Cognitive Psychology seminars

As Socrates said that "I know that I know nothing," our mind's function to be aware of our ignorance is essential for abstract and conceptual reasoning. However, the biological mechanism to enable such a hierarchical thought, or meta-cognition, remained unknown. In the first part of the talk, I will demonstrate our studies on the neural mechanism for metacognition on memory in macaque monkeys. In reality, awareness of ignorance is essential not only for the retrospection of the past but also for the exploration of novel unfamiliar environments for the future. However, this proactive feature of metacognition has been understated in neuroscience. In the second part of the talk, I will demonstrate our studies on the neural mechanism for prospective metacognitive matching among uncertain options prior to perceptual decision making in humans and monkeys. These studies converge to suggest that higher-order processes to self-evaluate mental state either retrospectively or prospectively are implemented in the primate neural networks.

Although analogical reasoning has been assumed to involve insight and its associated “aha!” experience, the relationship between these phenomena has never been directly probed empirically. In this study we investigated the relationship between representational change and the “aha!” experience during analogical reasoning. A novel set of verbal analogy stimuli were developed for use as an insight task. Across two experiments, participants reported significantly stronger aha moments and showed greater evidence of representational change on trials with more semantically distant analogies. Further, the strength of reported aha moments was correlated with the degree to which participants’ descriptions of the analogies changed over the course of each trial. Lastly, we probed the individual differences associated with a tendency to report stronger "aha" experiences, particularly related to mood, curiosity, and reward responsiveness. The findings shed light on the affective components of analogical reasoning and suggest that measuring affective responses during such tasks may elucidate novel insights into the mechanisms of creative analogical reasoning.

The brain is a prediction machine. Yet the world is never entirely predictable, for any animal. Unexpected events are surprising and this typically evokes prediction error signatures in animal brains. In humans such mismatched expectations are often associated with an emotional response as well. Appropriate emotional responses are understood to be important for memory consolidation, suggesting that valence cues more generally constitute an ancient mechanism designed to potently refine and generalize internal models of the world and thereby minimize prediction errors. On the other hand, abolishing error detection and surprise entirely is probably also maladaptive, as this might undermine the very mechanism that brains use to become better prediction machines. This paradoxical view of brain functions as an ongoing tug-of-war between prediction and surprise suggests a compelling new way to study and understand the evolution of consciousness in animals. I will present approaches to studying attention and prediction in the tiny brain of the fruit fly, Drosophila melanogaster. I will discuss how an ‘active’ sleep stage (termed rapid eye movement – REM – sleep in mammals) may have evolved in the first animal brains as a mechanism for optimizing prediction in motile creatures confronted with constantly changing environments. A role for REM sleep in emotional regulation could thus be better understood as an ancient sleep function that evolved alongside selective attention to maintain an adaptive balance between prediction and surprise. This view of active sleep has some interesting implications for the evolution of subjective awareness and consciousness.

Children's emerging ability to acquire and apply relational same-different concepts is often cited as a defining feature of human cognition, providing the foundation for abstract thought. Yet, young learners often struggle to ignore irrelevant surface features to attend to structural similarity instead. I will argue that young children have--and retain--genuine relational concepts from a young age, but tend to neglect abstract similarity due to a learned bias to attend to objects and their properties. Critically, this account predicts that differences in the structure of children's environmental input should lead to differences in the type of hypotheses they privilege and apply. I will review empirical support for this proposal that has (1) evaluated the robustness of early competence in relational reasoning, (2) identified cross-cultural differences in relational and object bias, and (3) provided evidence that contextual factors play a causal role in relational reasoning. Together, these studies suggest that the development of abstract thought may be more malleable and context-sensitive than initially believed.

