Yoshiyuki Hongoh
Abstract
This paper proposes a novel theoretical framework to integrally understand self-related cognition (e.g., metacognition) and other-related cognition (e.g., social cognition), which have developed separately in cognitive science and social psychology. A significant challenge has been that existing concepts are fragmented and fail to clearly capture the symmetrical nature of cognitive processes directed toward the self and others. To overcome this, this paper introduces a matrix model composed of two orthogonal axes: the target of cognition (Self vs. Other) and the process of cognition (Observation, Evaluation, and Regulation). This “Self/Other-Cognition Framework” organizes a wide array of existing concepts in a MECE (Mutually Exclusive, Collectively Exhaustive) manner, enabling an intuitive and logical comprehension of the entirety of human intellectual and social activities. We discuss the theoretical implications of this model, including its potential to unify cognitive and social psychology, and its practical implications for fields such as education, organizational management, and clinical practice.
1. Introduction
1.1. The Problem: The Fragmentation of Self- and Other-Cognition
Human beings are dual cognitive agents, simultaneously confronting their own inner worlds and navigating social relationships with others. To understand this fundamental human nature, cognitive science and psychology have long pursued two major streams of inquiry: cognition about the self and cognition about others.
One stream focuses on the introspective activities of the self. Its most prominent representative, “metacognition” research, defines the ability to objectively monitor and actively control one’s own cognitive processes (Flavell, 1979). It has flourished, particularly in educational psychology, as the core concept of Self-Regulated Learning (SRL). This approach has made immense contributions to elucidating the mechanisms by which individuals learn, think, and improve their performance. However, its scope has been largely confined to the individual’s internal landscape, often failing to provide a sufficient explanation for the self in its social context—that is, in interaction with others.
The other stream concentrates on cognition within a social context. “Social cognition” research addresses how we infer the intentions, emotions, and dispositions of others (e.g., Theory of Mind) and how we behave within interpersonal relationships (Fiske & Taylor, 1991). A diverse array of concepts, such as impression formation, causal attribution, and stereotyping, has been proposed, revealing the processes by which we construct our social reality. However, because these concepts were developed to explain specific social phenomena, they have become diversified and fragmented, making it difficult to discern a single, unifying logical structure that underpins all cognitive activities toward others.
Thus, while cognition about the self (metacognition) and cognition about others (social cognition) have each accumulated a wealth of knowledge, a conceptual chasm exists between them. In reality, humans do not exercise their capacity to reflect on themselves in isolation from their capacity to understand others. On the contrary, these processes are dynamic and complementary: we evaluate our own actions by observing the reactions of others (other-cognition → self-cognition), and we act upon others to achieve our personal goals (self-cognition → other-cognition). Yet, a simple, comprehensive theoretical framework that systematically explains this interplay has been notably absent.
1.2. Purpose and Research Question of This Paper
The purpose of this paper is to overcome this conceptual divide and to reconceptualize cognition toward self and others from a unified perspective. We proceed from the hypothesis that a common process structure underlies human cognitive activities, regardless of whether their target is the self or another person. Based on this hypothesis, this paper explores the following question:
Can human cognitive processes be systematically organized along two fundamental, orthogonal axes: the “Target of Cognition” (Self/Other) and the “Process of Cognition” (Observation, Evaluation, Regulation)?
To answer this question, we construct and propose a new theoretical model named the “Self/Other-Cognition Framework.” This framework aims to provide a new lens through which to reorganize the existing fragmented concepts in a MECE (Mutually Exclusive, Collectively Exhaustive) manner, thereby offering a more intuitive and logical understanding of the entire landscape of human intellectual and social activities.
1.3. Structure of This Paper
The structure of this paper is as follows. Chapter 2 will review the literature on metacognition and social cognition, identifying the limitations of existing concepts and clarifying the need for an integrated perspective. Chapter 3, the core of this paper, will present the “Self/Other-Cognition Framework” in detail and discuss its theoretical merits. Chapter 4 will explore the academic and practical implications of the framework, including its potential for reinterpreting existing research, generating new research questions, and its application in practical fields such as education and organizational management. Finally, Chapter 5 will summarize the contributions of this paper and discuss future prospects.
