United States

Decades of empirical and theoretical research on human decision-making has broadly categorized it into two, separate realms: decision-making under risk and decision-making under uncertainty, with the Allais paradox and the Ellsberg paradox being a prominent example of each, respectively. In this work, we present the first unified, resource-rational account of these two paradoxes. Specifically, we show that Nobandegani et al.’s (2018) sample-based expected utility model provides a unified, process-level account of the two variants of the Allais paradox (the common-consequence effect and the common-ratio effect) and the Ellsberg paradox. Our work suggests that the broad framework of resource-rationality could permit a unified treatment of decision-making under risk and decision-making under uncertainty, thus approaching a unified account of human decision-making.

CogSci 2021

A Unified, Resource-Rational Account of the Allais and Ellsberg Paradoxes

The 46th Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society was an in-person meeting held in Rotterdam, The Netherlands at the Postillion Hotel & Conference Centre.

**ON-DEMAND PROGRAM ACCESS AFTER THE CONFERENCE**<br>
Recordings of the invited program are now available. You can access them by clicking on the 'Schedule' icon on the left. Select view by week and navigate to the day and time slot of the recording you wish to view. Click on the time slot to access the recording.

Recordings available (click on each recording to view):

**Thursday, July 25**<br>
0900: [Keynote Speaker Morgan Barense on Enhancing real-world event memory](https://underline.io/events/465/sessions/17997/lecture/99084-dynamics-between-minds-and-the-environment)<br>
1000: [Gleitman Award Winner Isabelle Dautriche on Language Foundations: Insights from acquisition, communication, cognition, and more](https://underline.io/events/465/sessions/18000/lecture/99085-gleitman-talk)<br>
1415: [Invited Symposium: Dynamics between minds and the environment](https://underline.io/events/465/sessions?eventSessionId=18016&searchGroup=lecture)<br>
1700: [Rumelhart Prize Presentation Speaker Alison Gopnik on Exploit, explore, empower: Three ages and three intelligences](https://underline.io/events/465/sessions/18028/lecture/99161-rp1-rumelhart-prize-presentation)<br>

**Friday, July 26**<br>
0900: [C.L. de Carvalho-Heineken Prize Keynote Speaker Kia Nobre on Focusing in memory](https://underline.io/events/465/sessions/18035/lecture/99162-hp1-c-l-de-carvalho-heineken-prize-keynote-address)<br>
1030: [Rumelhart Symposium: Childhood as exploration](https://underline.io/events/465/sessions/18038/lecture/100346-childhood-as-exploration)<br>
1415: [Elman Prize Symposium](https://underline.io/events/465/sessions?eventSessionId=18053&searchGroup=lecture)<br>
1600: [Invited Symposium: Dynamics between minds](https://underline.io/events/465/sessions?eventSessionId=18065&searchGroup=lecture)<br>
1745: [Keynote Speaker Andrea E. Martin on Neural dynamics encode the structure and statistics of language](https://underline.io/events/465/sessions/18077/lecture/99271-neural-dynamics-encode-the-structure-and-statistics-of-language)<br>

**Saturday, July 27**<br>
0900: [Keynote Speaker Gregor Schöner on How higher cognition emerges from the dynamics of strongly interacting neural populations](https://underline.io/events/465/sessions/18083/lecture/99273-dynamics-within-the-mind)<br>
1000: [Glushko Talks](https://underline.io/events/465/sessions?eventSessionId=18086&searchGroup=lecture)<br>
1500: [Invited Symposium: Dynamics within minds](https://underline.io/events/465/sessions?eventSessionId=18100&searchGroup=lecture)<br>


#### **CogSci 2024 Program Book**
<div style="position:relative;padding-top:0;width:900px;height:500px;"><iframe style="position:absolute;border:none;width:100%;height:100%;left:0;top:0;" src="https://online.fliphtml5.com/ebtyf/cble/"  seamless="seamless" scrolling="no" frameborder="0" allowtransparency="true" allowfullscreen="true" ></iframe></div>


**The Program Book can be downloaded [here](https://drive.google.com/file/d/1yRVp1cBqRnAbdYi4GXWV_pZeyWNsRquv/view?usp=sharing).**

#### **Letter from the President**

Welcome to the 2024 Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society in Rotterdam! CogSci 2024 brings together a large community of cognitive scientists who have traveled here from around the world, as well as a smaller group of remote presenters. I would like to extend an especially warm welcome to our first-time CogSci meeting attendees, and hope that 
their experience inspires them to join our future meetings for many years to come.

