Netherlands

Disagreements are speech acts used by interlocutors to challenge previous assertions. When disagreements express subjective views, they can often be perceived as faultless. It is however unclear whether accepting a disagreement as faultless causes comprehenders to update their own semantic representations of the predicate targeted by the disagreement. Using the vague quantifiers many and few as a case study, we find in two adaptation studies that participants shifted their meaning representations of the quantifiers after being exposed to disagreements that were perceived to be faultless. The adaptation strengthened the participants&#39; baseline preferences, suggesting that even when a disagreement is judged to be faultless, there exists a perceived asymmetry in the plausibility of the two viewpoints under discussion.

**Authors:**

Emily Pecsok: Cornell University; Helena Aparicio: Cornell University

CogSci 2024

How can they both be right?: Faultless disagreement and semantic adaptation

### 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/).


CogSci 2021

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.

Disagreements are speech acts used by interlocutors to challenge previous assertions. When disagreements express subjective views, they can often be perceived as faultless. It is however unclear whether accepting a disagreement as faultless causes comprehenders to update their own semantic representations of the predicate targeted by the disagreement. Using the vague quantifiers many and few as a case study, we find in two adaptation studies that participants shifted their meaning representations of the quantifiers after being exposed to disagreements that were perceived to be faultless. The adaptation strengthened the participants' baseline preferences, suggesting that even when a disagreement is judged to be faultless, there exists a perceived asymmetry in the plausibility of the two viewpoints under discussion.

**Authors:**

Emily Pecsok: Cornell University; Helena Aparicio: Cornell University

poster

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!

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

Connectives like `because’ are referred to as `processing instructions’ since they facilitate processing of linguistic material directly following the connective. In an expectation-driven account of discourse processing, this can be attributed to predictions that readers make about the upcoming discourse relation, but also to predictions about upcoming discourse content. By modeling these two accounts, termed the relation prediction account and the content prediction account respectively, we show that they make different predictions about when the presence of a connective is most beneficial. In a self-paced reading study, we replicate the facilitative effect of the connective on processing, but do not find any evidence that this effect can be explained by a strong or weak version of either of the two accounts. This suggests that the role of the connective goes above and beyond informing the reader about the upcoming relation and content and possibly triggers a different processing strategy.

**Authors:**

Marian Marchal: Saarland University; Merel Cleo Johanna Scholman: Utrecht University; Ted Sanders: Utrecht University; Vera Demberg: Saarland University

What processing instructions do connectives provide? Modeling the facilitative effect of the connective

Studies of event individuation often consider people's representations of activities involving agents performing complex tasks. Concomitantly, theories of event individuation emphasize predictions about agents' intentions. While the ability to make such predictions must relate to some basis in lower-level perceptual features, little attention has yet been paid to identifying those features. We probe a fundamental distinction between `event' and `process' representation, relying on and extending studies that reveal object and event representation to be deeply analogous in our cognitive economy. We provide evidence that `temporal shape', as suggested by formal analysis in natural language semantics, is a sufficient low-level perceptual criterion for the individuation of events.

**Authors:**

Douglas Wadle: University of Kansas; Devansh Bansal: University of Southern California; Alexis C Wellwood: University of Southern California

Temporal Shaping and the Event/Process Distinction

Shy children are often delayed in their communicative productive behavior when reacting to novel situations. In this study, we wanted to know what kind of situational changes cause a delay and investigated 14 preschool children’s individual processing of situational demands and small changes to it. Whereas children’s shyness was measured by what the caregivers reported, children’s processing of situational demands was measured by their nonverbal turn-taking during two sessions with a social robot. We focused on how children respond to their partner when the situation is altered in comparison to a familiar one. Our results show that when the changes were introduced not only in the setting (spatial arrangement of the objects) but also in the robot’s request (i.e., the task), shy children were delayed compared to their less shy peers. Our results shed more light onto the question of how children perceive a situation and situational changes.

**Authors:**

Valeriia Tykhonenko: Paderborn University; Nils F Tolksdorf: Paderborn University; Katharina Rohlfing: Paderborn University

How turn-taking can inform about becoming familiar with a task and changes to it: shy and nonshy four-year-old children

Linguistic strategies humans use for communication are designed to meet the informational needs of their addressees. Speakers adapt not only speech but also increase the rate of iconic gestures to enhance the message clarity for children. Although sign languages allow signers to take advantage of iconicity to a far greater extent than what is possible in spoken languages, little is known about whether signers use iconicity as a strategy in child-directed communication. In the present study, we used automatic video pose estimation to analyze descriptions aimed at a child (12yo) vs. an adult produced by 7 deaf adult signers of Italian Sign Language. Overall, signers used iconic constructions more than lexical signs and with comparable frequency in descriptions for both age groups. However, iconic constructions were longer in duration for children. Taken together, the present study presents the first evidence that unlike speakers signers do not modulate quantitative but only qualitative aspects of iconicity for children.

**Authors:**

Anita Slonimska: Max Plank Institute for Psycholinguistics; Alessio di Renzo: Institute of Cognitive Sciences and Technologies; Mounika Kanakanti: Max Planck Institute for Psycholinguistics; Emanuela Campisi: University of Catania; Asli Ozyurek: Donders Institute 

Kinematic modulations of iconicity in child-directed communication in Italian Sign Language

This study explores a GPT-2 architecture’s capacity to capture monolingual children’s comprehension behaviour in Korean, an understudied language for this topic. We test how it copes with a suffixal passive construction involving verbal morphology and required interpretive procedures driven by that morphology. We fine-tune the models via patching and hyperparameter variations, and measure their classification performance on the test items used in Author (xxxx). Results showed that they do not faithfully simulate the children’s response patterns regarding the suffixal passive, yielding by-condition/hyperparameter asymmetries. This suggests the limits of neural networks’ capacity to address child language features, inviting subsequent inquiries on the extent to which computational models reveal developmental trajectories of child language that have been unveiled through corpus-based or experimental research.

