Psychology seminars

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.

Even young children seem to have an early understanding of the world around them, and the people in it. Before children can reliably say "ball", "wall", or "Saul", they expect balls to not go through walls, and for Saul to go right for a ball (if there's no wall). What is the formal conceptual structure underlying this commonsense reasoning about objects and agents? I will raise several possibilities for models underlying core intuitive physics as a way of talking about models of core knowledge and intuitive theories more generally. In particular, I will present some recent ML work trying to capture early expectations about object solidly, cohesion, and permanence, that relies on a rough-derendering approach.

Cognitive control involves the flexible allocation of mental resources during goal-directed behaviour and comprises three correlated but distinct domains—inhibition, task shifting, and working memory. Healthy ageing is characterised by reduced cognitive control. Professor Cheryl Grady and her team have been studying the influence of age differences in large-scale brain networks on the three control processes in a sample of adults from 20 to 86 years of age. In this webinar, Professor Cheryl Grady will describe three aspects of this work: 1) age-related dedifferentiation and reconfiguration of brain networks across the sub-domains 2) individual differences in the relation of task-related activity to age, structural integrity and task performance for each sub-domain 3) modulation of brain signal variability as a function of cognitive load and age during working memory. This research highlights the reduction in dynamic range of network activity that occurs with ageing and how this contributes to age differences in cognitive control. Cheryl Grady is a senior scientist at the Rotman Research Institute at Baycrest, and Professor in the departments of Psychiatry and Psychology at the University of Toronto. She held the Canada Research Chair in Neurocognitive Aging from 2005-2018 and was elected as a Fellow of the Royal Society of Canada in 2019. Her research uses MRI to determine the role of brain network connectivity in cognitive ageing.

The ability to recognize someone’s voice spans a broad spectrum with phonagnosia on the low end and super recognition at the high end. Yet there is no standardized test to measure the individual ability to learn and recognize newly-learnt voices with samples of speech-like phonetic variability. We have developed the Jena Voice Learning and Memory Test (JVLMT), a 20 min-test based on item response theory and applicable across different languages. The JVLMT consists of three phases in which participants are familiarized with eight speakers in two stages and then perform a three-alternative forced choice recognition task, using pseudo sentences devoid of semantic content. Acoustic (dis)similarity analyses were used to create items with different levels of difficulty. Test scores are based on 22 Rasch-conform items. Items were selected and validated in online studies based on 232 and 454 participants, respectively. Mean accuracy is 0.51 with an SD of .18. The JVLMT showed high and moderate correlations with convergent validation tests (Bangor Voice Matching Test; Glasgow Voice Memory Test) and a weak correlation with a discriminant validation test (Digit Span). Empirical (marginal) reliability is 0.66. Four participants with super recognition (at least 2 SDs above the mean) and 7 participants with phonagnosia (at least 2 SDs below the mean) were identified. The JVLMT is a promising screen too for voice recognition abilities in a scientific and neuropsychological context.

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.

Uncertainty regarding which psychological mechanisms are fundamental in mediating SSRI treatment outcomes and wide-ranging variability in their efficacy has raised more questions than it has solved. Since subjective mood states are an abstract scientific construct, only available through self-report in humans, and likely involving input from multiple top-down and bottom-up signals, it has been difficult to model at what level SSRIs interact with this process. Converging translational evidence indicates a role for serotonin in modulating context-dependent parameters of action selection, affect, and social cognition; and concurrently supporting learning mechanisms, which promote adaptability and behavioural flexibility. We examine the theoretical basis, ecological validity, and interaction of these constructs and how they may or may not exert a clinical benefit. Specifically, we bridge crucial gaps between disparate lines of research, particularly findings from animal models and human clinical trials, which often seem to present irreconcilable differences. In determining how SSRIs exert their effects, our approach examines the endogenous functions of 5-HT neurons, how 5-HT manipulations affect behaviour in different contexts, and how their therapeutic effects may be exerted in humans – which may illuminate issues of translational models, hierarchical mechanisms, idiographic variables, and social cognition.

