Netherlands

Causal reasoning enables us to explain the past, predict the future, and intervene in the present. Does the brain allocate specialized cortical regions to causal reasoning? And if so, are they involved in reasoning about both physical and social causal relationships, or are they domain-specific? In a pre-registered experiment (Exp 1) we scanned adults using fMRI while they matched physical and social causes to effects (e.g., ‘The car swerved to avoid a crash’ -&gt; ‘Coffee spilled all over the car seat’; ‘He was late for work’ -&gt; ‘Tom was scolded by his boss’) or physical and social descriptions of the same entity matched for difficulty and linguistic variables to the causal conditions (e.g., ‘The brightest object in the sky’-&gt; ‘The closest star to earth’; ‘She works at a hotel’ -&gt; ‘She brings in guests’ luggage’). A region in the left lateral prefrontal cortex (LPFC) responded significantly more strongly to causal than descriptive conditions in most subjects individually. Responses in this region in held-out data were high for both social and physical causal conditions, yet no greater than baseline for the two descriptive (non-causal) conditions. In a follow-up exploratory experiment (Exp 2), we tested a different task (answering causal versus non-causal questions about physical and social narratives, matched for linguistic variables). Again, we found that both the physical and social causal stimuli selectively engaged the LPFC region. Finally, in both experiments, we found that brain regions previously implicated in intuitive physical reasoning responded more to the physical causal than the physical non-causal stimuli. Collectively, these results suggest that a) a region in the LPFC is selectively engaged in causal reasoning independent of content domain and b) the hypothesized physics network (hPN) is selectively involved in physical causal reasoning across modalities (visual vs. linguistic).

**Authors:**

RT Pramod: MIT; Jessica Chomik: McGovern Institute for Brain Research, MIT; Laura Schulz: Massachusetts Institute of Technology; Nancy Kanwisher: Massachusetts Institute of Technology

CogSci 2024

A region in human left prefrontal cortex selectively engaged in causal reasoning

It is my great pleasure and honor to welcome you to the 64th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (ACL 2026), held in San Diego, California, USA, July 2–7, 2026. ACL 2026 continues our fields tradition of excellence in scholarship, innovation, and inclusivity, and I am deeply grateful to the many volunteers who have worked tirelessly to bring this event to life.

It is exciting to see the many developments in the field reflected at our conference, such as the advancement of large language models (born out of our community) into many application directions. This is not without challenges, partly due to unsolved problems, and partly due to misuse of the technology. All this is reflected well at ACL 2026. The conference also reflects that the field is not only about advancing technology, but also the science of fundamentally understanding language and how it is use by many different speaker communities. <br>
[Full Message from General Chair Philipp Koehn](https://drive.google.com/file/d/1QiJFOmMjvDgsDo3i1XzlQnImxe3RU_Cy/view?usp=sharing) <br><br><br>
<html><button style="display: inline-flex; align-items: center; justify-content: center; white-space: nowrap; border-radius: 9999px; font-weight: bold; background: #7c3aed; color: white; font-family: 'Space Grotesk', sans-serif; height: 40px; font-size: 16px; padding: 0 20px; border: none; cursor: pointer" onclick="window.open('https://drive.google.com/file/d/1QiJFOmMjvDgsDo3i1XzlQnImxe3RU_Cy/view?usp=sharing')">Conference Handbook</button></html>
<br><br><br><br>

To access this event page, you need to log in with the **email address you registered with**. <br>Access credentials will be sent to your email from Underline -  subject line "Welcome to ACL 2026". Please be sure to check your spam email folder if you do not see an email confirmation right away.

To access this event page, you are required to register.
Please complete your registration to continue.

We recommend reading [**the registration information**](https://2026.aclweb.org/registration/) first.

**Online Registration Form**: https://acl.swoogo.com/acl2026

Registration Required

ACL 2026

The 64th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (ACL 2026) will take place in San Diego, California, from July 2 - 7, 2026.

Causal reasoning enables us to explain the past, predict the future, and intervene in the present. Does the brain allocate specialized cortical regions to causal reasoning? And if so, are they involved in reasoning about both physical and social causal relationships, or are they domain-specific? In a pre-registered experiment (Exp 1) we scanned adults using fMRI while they matched physical and social causes to effects (e.g., ‘The car swerved to avoid a crash’ -> ‘Coffee spilled all over the car seat’; ‘He was late for work’ -> ‘Tom was scolded by his boss’) or physical and social descriptions of the same entity matched for difficulty and linguistic variables to the causal conditions (e.g., ‘The brightest object in the sky’-> ‘The closest star to earth’; ‘She works at a hotel’ -> ‘She brings in guests’ luggage’). A region in the left lateral prefrontal cortex (LPFC) responded significantly more strongly to causal than descriptive conditions in most subjects individually. Responses in this region in held-out data were high for both social and physical causal conditions, yet no greater than baseline for the two descriptive (non-causal) conditions. In a follow-up exploratory experiment (Exp 2), we tested a different task (answering causal versus non-causal questions about physical and social narratives, matched for linguistic variables). Again, we found that both the physical and social causal stimuli selectively engaged the LPFC region. Finally, in both experiments, we found that brain regions previously implicated in intuitive physical reasoning responded more to the physical causal than the physical non-causal stimuli. Collectively, these results suggest that a) a region in the LPFC is selectively engaged in causal reasoning independent of content domain and b) the hypothesized physics network (hPN) is selectively involved in physical causal reasoning across modalities (visual vs. linguistic).

