United States

Classifiers are a noun categorization device found in many East and Southeast Asian languages. Their syntactic status is debated: some theories treat them as forming a constituent with the noun, others with the numeral. Typological data on how classifiers, numerals, and nouns are ordered largely support the classifier-with-numeral hypothesis: orders in which the noun intervenes between the numeral and the classifier are unattested. However, typological evidence is problematic in this case, because the distribution of classifiers is highly geographically constrained, and ordering tendencies may reflect language contact. In this study, we look for evidence of the syntactic status of classifiers using artificial language learning experiments. We test whether learners’ preference among patterns are predicted by one of these two accounts. Results suggest that, if anything, learners in fact prefer orders that group classifiers with the numeral.

CogSci 2023

Cognitive biases for word order between numeral, classifier and noun

### Welcome to CogSci Conference 2025!

The 47th Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society was a hybrid meeting held in San Francisco. 

<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/amvr/"  seamless="seamless" scrolling="no" frameborder="0" allowtransparency="true" allowfullscreen="true" ></iframe></div>

#### About

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.

#### Our History 

* **Society Creation**<br>
The Society was incorporated as a 501(c)(3) non-profit professional organization in Massachusetts in 1979. The organizing committee included Roger Schank, Allan Collins, Donald Norman, and a number of other scholars from psychology, linguistics, computer science, and philosophy. 
<br><br>
* **Conference Creation**<br>
The first conference on cognitive science was held at La Jolla, California in August, 1979, and has occurred annually since then. The proceedings of each conference are published, and those from most years are available through Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc. The annual proceedings of the Cognitive Science Conference represent a major source of information on new work and new ideas in the scientific study of thinking. In 1990, the Society, with help from an anonymous donor, established the David Marr Prize for the best student paper at each annual meeting.
<br><br>
* **Journal Creation**<br>
The Journal, Cognitive Science, began publication in 1976, and is now published by Wiley-Blackwell. The Executive Editor is currently Richard P. Cooper of Birkbeck, University of London, and there are 18 Associate Editors and a 30-member editorial board. It serves as the premier outlet for research reports that intersect two or more disciplines. Copyrights for articles published in the journal are held by the Society. The Governing Board of the Cognitive Science Society voted in late 2006 to found a new journal, Topics in Cognitive Science (topiCS). The Editor in Chief is Wayne Gray, Cognitive Science Department, Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute. The journal seeks to fill a niche not occupied by Cognitive Science Journal or other cognitive science journals. Membership in the Society includes a subscription to Cognitive Science and TopiCS. Copyrights for articles published in the journal are held by the Society.
<br><br>

#### Code of Conduct

By attending the CogSci 2025 Conference, you are required to adhere to the society’s **[Code of Conduct](https://drive.google.com/file/d/1ChPuihLy6jE_BWqfO7J2KKgX35JW2zsM/view?usp=sharing)**.
<br><br>


You need to log in with the email address you registered with. 

Login credentials were sent to you from Underline -  subject line "Welcome to the CogSci 2025 Conference". Please be sure to check your spam/promotional inbox  if you do not see an email confirmation right away.





Please log in to join this event.

To access the site, please register [**here**](https://cognitivesciencesociety.org/registration/).

If you are registered and feel like you are seeing this message by mistake, please make sure you are logged in with the same email that you registered with. 

Please register!

CogSci 2025

The 47th Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society presents the latest research across cognitive science and highlights the theme of Cognition in Context.

poster

The 45th Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society will take place in Sydney, Australia as a modified hybrid conference. Presentations from the main-session room will be live-streamed every day for all events. This will include all invited talks and award sessions. Recordings of all CogSci 2023 sessions will be made available for on-demand viewing after the conference.<br>
The in-person component will be held at the International Convention Centre Sydney at Darling Harbour. The Conference will take place Wednesday July 26th – Saturday July 29th, 2023 (Wednesday, July 26th is the Workshops Day).

Join us!

<br>[**The Program at a Glance can be found here**](https://cognitivesciencesociety.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/07/COgSci-PAAG-V2.pdf)
<br>[**The Detailed Program can be found here**](https://online.fliphtml5.com/ebtyf/mswz/)
<br><br>

#### **CogSci 2023 Program Book**
<iframe style="width:700px;height:400px" src="https://online.fliphtml5.com/ebtyf/tzgk/"  seamless="seamless" scrolling="no" frameborder="0" allowtransparency="true" allowfullscreen="true" ></iframe>
<br>

The 45th Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society presents the latest research across cognitive science and highlights the theme of Cognition in Context.