The goal of this talk is to first provide a realization of why the replication crisis is omnipresent and then point to several tools via which the listener can improve their own work. To do so, I will go through our own work on social thermoregulation, point out why I thought changes were necessary, discuss which shortcomings we have in our own work, which measures we have taken to reduce those shortcomings, which tools we have relied on to do so, and which steps I believe we still need to make. Specifically, I will go through the following points: Major replication failures and data fabrication in the field of psychology; Replication failures of social thermoregulation studies; Realization that many of our studies were underpowered; Realization that many of our studies were very narrow in scope (i.e., in undergraduate students and mostly in EU/US); Realization that a lot of our measures were not independently validated. I will show these for our own work (but will also show why, via a meta-analysis, we have enough confidence to proceed with social thermoregulation research). Throughout the talk I will point you to the following tools that facilitate our work: Templates for exploratory and confirmatory research and for meta-analyses (developed for our work, but easily adaptable for other programs). I will also show you how to fork our templates; A lab philosophy; A research milestones sheet for collaborations and overviews; Excel sheet for contributorship; A tutorial for exploratory research; I would recommend listeners to read through this chapter before the talk (I will repeat a lot of that work, but I will go into greater depth). own work. To do so, I will go through our own work on social thermoregulation, point out why I thought changes were necessary, discuss which shortcomings we have in our own work, which measures we have taken to reduce those shortcomings, which tools we have relied on to do so, and which steps I believe we still need to make.

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.

I will begin by describing recent research taking a new, model-based approach to perceptual development. This approach uncovers fundamental changes in information processing underlying the protracted development of perception, action, and decision-making in childhood. For example, integration of multiple sensory estimates via reliability-weighted averaging – widely used by adults to improve perception – is often not seen until surprisingly late into childhood, as assessed by both behaviour and neural representations. This approach forms the basis for a newer question: the scope for the nervous system to deploy useful computations (e.g. reliability-weighted averaging) to optimise perception and action using newly-learned sensory signals provided by technology. Our initial model system is augmenting visual depth perception with devices translating distance into auditory or vibro-tactile signals. This problem has immediate applications to people with partial vision loss, but the broader question concerns our scope to use technology to tune in to any signal not available to our native biological receptors. I will describe initial progress on this problem, and our approach to operationalising what it might mean to adopt a new signal comparably to a native sense. This will include testing for its integration (weighted averaging) alongside the native senses, assessing the level at which this integration happens in the brain, and measuring the degree of ‘automaticity’ with which new signals are used, compared with native perception.

It seems we see the world in full detail. However, the eye is not a camera nor is the brain a computer. Incredible metabolic constraints render us unable to encode more than a fraction of information available in each glance. Instead, our illusion of stable and complete perception is accomplished by parsimonious representation relying on natural order inherent in the surrounding environment. I will begin by discussing previous behavioral work from our lab demonstrating one such strategy by which the visual system represents average properties of Gestalt-grouped sets of individual objects, warping individual object representations toward the Gestalt-defined mean. I will then discuss on-going work using a behavioral index of averaging Gestalt-grouped information established in our previous work in conjunction with an ERP-index of VSTM capacity (the CDA) to measure whether the Gestalt-grouping and perceptual averaging strategy acts to boost memory capacity above the classic “four-item” limit. Finally, I will outline our pre-registered study to determine whether this perceptual strategy is indeed engaged in a “smart” manner under normal circumstances, or compromises fidelity for capacity by perceptually-averaging in trials with only four items that could otherwise be individually represented.

In this talk, Dr. Schweinhardt will discuss top-down (i.e. cerebral) modulation of the perception and processing of nociceptive stimuli using selected examples in chronic pain patients as well as healthy subjects. Data on activity-dependent central sensitization will be presented as a case of bottom-up pain modulation. Finally, Dr. Schweinhardt will present a new line of research with which she aims at studying the interaction of top-down and bottom-up pain modulation.

