Is this AO and CO?

Thread posts

See all posts in this thread below.

  • User
  • Message
  • Actions
    • Published: 07-08-2015 11:09 am
      Updated: 07-08-2015 11:19 am
    • AO is increased use of general knowledge applied to social-settings (social categories) and activates the mentalizing areas more than personality-traits because personality-traits is individual specific (less general) and CO. [1,2]
      Another thing is that AO-individuals probably have a stronger DMN activation at rest than CO-individuals. [3]

      "The results revealed that social category-related behavioral information showed more activation in mentalizing areas (medial prefrontal cortex, anterior temporal lobe, bilateral temporo-parietal junction, posterior cingulate cortex) than trait-related information. This increased activation is interpreted in terms of the impact of autobiographical memories, greater variance among members of social categories than individual traits, a higher construal level (i.e., abstractness), and larger perceived group size."

      "Distinct neural correlates of social categories and personality traits", Laurens Van der Cruyssen et al., 2015. [1]

      "When imagining another individual, multi-voxel patterns of fMRI activation in the medial prefrontal cortex (mPFC) contained information about the individual's unique combination of personality traits. The authors propose that, in concert with other regions, the mPFC assembles a model of another's personality that is ultimately used to predict behavior."

      "The medial prefrontal cortex in constructing personality models", Jonathan B. Freeman et al., 2014. [2]

      "Humans readily adopt an intentional stance to other people, comprehending their behavior as guided by unobservable mental states such as belief, desire, and intention. We used fMRI in healthy adults to test the hypothesis that this stance is primed by the default mode of human brain function present when the mind is at rest. We report three findings that support this hypothesis. First, brain regions activated by actively adopting an intentional rather than nonintentional stance to a social stimulus were anatomically similar to those demonstrating default responses to fixation baseline in the same task. Second, moment-to-moment variation in default activity during fixation in the dorsomedial PFC was related to the ease with which participants applied an intentional—but not nonintentional—stance to a social stimulus presented moments later. Finally, individuals who showed stronger dorsomedial PFC activity at baseline in a separate task were generally more efficient when adopting the intentional stance and reported having greater social skills. "

      "The Default Mode of Human Brain Function Primes the Intentional Stance", Robert P. Spunt et al., 2015. [3]

      What do you think?
    • Published: 07-08-2015 03:16 pm
    • Yeah, this is really interesting! So basically personality-related information is complex social information, while literal social information is categories, identity, gender, nationality, etc etc? :)
    • Christian likes this post.
    • Published: 07-08-2015 03:42 pm
    • No I'm thinking the other way around.

      "social category-related behavioral information showed more activation in mentalizing areas (medial prefrontal cortex, anterior temporal lobe, bilateral temporo-parietal junction, posterior cingulate cortex) than trait-related information."

      Social-categories showed more activation of mentalizarion than personality-traits.
      Social-categories are more abstract than personality-traits..
    • Published: 07-09-2015 05:28 am
      Updated: 07-09-2015 05:32 am
    • If so, I'd like to see how a concrete-organic person would activate the DMN in the face of intensely concrete social pressure, for example when hugging another person? I think social categories and personality traits can be used generally or specifically. You can for example talk about general systems of personality types, for example 'nice guys' or 'feelers', or go down into more specific terms, such as 'tim is a nice guy' or 'john is a very affectionate person', but what if you redid the study and tested personality traits generally, while testing social categories individually? For example 'Tim is working class.' or 'Jenny is a woman.', that might cause the first study to have different results shouldn't it?

      Social categories are much more literalized than personality is. You can't easily see a persons personality by just looking at them (Well, we visual typers can ;)), but you can see if they dress working class or upper class, and you can tell which gender people have because there's so many norms for how women and men should dress, who should wear make-up, etc. AO's are more likely to dress for their personality, hobby, or for recreational purposes, while CO's are more likely to dress according to their social category and for positive community feedback, atleast according to what I've observed. I wasn't able to access the second study more than the outline, but it seems to hint in this direction aswell? Especially interesting imo is how many AM's express that they are completely unaware of people's gender, race, or nationality. Because of having unconscious CO? Because AM's do not appear to be detached to personality related differences. XAME and VAMP appear to be highly sensitive to emotional motivations and personality related issues (Affective), while VAME and XAMP appear to be emotionally detached when listening to people's personal motivations for their behavior. (Cognitive) so this should strengthen my argument.

      If you can find any research on the DMN and how it responds to art, music and aesthetic experiences that would be very interesting. One thing that comes up is that CO's appear to have more objective views on what good art, good music, etc is, based on what is popular and what the general community likes, while AO's appear to pursue art and fashion for recreational, personal purposes. AO's appear to have less objective views on what good art is, while CO's appear to have more literal definitions of what good art is, like a bigger desire for realism.
    • Christian likes this post.
    • Published: 07-09-2015 06:12 am
    • Yes I agree, the method used in the study made social categories more abstract because the person were to mentalize from those concepts. Personality-traits were derived from specific individuals which made them more concrete.

      So if I were to mentalize a person with Extraversion or a Empathic Leader that would probably be Abstract but if I mentalized a specific individuals experience which had those same traits that would be Concrete. So the level of abstractness is about if the mentalization is derived from general concepts or from specific individuals. Do you agree?
    • ErikThor likes this post.
    • Published: 07-09-2015 06:18 am
    • Yes, that's how I'd interpret these studies right now. :)
    • Christian likes this post.
  • User
  • Message
  • Actions

Become a member

Tell us your story by logging in.

Related

You might be interested in.