**Authors:**

Seongmin Mun: Ajou university; Gyu-Ho Shin: Unversity of Illinois at Chicago

Neural network modelling on Korean monolingual children’s comprehension of suffixal passive construction in Korean

Agreement, a systematic formal mapping between linguistic elements, adds redundant complexity to languages (e.g., in ‘she writes’ the -s adds no information), and yet is crosslinguistically prevalent. A prominent hypothesis argues that the ubiquity of agreement may be due to a functional advantage it confers for child learners. Here, we test this using an artificial language learning experiment with 56 English-speaking children (mean age 5;11). We investigate whether agreement can facilitate learning of noun classes (e.g., ‘masculine’/’feminine’). In one condition, agreement appeared as a redundant cue to noun classes, whereas in the other condition there was no agreement. Following exposure, we tested children on noun classification for both nouns they were trained on and novel nouns. Results reveal that children classified nouns equally well in both conditions. However, novel nouns were classified better in the agreement condition compared to the no-agreement condition, suggesting agreement can facilitate generalization for child learners.

**Authors:**

Shira Tal: University of Edinburgh; Kenny Smith: University of Edinburgh; Jennifer Culbertson: University of Edinburgh

Agreement marking can benefit child learners

Classifiers play a fundamental role in shaping how objects are categorized in Mandarin Chinese. We conducted object naming experiments with different types of classifiers as prompts and analyzed the distribution of names via the taxonomic device, by which nouns are divided into three levels according to the level of specificity, i.e., basic (e.g. apple), superordinate (e.g. fruit) and subordinate (e.g. golden apple) levels. We observe that different classifiers induce distinct distributions of names across the three levels. Under the general classifier condition, participants use more general terms for home furnishing objects (e.g., ‘furniture’) but not for animals, whereas the specific classifier condition consistently reveals a preference for basic level names (e.g., ‘table’), which are less general and represent the most inclusive category at which objects share common features and can be easily recognized. These findings contribute to our understanding of language production in Mandarin Chinese and highlight the importance of considering grammatical factors when examining referential expression choices.

**Authors:**

Jialing Liang: Universitat Pompeu Fabra; Xixian Liao: Universitat Pompeu Fabra

How does grammatical category influence conceptual categorization: The case of Chinese classifiers

Children learning Romance languages must learn to understand and use agreement, including gender and number agreement. We examine the development of adjective and participle agreement in a case where the task is complicated by syncretisms, multiple paradigms, and unequal input distributions. RomanshTuatschin (Indo-European, Switzerland) has two different paradigms for attributive (masculine and feminine) and predicative (masculine, feminine, neuter) contexts of adjective and participle use. The predicative masculine form is the same as the attributive neuter. Thus, the masculine form in these two paradigms differs, presenting learners with a challenge. The distribution of forms is even for attributives but heavily skewed towards the neuters for predicatives. Examining production errors in 2 to 4-year-olds, we evaluate the effects of frequency and syncretism and find that error-rate is affected by skewed distributions and less affected by syncretisms. This demonstrates the strong effect of input distributions on first language acquisition.

**Authors:**

Jekaterina Mazara: University of Zurich; Michele Loporcaro: University of Zurich; Sabine Stoll: University of Zurich

Acquisition of gender agreement depends on frequency distributions in specific contexts

Language often has different ways to express the same or similar meanings. Despite this, however, people seem to have preferences for some ways over others. For example, people overwhelmingly prefer "bread and butter" to "butter and bread". Previous research has demonstrated that these ordering preferences grow stronger with frequency (i.e., frequency-dependent regularization). In this paper we demonstrate that this frequency-dependent regularization can be accounted for by noisy-channel processing models. We also show that this regularization can only be accounted for if the listener infers more noise than the speaker produces. Finally, we show that the model can account for the language-wide distribution of binomial ordering preferences.

**Authors:**

Zachary Nicholas Houghton: University of California, Davis; Emily Morgan: UC Davis

Frequency-dependent regularization arises from a noisy-channel processing model

Semanticists have debated the extent to which modality and causation are related in natural language. This paper aims to promote a theory in which periphrastic causatives share core components of meaning with deontic modals, and potentially other kinds of modals. We report a sentence recall experiment that suggests that priming can be used to target the high-level meaning representations shared between two syntactically distinct linguistic expressions. Our results show that it's possible to prime the production of the deontic modal `had to' (e.g., ``Giorgio had to go to the store"), with causative `made' (e.g., ``Giulia made Giorgio go to the store''), suggesting that the two expressions share a component of their meaning. This paper shows that abstract semantic representation can be primed using the standard psycholinguistic method and contributes to the methodological and theoretical progress of understanding semantic processing and its effect on language production.

**Authors:**

Angelica Hill: University of Massachusetts Amherst; Shota Momma: University of Massachusetts Amherst

Premium content

Downloads

Next from CogSci 2024

What processing instructions do connectives provide? Modeling the facilitative effect of the connective

Similar lecture

Arguing with experts: Subjective disagreements on matters of taste