showed that perceiver-specific dimensions are meaningfully associated with perceivers' demographics, personality, and spiritual belief; and that they depend on target context. Together, our results resolve inconsistencies in mind perception research and work toward a novel unifying mind perception framework.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Cognition
Published
2025-08-08
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2025.106231
Citations
2
Primary Topic
Psychology of Moral and Emotional Judgment
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
2.86
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

A question of perspective: Target- vs. perceiver-specific dimensions of mind perception

Lasana T. Harris, Nele Johanna Bögemann, Steffen Nestler
2 citations
Cognition
Psychology of Moral and Emotional Judgment
2.86
article

A question of perspective: Target- vs. perceiver-specific dimensions of mind perception

Lasana T. Harris, Nele Johanna Bögemann, Steffen Nestler
article en
2 citations

Abstract

Mind perception - the inference of mind in others - is foundational for social cognition and interaction, but previous research on its underlying dimensions has so far only produced mixed findings. In a prominent study, H.M. Gray et al. (2007) identified two dimensions of mind perception - Agency and Experience -, while more recent work instead suggests three dimensions similar to Body, Heart, and Mind (Malle, 2019; Weisman et al., 2017). Here, we provide a comprehensive account that can accommodate both dimensional structures by distinguishing target- from perceiver-specific dimensions of mind perception. These dimensions explain target- and perceiver-specific differences in mind perception that were differentially focused on by previous studies ascribing to the competing dimensional structures. To test our account empirically and compare target- vs. perceiver-specific dimensions, we gathered online survey data from two samples (N = 157, and N = 150). In both samples, exploratory factor analyses yielded two target-specific dimensions in line with Agency-Experience, and three perceiver-specific dimensions in line with Body-Heart-Mind, thereby validating our explanatory account. Further analyses showed that perceiver-specific dimensions are meaningfully associated with perceivers' demographics, personality, and spiritual belief; and that they depend on target context. Together, our results resolve inconsistencies in mind perception research and work toward a novel unifying mind perception framework.

CognitionVol. 265
University of Münster (DE), University Hospital Münster (DE), University College London (GB), FH Münster University of Applied Sciences (DE), Bedford College (GB)
Reduced inequalities
Openalex Percentile: Top 9%
Psychology of Moral and Emotional Judgment
2.86
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.