I want to thank this year’s conference co-chairs, Larissa K Samuelson, Stefan Frank, Mariya Toneva, Allyson Mackey, and Eliot Hazeltine, for putting together an amazing series of invited talks and symposia around the theme of Dynamics of Cognition. The co-chairs also deserve credit for handling a record-breaking number of submissions and producing a truly exciting conference program 

Beyond the invited talks and symposia dedicated to this year’s conference theme, I would like to highlight the presentations and events honoring the 
Rumelhart, Elman, Gleitman and C .L . de Carvalho Heineken prize winners, including the Rumelhart reception on Thursday. As you may know, we are recording all of the invited talks and symposia, and all prize-winners’ talks, and will be making this content available after the conference. 

The Cognitive Science Society relies on the volunteer efforts of our Governing Board members who work on matters related to our membership; conference policies; diversity and inclusion, international, and outreach initiatives; prizes and much more. We welcome interest from Society members who would like to become more involved in what we do. The 
Society is deeply grateful to Rick Dale and Andrea Bender, who serve as editors of the two Society journals, Cognitive Science and Topics in Cognitive Science respectively. We especially acknowledge our editors’ generosity in donating their stipends each year to D&I and outreach efforts. 

This year’s Annual Meeting depends critically on the support of Marischal De Armond and his team at Podium Conference Specialists: Sharon Zwack, Cendrine De Vis, Sarah-Kate Burke, and Rachel Waller worked tirelessly to secure the venue and handled a multitude of logistical and organizational issues, from arranging coffee breaks and receptions to making sure that a huge number of posters fits comfortably into the available space. Finally, and importantly, I would like to acknowledge the Cognitive Science Society Executive Officer, Erica Wojcik, for managing the complex and ever expanding sphere of our Society’s activities.

I hope you enjoy this year’s meeting and the many different opportunities to engage with the vibrant community of cognitive scientists gathered here. I also hope you get a chance to explore the great city of Rotterdam with its many attractions, museums, restaurants and scenic views. If you’d like to talk more about our Society, or simply want to say hello, please stop by!

![](https://assets.underline.io/markdown_image/1/image/3c66d0e21fff30e204df1138ffd15173.jpeg)

**Anna Papafragou**  
President, Cognitive Science 
Society 2023-2024

**CODE OF CONDUCT**<br>
By attending the CogSci 2024 Conference, you are required to adhere to the society’s [Code of Conduct](https://drive.google.com/file/d/16-6KkptF0Gn3ZYGJDlpqpwTdImw45Ng0/view?usp=drive_link).

**ABOUT THE COGNITIVE SCIENCE SOCIETY**<br>
The Cognitive Science Society brings together researchers from around the world who hold a common goal: understanding the nature of the human mind. The mission of the Society is to promote Cognitive Science as a discipline, and to foster scientific interchange among researchers in various areas of study, including Artificial Intelligence, Linguistics, Anthropology, Psychology, Neuroscience, Philosophy, and Education.

The Society is a non-profit professional organization and its activities include sponsoring an annual conference and publishing the journals Cognitive Science and TopiCS.
<br><br>

You need to log in with the email address you registered with. Access credentials have been sent to your email. 

Please be sure to check your spam and other email folders if you do not see an email confirmation right away.

Please log in to explore this event.

It looks like you are not registered for this event. 

To access the site please register [**here**](https://cognitivesciencesociety.org/registration/). 

Please register!

CogSci 2024

The 46th Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society presents the latest research across cognitive science and highlights the theme of Cognition in Context.

poster

### Looking for Cogsci 2023? Please [click here](https://underline.io/events/405/reception) to switch to 2023 edition.


**Dear Colleagues,**

Welcome to the 43rd Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society! 

This year’s conference brings together the latest research from all Cognitive Science and also highlights this year’s theme **Comparative Cognition: Animal Minds.** 

The program features four plenary speakers: Friederike Range (University of Veterinary Medicine, Vienna), Onur Güntürkün (Ruhr University Bochum), Julia Fischer (University of Göttingen), and Erich Jarvis (The Rockefeller University). The keynotes and invited symposia showcase the broad spectrum of ideas that encompass the conference theme of comparative cognition. 

Further, the program includes the Rumelhart Prize keynote presentation by Susan Goldin-Meadow (University of Chicago), and symposia to celebrate the winner of the Elman Prize: Wei Ji Ma (New York University), the Heineken Award winner Robert Zatorre (McGill University), and the Robert J. Glushko Dissertation Prizes session.

The program committee for CogSci 2021 received 1,025 submissions, including 710 full papers, 275 member abstracts, 8 publication-based talks, as well as 15 proposals for symposia, and 17 for workshops and tutorials. After a rigorous review process, the committee selected 152 papers for oral presentation and inclusion in the conference proceedings (14.8%), 332 papers for poster presentation and inclusion in the proceedings (32.4%), and 175 papers for poster presentation with inclusion of abstracts in the proceedings (17.1%) We also selected 275 submitted member abstracts. In addition, we accepted 6 publication-based talks, 12 symposia, and 9 workshops and tutorials to make for an exciting and inclusive program.

