Reading the Mind in the Eyes or reading between the lines? Theory of Mind predicts collective intelligence equally well online and face-to-face.

David Engel,Thomas W Malone,Anita Williams Woolley,Lisa X Jing,Christopher F Chabris,Marina A Pavlova

doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0115212

David Engel, Thomas W Malone + Show 4 more

Open Access

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0115212

Copy DOI

Abstract

Recent research with face-to-face groups found that a measure of general group effectiveness (called “collective intelligence”) predicted a group’s performance on a wide range of different tasks. The same research also found that collective intelligence was correlated with the individual group members’ ability to reason about the mental states of others (an ability called “Theory of Mind” or “ToM”). Since ToM was measured in this work by a test that requires participants to “read” the mental states of others from looking at their eyes (the “Reading the Mind in the Eyes” test), it is uncertain whether the same results would emerge in online groups where these visual cues are not available. Here we find that: (1) a collective intelligence factor characterizes group performance approximately as well for online groups as for face-to-face groups; and (2) surprisingly, the ToM measure is equally predictive of collective intelligence in both face-to-face and online groups, even though the online groups communicate only via text and never see each other at all. This provides strong evidence that ToM abilities are just as important to group performance in online environments with limited nonverbal cues as they are face-to-face. It also suggests that the Reading the Mind in the Eyes test measures a deeper, domain-independent aspect of social reasoning, not merely the ability to recognize facial expressions of mental states.

Highlights

A growing body of research has been focused on the importance of individuals’ ability to make inferences about others’ mental states, termed ‘‘theory of mind’’ (ToM) or ‘‘mentalizing’’ [1,2,3,4,5]
Average ToM scores were the only significant predictor of collective intelligence in a regression that included other group composition and process variables. It is unknown how rich interpersonal cues need to be in order for collective intelligence to emerge at all, or for individual members to engage in the mentalizing necessary to facilitate social interaction
The scores of group members on the Reading the Mind in the Eyes’’ (RME) measure were a strong predictor of how well the groups could perform a wide range of tasks together, even when participants were only collaborating online via text chat and could not see each other’s eyes or facial expressions at all

Summary

Introduction

A growing body of research has been focused on the importance of individuals’ ability to make inferences about others’ mental states, termed ‘‘theory of mind’’ (ToM) or ‘‘mentalizing’’ [1,2,3,4,5]. One exception is a recent study by Woolley et al [11], which found that groups of adults with higher average ToM scores had significantly higher ‘‘collective intelligence,’’ as measured by the group’s ability to perform well across a wide range of different group tasks. Average ToM scores were the only significant predictor of collective intelligence in a regression that included other group composition and process variables. It is unknown how rich interpersonal cues need to be in order for collective intelligence to emerge at all, or for individual members to engage in the mentalizing necessary to facilitate social interaction. Many of the interpersonal cues that are important in face-to-face interactions (such as reading facial expressions and body language, or judging tone of voice) are not available, potentially impairing our ability to communicate effectively [15,16,17]

Objectives

Methods

Results

Conclusion