2. Literature Review and Conceptual Challenges
2.1. Cognition toward the Self: The Scope and Limits of Metacognition Research
Metacognition is broadly defined as “thinking about thinking” and consists of two primary components: metacognitive monitoring and metacognitive control (Nelson & Narens, 1990). Monitoring involves the observation and evaluation of one’s own cognitive states and abilities (e.g., “Do I understand this concept?”). Control involves the regulation of one’s cognitive processes based on that evaluation (e.g., “Since I don’t understand it, I should reread the chapter.”). This construct has proven invaluable in explaining the success of self-regulated learners, who actively monitor their comprehension, assess their strategies, and adjust their behaviors to achieve learning goals (Zimmerman, 2002).
However, the traditional focus of metacognition has been predominantly individualistic and task-oriented. It excels at explaining how a student solves a math problem or how a person manages their memory. The challenge arises when the context becomes social. While one may engage in metacognition about their social skills (“How well am I persuading this person?”), the field has not systematically integrated the external, social world as a primary target of cognition within a symmetrical framework.
2.2. Cognition toward Others: The Complexity of Social Cognition Theories
The field of social cognition covers a vast and complex territory. It seeks to understand how people make sense of others and themselves. Key areas include:
- Social Perception: The process of observing others’ behavior, speech, and non-verbal cues to gather information.
- Attribution Theory: The process of evaluating the causes of others’ behavior, attributing it to either dispositional or situational factors (Heider, 1958).
- Theory of Mind (ToM): The ability to evaluate and infer the mental states of others—their beliefs, desires, and intentions (Premack & Woodruff, 1978).
- Social Influence: The process of regulating or controlling the behavior and attitudes of others through persuasion, leadership, and conformity (Cialdini & Goldstein, 2004).
While each of these theories provides deep insights into specific phenomena, they remain largely disconnected. There is no overarching architecture that logically organizes social perception (observation), attribution (evaluation), and leadership (regulation) into a single, coherent process flow. This conceptual fragmentation makes it difficult to build a holistic model of social competence.
2.3. The Need for an Integrated Perspective
The separation of self- and other-cognition is an artificial one. Effective social functioning requires a constant interplay between the two. For example, accurate self-assessment (self-cognition) is often informed by feedback from others (other-cognition). Likewise, effective leadership (other-cognition) depends on a leader’s self-regulation and awareness (self-cognition). The absence of a MECE framework that bridges these domains has hindered a more systematic dialogue between cognitive and social psychology. This paper aims to build that bridge.
3. A New Theoretical Framework: The Self/Other-Cognition Model
To address the aforementioned challenges, we propose a new theoretical framework structured around two fundamental axes. This model provides a parsimonious yet comprehensive architecture for organizing the full spectrum of human cognitive and social activities.
3.1. The Two Constituent Axes of the Framework
- Axis 1 (Target of Cognition): Self-Cognition vs. Other-Cognition
- Self-Cognition: Cognitive processes where the target is one’s own internal states (thoughts, feelings, abilities) or external behaviors. This corresponds to the traditional domain of metacognition.
- Other-Cognition: Cognitive processes where the target is another person’s or group’s internal states or external behaviors. This encompasses the domain of social cognition.
- Axis 2 (Process of Cognition): Observation → Evaluation → Regulation
- Observation: The initial stage of information gathering. It involves monitoring and perceiving phenomena without judgment.
- Evaluation: The stage of processing and interpreting the observed information. It involves making judgments, inferences, and assessments.
- Regulation (or Control): The final stage of action. It involves modifying or directing behavior and thought processes based on the evaluation.
3.2. The Framework Matrix in Detail
Combining these two axes yields a 2×3 matrix that systematically organizes human cognitive activities.
| Process \ Target | Self-Cognition (Target: Self) | Other-Cognition (Target: Others) |
|---|---|---|
| 1. Observation | Self-Monitoring / Introspection: Becoming aware of one’s own thoughts, emotions, and physical sensations. Objectively noticing one’s own behavior. | Other-Observation / Social Perception: Paying attention to others’ facial expressions, tone of voice, gestures, and actions. Gathering contextual information. |
| 2. Evaluation | Self-Evaluation / Metacognitive Judgment: Assessing one’s own level of understanding, ability, or performance. Judging the effectiveness of current strategies. | Other-Evaluation / Social Inference: Inferring others’ intentions, feelings, and personality based on observation (e.g., attribution). Judging trustworthiness or cooperativeness. |
| 3. Regulation | Self-Regulation / Self-Control: Modifying thought strategies or learning methods based on self-evaluation. Suppressing impulses, refocusing attention, and adjusting behavior to improve performance. | Interpersonal-Regulation / Social Influence: Acting upon others to change their behavior or thoughts based on evaluation. Includes persuasion, negotiation, leadership, coaching, and motivation. |
3.3. Theoretical Merits of the Framework
This framework offers several theoretical advantages:
- Symmetry: It treats cognition toward the self and others as parallel and equally fundamental processes, breaking down the artificial wall between cognitive and social psychology.
