1. Example trial sequences for visual perspective-taking task
Anxiety Impairs Spontaneous Perspective Calculation Austin J. Simpson & Andrew R. Todd University of Iowa
Introduction
Although reasoning about others’ mental states is central to social life, adults commonly make perspective-taking errors. These errors are heightened when people are experiencing particular emotions (e.g., anxiety; Todd et al., 2015)
What cognitive mechanisms underlie anxiety-induced perspective-taking
difficulties?
Ascribing mental states may involve two distinct process (Leslie et al., 2005)
Implicit calculation: What does a person see, know, or want?
Explicit selection: Which calculated perspective is correct?
These processes can be separated in visual perspective-taking (VPT) tasks
(Samson et al., 2010)
Two intrusion effects commonly emerge in VPT tasks:
Egocentric intrusion: More difficulty reporting other perspective when
it doesn’t align with one’s own
Altercentric intrusion: More difficulty reporting own perspective when
it doesn’t align with another’s
How does feeling anxious affect these processes? Are these effects exclusive to social contexts?
Hypotheses
Perspective-calculation hypothesis: Anxiety increases egocentric intrusion and decreases altercentric intrusion
Past research shows increased egocentrism with anxiety (Todd et al., 2015)
Perspective-selection hypothesis: Deficits in executive function from anxiety (e.g., Eysenck et al., 2007) lead to increases in both egocentric and altercentric intrusion
Method
Experiment 1
147 undergraduates (82 women, 63 men, 3 unreported)
Emotion recall task: Anxiety (Cataldo & Cohen, 2015) or neutral-emotion
VPT task (Samson et al., 2010)
Four equivalent blocks of 52 experimental trials
Trial types: Other versus self trials; Consistent versus inconsistent trials
Fixation cross (500 ms)  Perspective cue (“YOU” or “HE”) (750 ms) 
Number of dots cue (0-3) (750 ms)  Response (Does number of dots cue
match or mismatch number of dots visible from cued perspective?)
Experiment 2a
106 undergraduates (76 women, 30 men)
Emotion recall task: Anxiety or anger
Experiment 2b
Non-social variant of VPT task (Surtees & Apperly, 2012)
Human avatar replaced with dual-colored stick
Discussion
Results support the perspective-calculation account, whereby anxiety increases egocentric intrusion and decreases altercentric intrusion
Conducted internal meta-analysis (see Borenstein et al., 2009)
Anxiety marginally increased egocentric intrusion, g=0.22, 90% CI:
[0.02, 0.43], Z=1.77, p=.077
Anxiety significantly decreased altercentric intrusion, g=-0.26, 95%
CI: [-0.50, -0.01], Z=2.06, p=.040
Anxiety’s disruptive effects on cognitive performance are especially pronounced for social aspects of cognition
Future Directions
Do similar results emerge on indirect measures that assess the implicit
tracking of higher-order mental states (e.g., beliefs)?
Do integral (vs. incidental, as shown here) forms of anxiety similarly affect
perspective-taking processes?
Conclusion
These findings enhance our understanding of how anxiety shapes social
aspects of cognition
The current work suggests that feeling anxious can undermine
spontaneous tendencies to track others’ perspectives
References
Borenstein, M., Hedges, L. V., Higgins, J. P., & Rothstein, H. R. (2009). Introduction to meta-analysis. Chichester, West Sussex: John Wiley &
Sons.
Cataldo, A. M.., & Cohen, A. L. (2015). The effect of emotional state on visual detection: A signal detection analysis. Emotion, 15, 846–853.
Eysenck, M. W., Derakshan, N., Santos, R., & Calvo, M. G. (2007). Anxiety and cognitive performance: Attentional control theory. Emotion, 7,
336–353.
Qureshi, A. W., Apperly, I. A., & Samson, D. (2010). Executive function is necessary for perspective selection, not level-1 visual perspective
calculation: Evidence from a dual-task study of adults. Cognition, 117, 230–236.
Samson, D., Apperly, I. A., Braithwaite, J. J., Andrews, B. J., & Bodley Scott, S. E. (2010). Seeing it their way: Evidence for rapid and involuntary
computation of what other people see. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 36, 1255–1266.
Surtees, A. D. R., & Apperly, I. A. (2012). Egocentrism and automatic perspective taking in children and adults. Child Development, 83, 452–
460.
Todd, A. R., Forstmann, M., Burgmer, P., Brooks, A. W., & Galinsky, A. D. (2015). Anxious and egocentric: How specific emotions influence
perspective taking. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 144, 374–391.
Townsend, J. T., & Ashby, F. G. (1983). Stochastic modeling of elementary psychological processes. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University
Press.
Example trial sequences for visual perspective-taking task
Intrusion effects by condition (Experiments 2a & 2b)
Results
Exclusions: Excluded mismatch trials and response times (RTs) <200 ms and >2000 ms
Processing cost metric (Qureshi et al., 2010; Townsend & Ashby, 1983):
Integrates speed and accuracy into single metric
[Mean correct RTs/Proportion of correct responses]
Experiment 1
Data support the perspective-calculation hypothesis—Emotion x Perspective x Consistency: F(1, 145)=4.34, p=.039, ηp2=.03
Underlying pattern (egocentric intrusion > altercentric intrusion)
stronger for anxious, F(1, 75)=41.45, p<.001, ηp2=.36, than neutral
participants, F(1, 70)=11.59, p=.001, ηp2 =.14
Experiments 2a and 2b
Data again support the perspective-calculation hypothesis—Emotion x Perspective x Consistency: F(1, 104)=6.05, p=.016, ηp2=.06
stronger for anxious, F(1, 53)=44.50, p<.001, ηp2=.46, than angry
participants, F(1, 51)=6.72, p=.012, ηp2 =.12
Anxiety’s effects are limited to situations involving social stimuli (i.e., not observed with non-social avatar in Experiment 2b), all relevant Fs < 1
Intrusion effects by condition (Experiment 1)