In the 17th century, physician Marcello Malpighi observed the existence of distinctive patterns of ridges and sweat glands on fingertips. This was a major breakthrough, and originated a long and continuing quest for ways to uniquely identify individuals based on fingerprints, a technique massively used until today. It is only in the past few years that technologies and methodologies have achieved high-quality measures of an individual’s brain to the extent that personality traits and behavior can be characterized. The concept of “fingerprints of the brain” is very novel and has been boosted thanks to a seminal publication by Finn et al. in 2015. They were among the firsts to show that an individual’s functional brain connectivity profile is both unique and reliable, similarly to a fingerprint, and that it is possible to identify an individual among a large group of subjects solely on the basis of her or his connectivity profile. Yet, the discovery of brain fingerprints opened up a plethora of new questions. In particular, what exactly is the information encoded in brain connectivity patterns that ultimately leads to correctly differentiating someone’s connectome from anybody else’s? In other words, what makes our brains unique? In this talk I am going to partially address these open questions while keeping a personal viewpoint on the subject. I will outline the main findings, discuss potential issues, and propose future directions in the quest for identifiability of human brain networks.

This talk aims to highlight the immense potential of Artificial Intelligence (AI) in advancing the field of psychology and cognitive neuroscience. Through the integration of machine learning algorithms, big data analytics, and neuroimaging techniques, AI has the potential to revolutionize the way we study human cognition and brain characteristics. In this talk, I will highlight our latest scientific advancements in utilizing AI to gain deeper insights into variations in cognitive performance across the lifespan and along the continuum from healthy to pathological functioning. The presentation will showcase cutting-edge examples of AI-driven applications, such as deep learning for automated scoring of neuropsychological tests, natural language processing to characeterize semantic coherence of patients with psychosis, and other application to diagnose and treat psychiatric and neurological disorders. Furthermore, the talk will address the challenges and ethical considerations associated with using AI in psychological research, such as data privacy, bias, and interpretability. Finally, the talk will discuss future directions and opportunities for further advancements in this dynamic field.

“Of pain you could wish only one thing: that it should stop. Nothing in the world was so bad as physical pain. In the face of pain there are no heroes.- George Orwell, ‘1984’ " "Neuroscience has revealed the secrets of the brain and nervous system to an extent that was beyond the realm of imagination just 10-20 years ago, let alone in 1949 when Orwell wrote his prophetic novel. Understanding pain, however, presents a unique challenge to academia, industry and medicine, being both a measurable physiological process as well as deeply personal and subjective. Given the millions of people who suffer from pain every day, wishing only, “that it should stop”, the need to find more effective treatments cannot be understated." "‘New treatments for pain’ will bring together approximately 120 people from the commercial, academic, and not-for-profit sectors to share current knowledge, identify future directions, and enable collaboration, providing delegates with meaningful and practical ways to accelerate their own work into developing treatments for pain.

Humans perceive the world in terms of objects and relations between them. In fact, for any given pair of objects, there is a myriad of relations that apply to them. How does the cognitive system learn which relations are useful to characterize the task at hand? And how can it use these representations to build a relational policy to interact effectively with the environment? In this paper we propose that this problem can be understood through the lens of a sub-field of symbolic machine learning called relational reinforcement learning (RRL). To demonstrate the potential of our approach, we build a simple model of relational policy learning based on a function approximator developed in RRL. We trained and tested our model in three Atari games that required to consider an increasingly number of potential relations: Breakout, Pong and Demon Attack. In each game, our model was able to select adequate relational representations and build a relational policy incrementally. We discuss the relationship between our model with models of relational and analogical reasoning, as well as its limitations and future directions of research.