Automated Writing Evaluation (AWE) tools are steadily gaining prominence in educational settings given the ease and scale in which they can be deployed. Nevertheless, despite producing a similar performance as human raters, the accuracy of automated systems is often met with skepticism. In the current study we explore whether such skepticism extends to writing feedback believed to be generated by human tutors in training or an AI tutor under development. When both sources are fallible, are critical judgments mitigated? Participants (N=477) judged the accuracy of feedback on writing samples given by human or AI tutors where the feedback was normed to be accurate, inaccurate, and ambiguous. Results showed participants were still more likely to deem identical feedback provided by an AI, as compared to human tutors, as less accurate, and they were more confident in these evaluations. It appears that “novice” AWE systems are not completely immune to negative bias.

Fallible feedback: Judgments of "novice" automated and human writing tutors

Curiosity relates to learning and recent work shows robust associations between curiosity and recall of information in adults and children over age 10. The current study tested a similar association in younger children and explored children’s information-seeking behaviors. Children (n=90, 4-10-year-olds) played a free-exploration game in which they clicked shapes to learn different facts about different topics. They then recalled what they remembered learning on the task (recall) and asked questions about what they were curious to know more about (curiosity). We observed a positive association between children’s curiosity and recall of information, even when controlling for amount of information seeking and children’s age. This association was specifically seen for recall without memory cues. There was no association between children’s curiosity and information seeking behavior, and children showed a strong tendency of breadth exploration over exploring in depth with some indication of children beginning to explore depth more with age.


Exploring to learn: Curiosity, breadth and depth of exploration, and recall in young children

Categories simplify the vast number of entities we encounter into equivalence classes, serving as a fundamental block of our cognition. This simplification of information supports our ability to reason about and interact with members of each category. In adulthood, selective attention helps us form categories efficiently by focusing on relevant attributes while filtering out irrelevant information. However, young children tend to encode more attributes than necessary, and this developmental difference is partly due to a prolonged development of selective attention. In the current study, we proposed another important contributor to the development. As shown in three experiments, children prefer information gathering to efficiency, regardless of its value. Experiment 1 revealed that children sample more information than adults even when filtering demands are low. Experiment 2 further supports children's preference for information. And Experiment 3 eliminates alternative explanations, demonstrating that children enjoy gathering information rather than motor actions associated with it.

Driven by Information: Children's Exploration Shapes Their Distributed Attention in Category Learning

Young children acquire a wide range of linguistic and cognitive skills in the first three years of life. Decades of experimental work have established a solid empirical foundation for our understanding of cognitive development. But most experimental studies are limited in statistical power and focus on specific psychological constructs, thus making them unsuitable for describing developmental growth at scale. Here, we turned to meta-analyses of experimental research. We conducted a meta-meta-analysis to consolidate and integrate 23 meta-analyses compiled on MetaLab, a community-augmented meta-analysis platform. We found that most datasets can not meaningfully distinguish different functional forms for developmental change, but in those that could, there is great diversity in the best-fitting functional forms of the age model. We also evaluated the impact of a range of methodological factors. Overall, our work sheds light on the heterogeneous nature of developmental trajectories and the subtle interactions between research methods and experimental outcomes.

A synthesis of early cognitive and language development using (meta-)meta-analysis

Quantitative models of behavior are a fundamental tool in cognitive science. Typically, models are hand-crafted to implement specific cognitive mechanisms. Such "classic" models are interpretable by design, but may provide poor fit to experimental data. Artificial neural networks (ANNs), on the contrary, can fit arbitrary datasets at the cost of opaque mechanisms. Here, we adopt a hybrid approach, combining the predictive power of ANNs with the interpretability of classic models.
We apply this approach to Reinforcement Learning (RL), beginning with classic RL models and replacing their components one-by-one with ANNs. We find that hybrid models can provide similar fit to fully-general ANNs, while retaining the interpretability of classic cognitive models: 
They reveal reward-based learning mechanisms in humans that are strikingly similar to classic RL. They also reveal mechanisms not contained in classic models, including separate reward-blind mechanisms, and the specific memory contents relevant to reward-based and reward-blind mechanisms.

