Recent debates over adults' theory of mind use have been fueled by surprising failures of perspective‐taking in communication, suggesting that perspective‐taking may be relatively effortful. Yet adults routinely engage in effortful processes when needed. How, then, should speakers and listeners allocate their resources to achieve successful communication? We begin with the observation that the shared goal of communication induces a natural division of labor: The resources one agent chooses to allocate toward perspective‐taking should depend on their expectations about the other's allocation. We formalize this idea in a resource‐rational model augmenting recent probabilistic weighting accounts with a mechanism for (costly) control over the degree of perspective‐taking. In a series of simulations, we first derive an intermediate degree of perspective weighting as an optimal trade‐off between expected costs and benefits of perspective‐taking. We then present two behavioral experiments testing novel predictions of our model. In Experiment 1, we manipulated the presence or absence of occlusions in a director–matcher task. We found that speakers spontaneously modulated the informativeness of their descriptions to account for “known unknowns” in their partner's private view, reflecting a higher degree of speaker perspective‐taking than previously acknowledged. In Experiment 2, we then compared the scripted utterances used by confederates in prior work with those produced in interactions with unscripted directors. We found that confederates were systematically less informative than listeners would initially expect given the presence of occlusions, but listeners used violations to adaptively make fewer errors over time. Taken together, our work suggests that people are not simply “mindblind”; they use contextually appropriate expectations to navigate the division of labor with their partner. We discuss how a resource‐rational framework may provide a more deeply explanatory foundation for understanding flexible perspective‐taking under processing constraints.

中文翻译：

---

传播中的分工：演讲者帮助听众解释视觉角度的不对称

最近关于成年人思维使用理论的争论是由于交流中观点采择的惊人失败而引发的，这表明观点采择可能相对费力。然而，成年人通常会在需要时参与到费力的过程中。那么，演讲者和听众应该如何分配资源以实现成功的沟通呢？我们首先观察到，共同的交流目标引发了自然的劳动分工：一个代理选择分配给观点采择的资源应该取决于他们对另一个分配的期望。我们将这个想法形式化为一个资源合理的模型增强了最近的概率加权帐户，并使用了一种（昂贵的）控制观点采择程度的机制。在一系列模拟中，我们首先得出一个中间程度的观点权重，作为观点采择的预期成本和收益之间的最佳权衡。然后，我们展示了两个行为实验来测试我们模型的新颖预测。在实验 1 中，我们在导演 - 匹配器任务中操纵了遮挡的存在或不存在。我们发现说话者会自发地调整他们描述的信息量，以解释他们伴侣个人观点中的“已知未知数”，这反映了比之前承认的更高程度的说话者视角。在实验 2 中，然后，我们将同盟者在先前工作中使用的脚本化话语与在与无脚本化导演互动时产生的话语进行了比较。我们发现，考虑到遮挡的存在，同盟系统提供的信息比听众最初预期的要少，但听众会使用违规来随着时间的推移自适应地减少错误。综上所述，我们的工作表明，人们不仅仅是“头脑盲”；他们使用上下文适当的期望来导航与他们的合作伙伴的分工。我们讨论了资源理性框架如何为理解处理约束下的灵活观点采择提供更深入的解释基础。但随着时间的推移，听众使用违规行为来自适应地减少错误。综上所述，我们的工作表明，人们不仅仅是“头脑盲”；他们使用上下文适当的期望来导航与他们的合作伙伴的分工。我们讨论了资源理性框架如何为理解处理约束下的灵活观点采择提供更深入的解释基础。但随着时间的推移，听众使用违规行为来自适应地减少错误。综上所述，我们的工作表明，人们不仅仅是“头脑盲”；他们使用上下文适当的期望来导航与他们的合作伙伴的分工。我们讨论了资源理性框架如何为理解处理约束下的灵活观点采择提供更深入的解释基础。