- Comprehensiveness: It is capable of locating and organizing most major concepts from both fields within the matrix, providing a bird’s-eye view of the landscape.
- Logical Coherence: It is based on the fundamental cognitive flow of input (Observation), processing (Evaluation), and output (Regulation), making it intuitive and easy to understand.
4. Discussion
4.1. Theoretical Implications
The primary contribution of this framework is the reorganization of existing knowledge, which in turn can stimulate new research. By placing concepts like “self-regulation” and “leadership” within the same overarching structure, we can begin to ask new questions:
- Correlation and Causality: What is the relationship between the ability to regulate oneself (Self-Regulation) and the ability to influence others (Other-Regulation)? Is proficiency in one a prerequisite for the other?
- Developmental Psychology: How do the six cells of this matrix develop from infancy to adulthood? For instance, do children develop the capacity for accurate Self-Evaluation before or after they develop accurate Other-Evaluation (Theory of Mind)?
- Cross-Cultural Psychology: Do different cultures place varying emphasis on the development of Self-Cognition versus Other-Cognition, and how does this affect social harmony and individual achievement?
4.2. Practical Implications
The framework also has significant practical value in applied domains:
- Education: It provides a holistic competency model for students. Educational programs often focus heavily on Self-Cognition (e.g., study skills, metacognition) but may neglect to systematically train Other-Cognition (e.g., collaboration, perspective-taking). This framework argues for an integrated approach.
- Organizational Management: It serves as a powerful diagnostic tool for leadership development. A struggling manager’s problem can be precisely located within the matrix. For example, a manager might excel at Other-Observation (they notice everything) but fail at Other-Evaluation (they misinterpret intentions), leading to flawed Other-Regulation (poor decision-making). 360-degree feedback can be analyzed as the integration of Self-Evaluation and Other-Evaluation.
- Clinical Psychology: It can be used as an assessment tool for interpersonal difficulties. Many psychological disorders involve distortions in one or more of the framework’s cells (e.g., social anxiety may involve biased Other-Evaluation, while impulse-control disorders represent a failure in Self-Regulation).
4.3. Limitations and Future Directions
This paper presents a theoretical proposal. The immediate next step is empirical validation. Research is needed to develop instruments that can measure an individual’s proficiency in each of the six cells and to test the relationships between them. Furthermore, while the framework presents the processes in a linear fashion (Observation → Evaluation → Regulation), real-world cognition is a dynamic, iterative cycle. Future research should explore these complex interactions.
5. Conclusion
The “Self/Other-Cognition Framework” proposed in this paper offers a simple, powerful, and unifying lens through which to view the complexity of human cognition and social behavior. By organizing disparate concepts along the two fundamental axes of cognitive target (Self/Other) and cognitive process (Observation/Evaluation/Regulation), it bridges the historical gap between cognitive and social psychology. This model not only provides a clearer, more structured understanding of existing knowledge but also opens up new avenues for research and practice. It reminds us that to be fully functional human beings, we must be as adept at understanding the world within ourselves as we are at understanding the world of others.
References
Cialdini, R. B., & Goldstein, N. J. (2004). Social influence: Compliance and conformity. Annual Review of Psychology, 55, 591-621.
Fiske, S. T., & Taylor, S. E. (1991). Social cognition (2nd ed.). McGraw-Hill.
Flavell, J. H. (1979). Metacognition and cognitive monitoring: A new area of cognitive–developmental inquiry. American Psychologist, 34(10), 906–911.
Heider, F. (1958). The Psychology of Interpersonal Relations. John Wiley & Sons.
Nelson, T. O., & Narens, L. (1990). Metamemory: A theoretical framework and new findings. In G. H. Bower (Ed.), The psychology of learning and motivation (Vol. 26, pp. 125-173). Academic Press.
Premack, D., & Woodruff, G. (1978). Does the chimpanzee have a theory of mind? Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 1(4), 515-526.
Zimmerman, B. J. (2002). Becoming a self-regulated learner: An overview. Theory into Practice, 41(2), 64-70.