Prior studies of A:B::C:D verbal analogies have identified several factors that affect performance, including the semantic similarity between source and target domains (semantic distance), the semantic association between the C-term and incorrect answers (distracter salience), and the type of relations between word pairs (e.g., categorical, compositional, and causal). However, it is unclear how these stimulus properties affect performance when utilized together. Moreover, how do these item factors interact with individual differences such as crystallized intelligence and creative thinking? Several studies reveal interactions among these item and individual difference factors impacting verbal analogy performance. For example, a three-way interaction demonstrated that the effects of semantic distance and distracter salience had a greater impact on performance for compositional and causal relations than for categorical ones (Jones, Kmiecik, Irwin, & Morrison, 2022). Implications for analogy theories and future directions are discussed.

What do other people really think of you? In this talk, I highlight the unique perspective that other people have on the most consequential aspects of our personalities—how we treat others, our best and worst qualities, and our moral character. First, I compare how people thought they behaved with how they actually behaved in everyday life (based on observer ratings of unobtrusive audio recordings; 217 people, 2,519 observations). I show that when people think they are being kind (vs. rude), others do not necessarily agree. This suggests that people may have blind spots about how well they are treating others in the moment. Next, I compare what 463 people thought their own best and worst traits were with what their friends thought about them. The results reveal that friends are more likely to point out flaws in the prosocial and moral domains (e.g., “inconsiderate”, “selfish”, “manipulative”) than are people themselves. Does this imply that others might want us to be more moral? To find out, I compare what targets (N = 800) want to change about their own personalities with what their close others (N = 958) want to change about them. The results show that people don’t particularly want to be more moral, and their close others don’t want them to be more moral, either. I conclude with future directions on honest feedback as a pathway to self-insight and, ultimately, self-improvement.

People from cultures around the world tend to borrow from the domain of space to represent abstract concepts. For example, in the domain on time, we use spatial metaphors (e.g., describing the future as being in front and the past behind), accompany our speech with spatial gestures (e.g., gesturing to the left to refer to a past event), and use external tools that project time onto a spatial reference frame (e.g., calendars). Importantly, these associations are also present in the way we think and reason about time, suggesting that space and time are also linked in the mind. In this talk, I will explore the developmental origins and functional implications of these types of cross-dimensional associations. To start, I will discuss the roles that language and culture play in shaping how children in the US and India represent time. Next, I will use word learning and memory as test cases for exploring why cross-dimensional associations may be cognitively advantageous. Finally, I will talk about future directions and the practical implications for this line of work, with a focus on how encouraging spatial representations of abstract concepts could improve learning outcomes.

Global responses to the Covid-19 pandemic have resulted in various forms of “lockdown” being imposed on citizens. These lockdown measures have resulted in significant changes to all aspects of daily life for all those who live under them. Lockdowns have however, also provided a unique opportunity for psychologists to examine how changes in the structure of daily life influence our experience of time. This talk will review recent research examining the impact on covid-19 on real-world time experience. It will look to discuss whether the factors which influence “normal” time experience also influenced time experience during lockdown. Finally, it will try to highlight some potential future directions for enhancing our understanding of real-life time distortion.

Recent human gene discovery efforts show that gain-of-function (GOF) variants in the KCNT1gene, which encodes a Na+-activated K+ channel subunit, cause severe epilepsies and other neurodevelopmental disorders. Although the impact of these variants on the biophysical properties of the channels is well characterized, the mechanisms that link channel dysfunction to cellular and network hyperexcitability and human disease are unknown. Furthermore, precision therapies that correct channel biophysics in non-neuronal cells have had limited success in treating human disease, highlighting the need for a deeper understanding of how these variants affect neurons and networks. To address this gap, we developed a new mouse model with a pathogenic human variant knocked into the mouse Kcnt1gene. I will discuss our findings on the in vivo phenotypes of this mouse, focusing on our characterization of epileptiform neural activity using electrophysiology and widefield Ca++imaging. I will also talk about our investigations at the synaptic, cellular, and circuit levels, including the main finding that cortical inhibitory neurons in this model show a reduction in intrinsic excitability and action potential generation. Finally, I will discuss future directions to better understand the mechanisms underlying the cell-type specific effects, as well as the link between the cellular and network level effects of KCNT1 GOF.