Elizabeth J. Robinson

Bio: Elizabeth J. Robinson is an academic researcher from University of Warwick. The author has contributed to research in topics: Utterance & Nonverbal communication. The author has an hindex of 38, co-authored 127 publications receiving 4083 citations. Previous affiliations of Elizabeth J. Robinson include Macquarie University & Keele University.

Children's Thinking About Counterfactuals and Future Hypotheticals as Possibilities

Abstract: Two experiments explored whether children's correct answers to counterfactual and future hypothetical questions were based on an understanding of possibilities. Children played a game in which a toy mouse could run down either 1 of 2 slides. Children found it difficult to mark physically both possible outcomes, compared to reporting a single hypothetical future event, "What if next time he goes the other way ..." (Experiment 1: 3-4-year-olds and 4-5-year-olds), or a single counterfactual event, "What if he had gone the other way ...?" (Experiment 2: 3-4-year-olds and 5-6-year-olds). An open counterfactual question, "Could he have gone anywhere else?," which required thinking about the counterfactual as an alternative possibility, was also relatively difficult.

Shared workspaces: how do they work and when are they useful?

Abstract: We investigated the effect on synchronous communication of adding a Shared Workspace to audio, for three tasks possessing key representative features of workplace activity. We examined the content and effectiveness of remote audio communication between pairs of participants, who worked with and without the addition of the Workspace. For an undemanding task requiring the joint production of brief textual summaries, we found no benefits associated with adding the Workspace. For a more demanding text editing task, the Workspace initially hampered performance but, with task practice, participants performed more efficiently than with audio alone. When the task was graphical design, the Workspace was associated with greater communication efficiency and also changed the nature of communication. The Workspace permits the straightforward expression of spatial relations and locations, gesturing, and the monitoring and coordination of activity by direct visual inspection. The results suggest that, for demanding text-based tasks, or for complex graphical tasks, there are overall benefits in adding a visual channel in the form of a Workspace. These benefits occur despite the costs involved in attempting to coordinate activity with this unfamiliar form of communication. Our findings provide evidence for early claims about putative Workspace benefits. We also interpret these results in the context of a theory of mediated communication.

Children's trust in previously inaccurate informants who were well or poorly informed: when past errors can be excused.

Abstract: Past research demonstrates that children learn from a previously accurate speaker rather than from a previously inaccurate one. This study shows that children do not necessarily treat a previously inaccurate speaker as unreliable. Rather, they appropriately excuse past inaccuracy arising from the speaker’s limited information access. Children (N = 67) aged 3, 4 and 5 years aimed to identify a hidden toy in collaboration with a puppet as informant. When the puppet had previously been inaccurate despite having full information, children tended to ignore what they were told and guess for themselves: They treated the puppet as unreliable in the longer term. However children more frequently believed a currently well-informed puppet whose past inaccuracies arose legitimately from inadequate information access.

Lay public's understanding of equipoise and randomisation in randomised controlled trials

Abstract: Objectives: To research the lay public's understanding of equipoise and randomisation in randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and to look at why information on this may not be not taken in or remembered, as well as the effects of providing information designed to overcome barriers.Design: Investigations were informed by an update of systematic review on patients' understanding of consent information in clinical trials, and by relevant theory and evidence from experimental psychology. Nine investigations were conducted with nine participants.Setting: Access (return to education), leisure and vocational courses at Further Education Colleges in the Midlands, UK.Participants: Healthy adults with a wide range of educational backgrounds and ages.Investigations: Participants read hypothetical scenarios and wrote brief answers to subsequent questions. Sub-samples of participants were interviewed individually to elaborate on their written answers. Participants' background assumptions concerning equipoise and randomisation were examined and ways of helping participants recognise the scientific benefits of randomisation were explored.Main outcome measures: Judgments on allocation methods; treatment preferences; the acceptability of random allocation; whether or not individual doctors could be completely unsure about the best treatment; whether or not doctors should reveal treatment preferences under conditions of collective equipoise; and how sure experts would be about the best treatment following random allocation vs doctor/patient choice. Assessments of understanding hypothetical trial information.Results: Recent literature continues to report trial participants' failure to understand or remember information about randomisation and equipoise, despite the provision of clear and readable trial information leaflets. In current best practice, written trial information describes what will happen without offering accessible explanations. As a consequence, patients may create their own incorrect interpretations and consent or refusal may be inadequately informed. In six investigations, most participants identified which methods of allocation were random, but judged the random allocation methods to be unacceptable in a trial context; the mere description of a treatment as new was insufficient to engender a preference for it over a standard treatment; around half of the participants denied that a doctor could be completely unsure about the best treatment. A majority of participants judged it unacceptable for a doctor to suggest letting chance decide when uncertain of the best treatment, and, in the absence of a justification for random allocation, participants did not recognise scientific benefits of random allocation over normal treatment allocation methods. The pattern of results across three intervention studies suggests that merely supplementing written trial information with an explanation is unlikely to be helpful. However, when people manage to focus on the trial's aim of increasing knowledge ( as opposed to making treatment decisions about individuals), and process an explanation actively, they may be helped to understand the scientific reasons for random allocation.Conclusions: This research was not carried out in real healthcare settings. However, participants who could correctly identify random allocation methods, yet judged random allocation unacceptable, doubted the possibility of individual equipoise and saw no scientific benefits of random allocation over doctor/patient choice, are unlikely to draw upon contrasting views if invited to enter a real clinical trial. This suggests that many potential trial participants may have difficulty understanding and remembering trial information that conforms to current best practice in its descriptions of randomisation and equipoise. Given the extent of the disparity between the assumptions underlying trial design and the assumptions held by the lay public, the solution is unlikely to be simple. Nevertheless, the results suggest that including an accessible explanation of the scientific benefits of randomisation may be beneficial provided potential participants are also enabled to reflect on the trial's aim of advancing knowledge, and to think actively about the information presented. Further areas for consideration include: the identification of effective combinations of written and oral information; helping participants to reflect on the aim of advancing knowledge; and an evidence-based approach to leaflet construction.