We hope that you enjoy the conference this year!<br><br>

**Your Program Chairs,**
![](https://assets.underline.io/uploads/markdown_image/1/image/99984908caba5e6453e5fc5ba34f3507.jpg)

**Learn more about the Vienna Cognitive Science Hub at the University of Vienna, hosts of CogSci 2021**

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/464h1m3iU68" title="YouTube video player" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen></iframe>

To review the proceedings for the conference or review the searchable program, please visit the [website](https://cognitivesciencesociety.org/program/).


The Cognitive Science Society brings together researchers from around the world who hold a common goal: understanding the nature of the human mind. The mission of the Society is to promote Cognitive Science as a discipline, and to foster scientific interchange among researchers in various areas of study, including Artificial Intelligence, Linguistics, Anthropology, Psychology, Neuroscience, Philosophy, and Education. The Society is a non-profit professional organization and its activities include sponsoring an annual conference and publishing the journals Cognitive Science and TopiCS.

Are Goffin’s cockatoos capable of transferring a tool-use skill acquired in a certain situation to a new contextual setting on which they have no previous experience? In our study, performance of thirteen adult subjects (divided into two groups: experimental or control) was compared in a two-stage experiment where the learning component about the tool was manipulated by providing a more diverse training for the experimental group in stage one. We hypothesized that this broader learning of the tool's affordances would enable to transfer its use to solve a novel task. Our results show that the experimental group outperformed the control group in stage two (higher success rate and faster learning speed), which we interpret as a product of behavioural flexibility being enhanced during stage one: by operating the tool in more diverse contexts, these individuals might have acquired an advantageous experience, transferrable to tackle an untrained problem more efficiently.

Knowledge transfer for tool use in the Goffin's cockatoo

Prosociality is considered one of the driving forces for cooperation in human and animal societies. The presence of prosociality in different taxa suggests convergent evolution. To broaden the phylogenetic spectrum in our understanding of prosociality, we examined two parrot species (i.e., African grey parrots (AGP) and blue-headed macaws (BHM)) using a food-sharing paradigm. By controlling the parrots’ hunger level, we tested how satiation may affect their willingness to share food with their most affiliated partner and a less affiliated partner. We also assessed whether they reciprocated if roles were reversed and examined birds’ regurgitation behaviour following the test condition. Preliminary results show that the parrots did not directly transfer any food pieces to their partner. However, food-sharing by regurgitation subsequent to the test situation occurred between the most affiliative partners and more frequently in the AGP than the BHM. This study highlights parrots as a fruitful model for studying prosociality.

Assessing prosocial tendencies of parrots in food sharing situations

Recent work has demonstrated robust learning traps during learning from experience – decision-making biases that persist due to the choice-contingent nature of outcome feedback. In two experiments, we investigate the effect of outcome valence on learning trap development. Participants chose to approach or avoid category exemplars associated with rewards or losses, and, to maximize reward, must learn a categorization rule based on two stimulus dimensions. We replicate previous findings showing that when outcome feedback was contingent upon approaching exemplars, people frequently fell into the trap of using an incomplete categorization rule based on only a single dimension, which was suboptimal for long-term reward. Notably, learning trap development was attenuated in an environment with frequent loss outcomes, even when participants received explicit information about the base rates of gains and losses. The implications of these findings for theoretical models and future research are discussed.

Can losses help attenuate learning traps?

Tone combinations with small integer frequency ratios are perceived as pleasant and are referred to as “consonant”. Human consonance preference has been connected to preference for sounds, such as the human voice, that inherently contain consonant intervals via the harmonic series. As such, we might expect other species with harmonic vocalizations to also show attraction to consonance. We tested budgerigars and humans in a place preference test. Subjects could freely spend time with consonant or dissonant versions of a piano melody. Time spent with stimulus types was used as a measure of attraction. Human females spent more time with consonant stimuli but males showed no preference. In budgerigars neither sex showed a preference. This did not change when repeating the experiment with consonant and dissonant versions of budgerigar sounds. The amount of nonlinearity in budgerigar vocalizations can explain these results engendering relevant implications for future cross-species consonance studies.

No evidence for attraction to consonance in budgerigars (Melopsittacus undulatus) from a place preference paradigm

Neural representations for faces, bodies, and objects have been studied extensively in humans. However, much less is known on how our socio-cognitive niche shaped the evolution of these neural bases. Canine neuroscience allows us to close this gap by studying a longstanding, close companion of humans. Here, we study the neural underpinnings of face, body and object processing in pet dogs (Canis familiaris) and humans. Fifteen awake and unrestrained dogs and forty humans underwent MRI scanning and viewed faces, bodies, objects, and scrambled images. Preliminary results for the dogs indicate temporal regions selective for animate stimuli and a potentially distinct sub-region selective for bodies, and replicate previous findings of category-selective regions in humans. Investigating the multivariate patterns of activation indicates similar categorical object representations in both species. Our findings will provide insights into the potentially convergent evolution of a core cognitive skill in the dog and human brain.