This talk will focus on the idea that the kind of similarity driving analogical retrieval is determined by the kind of features encoded regarding the source and the target cue situations. Emphasis will be put on educational perspectives in order to show the influence of world semantics on learners’ problem representations and solving strategies, as well as the difficulties arising from semantic incongruence between representations and strategies. Special attention will be given to the recoding of semantically incongruent representations, a crucial step that learners struggle with, in order to illustrate a promising path for going beyond informal strategies.

Previous work with complex memory span tasks, in which simple choice decisions are imposed between presentations of to-be-remembered items, shows that these secondary tasks reduce memory span. It is less clear how reconfiguring and maintaining various amounts of information affects decision speeds. We documented and replicated a non-linear effect of accumulating memory items on concurrent processing judgments, showing that this pattern could be made linear by introducing "lead-in" processing judgments prior to the start of the memory list. With lead-in judgments, there was a large and consistent cost to processing response times with the introduction of the first item in the memory list, which increased gradually per item as the list accumulated. However, once presentation of the list was complete, decision responses sped rapidly: within a few seconds, decisions were at least as fast as when remembering a single item. This pattern of findings is inconsistent with the idea that merely holding information in mind conflicts with attention-demanding decision tasks. Instead, it is possible that reconfiguring memory items for responding provokes conflict between memory and processing in complex span tasks.

In human and non-human animals, conceptual knowledge is partially organized according to low-dimensional geometries that rely on brain structures and computations involved in spatial representations. Recently, two separate lines of research have investigated cognitive maps, that are associated with the hippocampal formation and are similar to world-centered representations of the environment, and image spaces, that are associated with the parietal cortex and are similar to self-centered spatial relationships. I will suggest that cognitive maps and image spaces may be two manifestations of a more general propensity of the mind to create low-dimensional internal models, and may play a role in analogical reasoning and metaphorical thinking. Finally, I will show some data suggesting that the metaphorical relationship between colors and emotions can be accounted for by the structural alignment of low-dimensional conceptual spaces.

Recent years have seen a considerable surge of research on interest-based engagement, examining how and why people are engaged in activities without relying on extrinsic rewards. However, the field of inquiry has been somewhat segregated into three different research traditions which have been developed relatively independently --- research on curiosity, interest, and trait curiosity/interest. The current talk sets out an integrative perspective; the reward-learning framework of knowledge acquisition. This conceptual framework takes on the basic premise of existing reward-learning models of information seeking: that knowledge acquisition serves as an inherent reward, which reinforces people’s information-seeking behavior through a reward-learning process. However, the framework reveals how the knowledge-acquisition process is sustained and boosted over a long period of time in real-life settings, allowing us to integrate the different research traditions within reward-learning models. The framework also characterizes the knowledge-acquisition process with four distinct features that are not present in the reward-learning process with extrinsic rewards --- (1) cumulativeness, (2) selectivity, (3) vulnerability, and (4) under-appreciation. The talk describes some evidence from our lab supporting these claims.

Recent years have seen a considerable surge of research on interest-based engagement, examining how and why people are engaged in activities without relying on extrinsic rewards. However, the field of inquiry has been somewhat segregated into three different research traditions which have been developed relatively independently -- research on curiosity, interest, and trait curiosity/interest. The current talk sets out an integrative perspective; the reward-learning framework of knowledge acquisition. This conceptual framework takes on the basic premise of existing reward-learning models of information seeking: that knowledge acquisition serves as an inherent reward, which reinforces people’s information-seeking behavior through a reward-learning process. However, the framework reveals how the knowledge-acquisition process is sustained and boosted over a long period of time in real-life settings, allowing us to integrate the different research traditions within reward-learning models. The framework also characterizes the knowledge-acquisition process with four distinct features that are not present in the reward-learning process with extrinsic rewards -- (1) cumulativeness, (2) selectivity, (3) vulnerability, and (4) under-appreciation. The talk describes some evidence from our lab supporting these claims.