Predictive and Interpretable: Combining Artificial Neural Networks and Classic Cognitive Models to Understand Human Learning and Decision Making

Dependency tree is efficient for relation extraction model to exploit relations between words. Recent approaches have achieved promising performance while still suffering from inherent limitations. 
In this paper, we propose a novel relation extraction framework called Progressive Graph Learning over pruned dependency tree (PGLNet). PGLNet constructs a set of graphs by progressively adapting to input sentence. Specially, we implement the model to construct progressive weighted adjacency matrices by learning the relations among graph nodes with self-attention mechanism. Then, the model takes the learned weights as reference to prune dependency tree. Next, progressive convolution module is designed to encode the relations of entities and followed by relations classification. We evaluate our proposed model using public real-world datasets, experimental results demonstrate that the proposed model achieves state-of-the-art performance with consistency in all datasets. We conclude that the ability of PGLNet to progressively adapt to input data and enable the model with robustness.


Progressive Graph Learning over Pruned Dependency Trees For Relation Extraction

In this work, we develop convolutional neural generative coding (Conv-NGC), a generalization of predictive coding to the case of convolution/deconvolution-based computation. Specifically, we concretely implement a flexible neurobiologically-motivated algorithm that progressively refines latent state feature maps in order to dynamically form a more accurate internal representation/reconstruction model of natural images. The performance of the resulting sensory processing system is evaluated on complex datasets such as Color-MNIST, CIFAR-10, and Street House View Numbers (SVHN). We study the effectiveness of our brain-inspired model on the tasks of reconstruction and image denoising and find that it is competitive with convolutional auto-encoding systems trained by backpropagation of errors and outperforms them with respect to out-of-distribution reconstruction (including the full 90k CINIC-10 test set).


Convolutional Neural Generative Coding: Scaling Predictive Coding to Natural Images

Punishment is a cost imposed on a target, in response to an undesirable action. Yet choosing to punish also reveals information about the authority’s own motives and values. 
We propose that observers jointly infer the wrongness of the action and the authority's motivations. Using hypothetical scenarios in unfamiliar societies, we experimentally manipulated observers' prior beliefs and measured human observers' inferences after observing punishment. These inferences were recapitulated in a formal model that inverts an intuitive causal model of authorities who make rational choices about punishment by weighing its costs and benefits (i.e. utilities). An essential component of this model, driving these inferences, is that legitimate authorities consider the utility of a proportional response to harmful actions, which depends on the balance between the wrongness of the act and the severity of the punishment.

What people learn from punishment: joint inference of wrongness and punisher's motivations from observation of punitive choices

Political polarization is driven by many factors, but the role of moral values as both a signal of political identity and a source of internal conflict is understudied. We report an agent-based computational model of polarization that fills this gap. Agents seek to differentiate in- and outgroup neighbors with a slight preference for the former. However, they must do so by inferring neighbors’ identities from visible but transient moral signals. Moreover, agents experience conflicts within their own values, and if difficult to resolve internally, can copy the values of their ingroup or disengage (i.e., act immorally). Results show that liberals form larger, more homogeneous clusters, are happier, and experience less moral conflict than conservatives. Conservatives experience more and higher levels of conflict, and morally disengage significantly more often than liberals.


Simulating Political Polarization as a Function of Uncertain Inference and Signaling of Moral Values

The concept of a good life is usually assumed by philosophers to be equivalent to that of well-being, or perhaps of a morally good life, and hence has received little attention as a potentially distinct subject matter. In a series of experiments participants were presented with vignettes involving socially sanctioned wrongdoing toward outgroup members. Findings indicated that, for a large majority, judgments of bad character strongly reduce ascriptions of the good life, while having no impact at all on ascriptions of happiness or well-being. Taken together with earlier findings these results suggest that the lay concept of a good life is clearly distinct from those of happiness, well-being, or morality, likely encompassing both morality and well-being, and perhaps other values as well: whatever matters in a person’s life. Importantly, morality appears not to play a fundamental role in either happiness or well-being among the folk.



Premium content

Downloads

Next from CogSci 2023

Fallible feedback: Judgments of "novice" automated and human writing tutors

Similar lecture

Numbers and counting: Silent gesture and artificial language learning do not always reflect typological patterns