Face, body and object representations in the human and dog brain

Enhanced behavioural flexibility has been linked to relatively large brain size and social complexity. Aras exhibit both properties. We tested parrots of A. ambiguus and A. glaucogularis in a serial reversal learning paradigm, in which all the individuals completed an acquisition, and 10 reversal learning phases. Behavioural flexibility (and thus learning performance) was measured as the number of errors per trial. We also conducted social observations on individuals’ social interactions. We found that both species made significantly fewer errors per trial during each reversal phase and over the course of ten reversal phases. All individuals gradually developed a generalised learning strategy i.e., ‘win-stay-loose-shift’, and thus showing ‘learning to learn efficiently’. Our results also support the Social Intelligence Hypothesis whereby individuals’ learning performance was positively related to social interaction. These results show that the two Ara species demonstrate behavioural flexibility, and social complexity provides one explanation for varied individual learning performance.

Serial reversal learning using a colour discrimination task in two Ara species

Humans are ultra-social: they spontaneously incorporate others’ mental states into their action-planning (Kaminski et al.,2008), and altercentric: their behavior is influenced by others’ perspectives, even perspectives irrelevant to their instrumental goal (Kampis & Southgate, 2020). Recent evidence suggests that similarly to human infants, non-human great apes anticipate others’ actions based on their beliefs (Krupenye et al.,2016; Kano et al, 2019); raising the critical question whether altercentrism is uniquely human. 
In two experiments, we tested chimpanzees, bonobos, and orangutans in a manual search paradigm adapted from Mendes et al. (2008). These experiments replicated findings demonstrating apes’ first-person object-tracking abilities. Experiment 1 found no evidence for altercentrism: apes’ search behavior was not spontaneously modulated by another agent’s beliefs (unlike 14-month-old human infants; Kampis & Kovács, 2020). Experiment 2 found tentative evidence that apes inferred a person’s actions based on her beliefs, and adapted their own actions based on this information.

Great apes’ understanding of others’ beliefs in two manual search tasks

What is the extent to which learned communication signals are a product of biological evolution? Songbirds are a good candidate group for studying this question, since songbird species show remarkable similarities but also a large variability in their vocalizations, with many examples of cultural transmission. To this end, in a large sample of songbird species and other birds that do not learn their songs, we analyzed whether evolutionary relations estimated from molecular genetics can predict acoustic similarity between songs. We assessed birdsong similarity with various acoustic features extracted by signal processing methods. Surprisingly, we found that the extent to which learned songs reflect genetic relations is comparable to - if not exceeding - innate vocalizations. These findings suggest that even in communication signals that are largely determined by cultural transmission (eg: human language), evolutionary constraints could manifest, as famously suggested by Chomsky in his theory of universal grammar.

Evolutionary influences in learned bird communication signals

Labels may play a role in the formation and acquisition of object categories. We investigated this using a free-categorization task, manipulating the presence or absence of labels and whether labels were random or reinforced one of two alternative categorization cues (taxonomic or thematic relationships). When labels were absent, participants used thematic and taxonomic cues equally to categorize stimuli. When present, labels were used as the primary cue for category formation, with random labels leading participants to attend less to taxonomic and thematic relations between stimuli. When labels redundantly reinforced either thematic or taxonomic cues, the use of the cue in question was boosted along with the use of labels as a cue for categorization. Most interestingly, in spite of previously observed associations between labels and taxonomic grouping, labels did not preferentially boost the use of either taxonomic or thematic cues in comparison with the other.

Labels, Even Arbitrary Ones, Facilitate Categorization

According to a long-standing dogma, Westerners are more capable of thinking abstractly than East Asians. Here, we challenge this generalization by comparing US and Chinese adults in a paradigm case of abstract thinking: analogy. Chinese and American participants completed the most difficult set of Raven’s (2003) Standard Progressive Matrices (SPM), a widely used test of analogical reasoning. For each item, participants attempted to discern the analogical relationships between parts of an incomplete matrix to identify the correct way to complete it. Chinese participants produced significantly more correct answers on the SPM, indicating more successful analogical reasoning. We replicated this result with a second sample of Chinese participants. This cross-cultural difference remained significant when demographic factors were controlled. We predicted this difference, reasoning that East Asian’s sensitivity to context gives them an advantage over Westerners in various kinds of abstract thinking.

Downloads

Next from CogSci 2021

Knowledge transfer for tool use in the Goffin's cockatoo

Similar lecture

Decision-Making Paradoxes in Humans vs Machines: The case of the Allais and Ellsberg Paradoxes