Abstract relations are considered the pinnacle of human cognition, allowing analogical and logical reasoning, and possibly setting humans apart from other animal species. Such relations cannot be represented in a perceptual code but can easily be represented in a propositional language of thought, where relations between objects are represented by abstract discrete symbols. Focusing on the abstract relations same and different, I will show that (1) there is a discontinuity along ontogeny with respect to the representations of abstract relations, but (2) young infants already possess representations of same and different. Finally, (3) I will investigate the format of representation of abstract relations in young infants, arguing that those representations are not discrete, but rather built by juxtaposing abstract representations of entities.

Analogies are widely used by teachers and coaches of different movement disciplines, serving a role during the learning phase of a new skill, and honing one’s performance to a competitive level. In previous studies, analogies improved motor control in various tasks and across age groups. Our study aimed to evaluate the efficacy of analogies throughout the learning process, using kinematic measures for an in-depth analysis. We tested whether applying analogies can shorten the motor learning process and induce insight and skill improvement in tasks that usually demand many hours of practice. The experiment included a drawing task, in which subjects were asked to connect four dots into a closed shape, and a mirror game, in which subjects tracked an oval that moved across the screen. After establishing a baseline, subjects were given an analogy, explicit instructions, or no further instruction. We compared their improvement in overall skill, accuracy, and speed. Subjects in the analogy and explicit groups improved their performance in the drawing task, while significant differences were found in the mirror game only for slow movements between analogy and controls. In conclusion, analogies are an important tool for teachers and coaches, and more research is needed to understand how to apply them for maximum results. They can rapidly change motor control and strategy but may also affect only some aspects of a movement and not others. Careful thought is needed to construct an effective analogy that encompasses relevant movement facets, as well as the practitioner’s personal background and experience.

Comparison is a powerful learning process that improves learning in many domains. For over 10 years, my colleagues and I have researched how we can use comparison to support better learning of school mathematics within classroom settings. In 5 short-term experimental, classroom-based studies, we evaluated comparison of solution methods for supporting mathematics knowledge and tested whether prior knowledge impacted effectiveness. We next developed supplemental Algebra I curriculum and professional development for teachers to integrate Comparison and Explanation of Multiple Strategies (CEMS) in their classrooms and tested the promise of the approach when implemented by teachers in two studies. Benefits and challenges emerged in these studies. I will conclude with evidence-based guidelines for effectively supporting comparison and explanation in the classroom. Overall, this program of research illustrates how cognitive science research can guide the design of effective educational materials as well as challenges that occur when bridging from cognitive science research to classroom instruction.

In this talk, I will present the results of two recent systematic reviews and meta-analyses related to analogical reasoning and metaphor processing in autism, together with the results of a study that investigated verbal analogical reasoning and metaphor processing in the same sample of participants. Both metaphors and analogies rely on exploiting similarities, and they necessitate contextual processing. Nevertheless, our findings relating to metaphor processing and analogical reasoning showed distinct patterns. Whereas analogical reasoning emerged as a relative strength in autism, metaphor processing was found to be a relative weakness. Additionally, both meta-analytic studies investigated the relations between the level of intelligence of participants included in the studies, and the effect size of group differences between the autistic and typically developing (TD) samples. These analyses suggested in the case of analogical reasoning that the relative advantage of ASD participants might only be present in the case of individuals with lower levels of intelligence. By contrast, impairments in metaphor processing appeared to be more pronounced in the case of individuals with relatively lower levels of (verbal) intelligence. In our experimental study, we administered both verbal analogies and metaphors to the same sample of high-functioning autistic participants and TD controls. The two groups were matched on age, verbal IQ, working memory and educational background. Our aim was to understand better the similarities and differences between processing analogies and metaphors, and to see whether the advantage in analogical reasoning and disadvantage in metaphor processing is universal in autism.