ONS figures suggest that at least 10% of individuals suffering COVID -19 Infection continue to experience several weeks after testing positive, and other studies report the proportions as even higher (e.g. Logue et al., 2021). One of the most prevalent reported symptoms among these “Long Covid” sufferers is cognitive dysfunction (Davis et al., 2020). However, to date the cognitive sequelae of COVID -19 are little understood. There are a number of reasons why COVID -19 infection might be associated with cognitive impairment and mental illness (e.g. Bougakov et al., 2020). In particular, increasing evidence indicates inflammation (e.g. Huang et al., 2020) and dysfunctional clotting (e.g. Taquet et al., 2021) as issues of major concern, both of which have been previously linked to a range of cognitive deficits (e.g. Vintimilla et al., 2019; Cumming et al., 2013). Indeed, evidence is beginning to emerge that cognitive issues may be widespread in the post-infection period, particularly among hospitalised and ventilated patients (e.g. Hampshire et al., 2020; Alemanno et al,. 2020). Here I shall present “Hot off the [SPSS]Press” results from a study on memory and cognition following COVID infection in a non-hospitalized cohort.

Behavioural measurements are often overlooked by computational neuroscientists, who prefer to focus on electrophysiological recordings or neuroimaging data. This attitude is largely due to perceived lack of depth/richness in relation to behavioural datasets. I will show how contemporary psychophysics can deliver extremely rich and highly constraining datasets that naturally interface with computational modelling. More specifically, I will demonstrate how psychophysics can be used to guide/constrain/refine computational models, and how models can be exploited to design/motivate/interpret psychophysical experiments. Examples will span a wide range of topics (from feature detection to natural scene understanding) and methodologies (from cascade models to deep learning architectures).

Though studies show that abuse, neglect or trauma during childhood can lead to lifelong lifelong struggles including in mental health, research also indicates that solutions and interventions at various stages of life can be developed to help. And while many people manage to remain resilient, a lack of opportunity early in life, including because of poverty and systemic racism, can constrain their ability to realize their full potential. In what ways are health and other outcomes affected? How can systems instead restore opportunity? "The Picower Institute for Learning and Memory's biennial spring symposium, 'Early Life Stress & Mental Health,' will examine these issues. The daylong event will feature talks by neuroscientists, policy experts, physicians, educators and activists as they discuss how our experiences and biology work together to affect how our minds develop and what can be accomplished in helping people overcome early disadvantages.

Over the last fifteen years, Simona Ginsburg and I developed an evolutionary approach for studying basic consciousness, suggesting that the evolution of learning drove the evolutionary transition to from non-conscious to conscious animals. I present the rationale underlying this thesis, which has led to the identification of a capacity that we call the evolutionary transition marker, which, when we find evidence of it, we have evidence that the major evolutionary transition in which we are interested has gone to completion. I then put forward our proposal that the evolutionary marker of basic consciousness is a complex form of associative learning that we call unlimited associative learning (UAL), and that the evolution of this capacity drove the transition to consciousness. I discuss the implications of this thesis for questions pertaining to the neural dynamics that constitute conscious, to its taxonomic distribution and to the ecological context in which it first emerged. I end by pointing to some of the ways in which the relationship between UAL and consciousness can be experimentally tested in humans and in non-human animals.

A striking range of individual differences has been reported in a variety of visual search tasks, which naturally leads to the idea that some people are better at finding things than others. However, this conclusion appears to be premature. We carried out a replication of three recent visual search experiments and found that each task showed a wide range of individual differences as predicted, and observed good test-retest reliability in all three. However, performance on any one task was not correlated with the performance in the others: participants who naturally adopt efficient search strategies in one paradigm may perform at chance in another! Furthermore, we also show that behaviour in different versions of the same paradigm can be radically different: When simple line segments are used for search items, a large range of search strategies are found. If we instead use more complex search items, all our participants effortlessly adopt an optimal strategy. These results suggest search strategies are stable over time, but context-specific. To understand visual search we, therefore, need to account not only for differences between individuals but also how individuals interact with the search task and context.

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.