[DSRP Evidence](https://dsrpevidence.org/)

# Perspectives Organize Information in Mind and Nature (P)

Cabrera D, Cabrera L, Cabrera E, Systems 10(3):52, 2022

## Abstract

The importance of perspective-taking crosses disciplines and is foundational to diverse phenomena such as point-of-view, scale, mindset, theory of mind, opinion, belief, empathy, compassion, analysis, and problem solving, etc. This publication gives predictions for and a formal description of point-view Perspectives (P) or the “P-rule”. This makes the P-rule foundational to systems, systems thinking and the consilience of knowledge. It is one of four universals of the organization of information as a whole. This paper presents nine empirical studies in which subjects were asked to complete a task and/or answer a question. The samples vary for each study (ranging from N = 407 to N = 34,398) and are generalizable to a normal distribution of the US population. As was evident in Cabrera, “These studies support—with high statistical significance—the predictions made by DSRP Theory (Distinctions, Systems Relationships, Perspectives) point-view Perspectives including its: universality as an observable phenomenon in both mind (cognitive complexity) and nature (material complexity) (i.e., parallelism); internal structures and dynamics; mutual dependencies on other universals (i.e., Distinctions, Systems, and Relationships); role in structural predictions; and, efficacy as a metacognitive skill”. These data suggest that point-view Perspectives (P) observably and empirically exist, and that universality, efficacy, and parallelism (between cognitive and material complexity) exist as well. The impact of this paper is that it provides empirical evidence for the phenomena of point-view perspective taking (“P-rule”) as a universal pattern/structure of systems thinking, a field in which scholarly debate is often based on invalidated opinioned frameworks; this sets the stage for theory building in the field.

## What they found (results)

A perspectival prompt reduced seven visible objects to four for 89.7% of subjects. The same image described as a bat at 96.3% at baseline fell to 35.4% under a threat scenario. No subject mentioned a liver in 1,510 free descriptions; prompted to look from a particular point of view, 88.2% clicked the right spot. Shown one circle, 60.7% chose ball, 34.9% hole and 4.4% dot.

## Response

The largest effects in the corpus, and the source of the neutrino move: a pattern absent from free description at scale, predicted to be present, then found under targeted probe. Also the source of the reversal — conceptual perspectives were taken 2.29× more readily than animate ones, against the authors' stated expectation.

## Experiments reported in this paper

- [Cabrera D, Cabrera L, Cabrera E (2022). Ball–Dot–Hole. Systems 10(3):52.](https://dsrpevidence.org/experiment/314) (N = 407)
- [Cabrera D, Cabrera L, Cabrera E (2022). Financial Fish. Systems 10(3):52.](https://dsrpevidence.org/experiment/323) (N = 392 / 342)
- [Cabrera D, Cabrera L, Cabrera E (2022). Only See Blue. Systems 10(3):52.](https://dsrpevidence.org/experiment/335) (N = 407)
- [Cabrera D, Cabrera L, Cabrera E (2022). What's a Bat. Systems 10(3):52.](https://dsrpevidence.org/experiment/356)
- [Cabrera D, Cabrera L, Cabrera E (2022). Where's the Plant. Systems 10(3):52.](https://dsrpevidence.org/experiment/357)
- [Cabrera D, Cabrera L, Cabrera E (2022). Where's Waldo. Systems 10(3):52.](https://dsrpevidence.org/experiment/358) (N = 1,510 baseline)

[Read the paper](https://doi.org/10.3390/systems10030052)