With the Donders Inclusion Seminars, we celebrate diversity. Please join us on Apr. 21st 2021 at 15.00 (CET) as we next welcome Dr. Silvy Collin of Tilburg University on Crowdcast. Her seminar is entitled "Schemas and schema-mediated memory". To read the abstract and register for the event visit: https://www.crowdcast.io/e/donders-inclusion-3

In this talk I’ll discuss translation of findings of multisensory facilitation of learning to cognitive training. I’ll first review some early findings of multisensory facilitation of learning and then discuss how we have been translating these basic science approaches into gamified training interventions to improve cognitive functions. I’ll touch on approaches to training vision, hearing and working memory that we are developing at the UCR Brain Game Center for Mental Fitness and Well-being. I look forward to discussing both the basic science but also the complexities of how to translate approaches from basic science into the more complex frameworks often used in interventions.

Across species, humans are uniquely able to acquire deep relational systems of the kind needed for mathematics, science, and human language. Analogical comparison processes are a major contributor to this ability. Analogical comparison engages a structure-mapping process (Gentner, 1983) that fosters learning in at least three ways: first, it highlights common relational systems and thereby promotes abstraction; second, it promotes inferences from known situations to less familiar situations; and, third, it reveals potentially important differences between examples. In short, structure-mapping is a domain-general learning process by which abstract, portable knowledge can arise from experience. It is operative from early infancy on, and is critical to the rapid learning we see in human children. Although structure-mapping processes are present pre-linguistically, their scope is greatly amplified by language. Analogical processes are instrumental in learning relational language, and the reverse is also true: relational language acts to preserve relational abstractions and render them accessible for future learning and reasoning. Although structure-mapping processes are present pre-linguistically, their scope is greatly amplified by language. Analogical processes are instrumental in learning relational language, and the reverse is also true: relational language acts to preserve relational abstractions and render them accessible for future learning and reasoning.

Constraints on control-dependent processing have become a fundamental concept in general theories of cognition that explain human behavior in terms of rational adaptations to these constraints. However, theories miss a rationale for why such constraints would exist in the first place. Recent work suggests that constraints on the allocation of control facilitate flexible task switching at the expense of the stability needed to support goal-directed behavior in face of distraction. We formulate this problem in a dynamical system, in which control signals are represented as attractors and in which constraints on control allocation limit the depth of these attractors. We derive formal expressions of the stability-flexibility tradeoff, showing that constraints on control allocation improve cognitive flexibility but impair cognitive stability. We provide evidence that human participants adapt higher constraints on the allocation of control as the demand for flexibility increases but that participants deviate from optimal constraints. In continuing work, we are investigating how collaborative performance of a group of individuals can benefit from individual differences defined in terms of balance between cognitive stability and flexibility.

Initial social perceptions are often thought to reflect direct “read outs” of facial features. Instead, we outline a perspective whereby initial perceptions emerge from an automatic yet gradual process of negotiation between the perceptual cues inherent to a person (e.g., facial cues) and top-down social cognitive processes harbored within perceivers. This perspective argues that perceivers’ social-conceptual knowledge in particular can have a fundamental structuring role in perceptions, and thus how we think about social groups, emotions, or personality traits helps determine how we visually perceive them in other people. Integrative evidence from real-time behavioral paradigms (e.g., mouse-tracking), multivariate fMRI, and computational modeling will be discussed. Together, this work shows that the way we use facial cues to categorize other people into social groups (e.g., gender, race), perceive their emotion (e.g., anger), or infer their personality (e.g., trustworthiness) are all fundamentally shaped by prior social-conceptual knowledge and stereotypical assumptions. We find that these top-down impacts on initial perceptions are driven by the interplay of higher-order prefrontal regions involved in top-down predictions and lower-level fusiform regions involved in face processing. We argue that the perception of social categories, emotions, and traits from faces can all be conceived as resulting from an integrated system relying on domain-general cognitive properties. In this system, both visual and social cognitive processes are in a close exchange, and initial social perceptions emerge in part out of the structure of social-conceptual knowledge.