Meta-analysis of theory-of-mind development: The truth about false belief.

Abstract: Research on theory of mind increasingly encompasses apparently contradictory findings. In particular, in initial studies, older preschoolers consistently passed false-belief tasks—a so-called “definitive” test of mentalstate understanding—whereas younger children systematically erred. More recent studies, however, have found evidence of false-belief understanding in 3-year-olds or have demonstrated conditions that improve children’s performance. A meta-analysis was conducted ( N � 178 separate studies) to address the empirical inconsistencies and theoretical controversies. When organized into a systematic set of factors that vary across studies, false-belief results cluster systematically with the exception of only a few outliers. A combined model that included age, country of origin, and four task factors (e.g., whether the task objects were transformed in order to deceive the protagonist or not) yielded a multiple R of .74 and an R 2 of .55; thus, the model accounts for 55% of the variance in false-belief performance. Moreover, false-belief performance showed a consistent developmental pattern, even across various countries and various task manipulations: preschoolers went from below-chance performance to above-chance performance. The findings are inconsistent with early competence proposals that claim that developmental changes are due to tasks artifacts, and thus disappear in simpler, revised false-belief tasks; and are, instead, consistent with theoretical accounts that propose that understanding of belief, and, relatedly, understanding of mind, exhibit genuine conceptual change in the preschool years.

Resource Manual for Nursing Research: Generating and Assessing Evidence for Nursing Practice

Abstract: The perfect complement to Nursing Research: Generating and Assessing Evidence for Nursing Practice, Ninth Edition, this knowledge builder helps you develop and reinforce basic skills essential to nursing research.

Pretense and representation: The origins of "theory of mind."

Abstract: One of the major developments of the second year of human life is the emergence of the ability to pretend. A child's knowledge of a real situation is apparently contradicted and distorted by pretense. If, as generally assumed, the child is just beginning to construct a system for internally representing such knowledge, why is this system of representation not undermined by its use in both comprehending and producing pretense? In this article I present a theoretical analysis of the representational mechanism underlying this ability. This mechanism extends the power of the infant's existing capacity for (primary) representation, creating a capacity for metarepresentation. It is this, developing toward the end of infancy, that underlies the child's new abilities to pretend and to understand pretense in others. There is a striking isomorphism between the three fundamental forms of pretend play and three crucial logical properties of mental state expressions in language. This isomorphism points to a common underlying form of internal representation that is here called metarepresentation. A performance model, the decoupler, is outlined embodying ideas about how an infant might compute the complex function postulated to underlie pretend play. This model also reveals pretense as an early manifestation of the ability to understand mental states. Aspects of later preschool development, both normal and abnormal, are discussed in the light of the new model. This theory begins the task of characterizing the specific innate basis of our commonsense "theory of mind."

Individual differences in inhibitory control and children's theory of mind.

Abstract: This research examined the relation between individual differences in inhibitory control (IC; a central component of executive functioning) and theory-of-mind (ToM) performance in preschool-age children. Across two sessions, 3- and 4-year-old children ( N � 107) were given multitask batteries measuring IC and ToM. Inhibitory control was strongly related to ToM, r � .66, p � .001. This relation remained significant controlling for age, gender, verbal ability, motor sequencing, family size, and performance on pretend-action and mental state control tasks. Inhibitory tasks requiring a novel response in the face of a conflicting prepotent response (Conflict scale) and those requiring the delay of a prepotent response (Delay scale) were significantly related to ToM. The Conflict scale, however, significantly predicted ToM performance over and above the Delay scale and control measures, whereas the Delay scale was not significant in a corresponding analysis. These findings suggest that IC may be a crucial enabling factor for ToM development, possibly affecting both the emergence and expression of mental state knowledge. The implications of the findings for a variety of executive accounts of ToM are discussed.