**Authors:**

RT Pramod: MIT; Jessica Chomik: McGovern Institute for Brain Research, MIT; Laura Schulz: Massachusetts Institute of Technology; Nancy Kanwisher: Massachusetts Institute of Technology

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.

Cognitive scientists continue to debate gender/sex differences in basic problem-solving, including numerical and spatial cognition. While such differences may exist in adulthood, it is unclear whether these cognitive skills are fixed (early-developing, permanent) or plastic (late-developing, malleable). If fixed, they would relate more to gender categories; if plastic, they would relate more to gender socialization and spatial learning environment. To disentangle these hypotheses, we measured brain activity with fMRI in 51 children (4-8y; 20 boys / 31 girls) during numerical (vs. face) and geometric (vs. word) processing tasks. Greater activity occurred in superior and inferior parietal cortex during numerical and geometric processing compared to control conditions, but activity was unrelated to gender category, gender socialization, or spatial learning environment. These initial findings challenge the hypothesis of early, fixed gender effects in numerical and spatial development. Bayesian analyses will quantify support for the null vs. experimental hypotheses, incorporating additional environmental predictors.

**Authors:**

Marissa Laws: Carnegie Mellon University; Jessica Cantlon: Carnegie Mellon

Plasticity, gender, and the environment during numerical and spatial development

Transcranial alternating current stimulation (tACS) is an efficient neuromodulation technique to enhance cognitive function in a non-invasive manner. Using electroencephalography and functional magnetic resonance imaging, it was investigated whether a tACS with different phase lags between central executive and default mode networks modulated cognitive performance in perception, working memory, and inhibitory control. It was found that phase-lag-dependent tACS mediated improvement in task performance, neurodynamically reflected in task-relevant cortical and subcortical activation as well as prefrontal-based top-down functional connectivity. Our observations provide neurophysiological correlates of network-wise tACS-phase-dependent neuromodulation and a feasible non-invasive approach to effectively modulate fundamental cognitive functions.

**Authors:**

Byoung-Kyong Min: Korea University

Network-wise transcranial alternating current stimulation with phase lags

Measuring and quantifying degrees of belief poses a fundamental challenge, prompting an exploration into how humans navigate uncertainty. This study challenges the conventional use of probability theory and investigates ranking theory as a viable alternative model. Across the initial three experiments (N = 168; N = 63; N = 200), participants consistently utilized negative ranking functions to express disbelief, revealing a robust pattern across diverse contexts. Notably, a logarithmic relationship emerged between subjective probability and negative ranks (degree of disbelief). Experiment 3 provided clarity regarding the association between subjective probability and two-sided ranks (degree of disbelief and belief), establishing a log-odds relationship. In Experiment 4 (N = 268) the examination of ranks and subjective probability in a learning task revealed that degrees of disbelief more accurately represented the objective probability distribution than subjective probability. Lastly, Experiment 5 (N = 291) addressed decision-making under uncertainty through the Ellsberg paradox, uncovering how ranking theory not only resolved contradictions with expected utility theory but also eliminated the paradoxical nature of the Ellsberg scenario. This study advances our understanding of human uncertainty and supports ranking theory as a compelling alternative.

**Authors:**

Hanbin Go: University of Waterloo; Britt Anderson: University of Waterloo

Behavioural and theoretical support for ranking theory as an alternative model of human uncertainty representation

To what degree does semantic foraging probe semantic network structure? We use a combination of foraging experiments (animals, concrete nouns) and simulations on networks based on nine approaches to semantic similarity to address this question. In data and simulations, we find a significant bias towards naming semantically similar items, and significant correlations between inter-naming time and semantic distance. In previous foraging experiments, a roughly power law distribution with a Lévy range exponent was found in the distribution of inter-naming intervals. We find the value of this exponent is not universal but is sensitive to the search space size in that the exponent decreases (moving further into the Lévy range) as the number of nameable items is exhausted. Moreover, these exponents are not unique to semantic networks but appear in censored random walks on other graphs. Our combined experimental results and simulations provide insights into the topology of semantic memory.

**Authors:**

Kevin Brown: Oregon State University; Jay Rueckl: University of Connecticut; Elliot Saltzman: Boston University; James Magnuson: University of Connecticut; Ken McRae: University of Western Ontario; EILING YEE: University of Connecticut

Nonuniversal foraging behavior in semantic networks

Pupil dilation is assumed to be a slow and indirect reflection of latent cognitive events. Deconvolution approaches promise a more precise study of these events, assuming that they all trigger a delayed pupil response.

However, conventional deconvolution approaches neglect the possibility that between-event timings and the shape of the pupil responses differ between subjects, trials, and cognitive events. Accounting for this variability however is crucial to 1) achieve precise recovery of latent events and 2) to investigate how trial-level predictors influence cognitive processes.

We present a new method that performs trial-level deconvolution by combining generalized additive mixed models with Hidden semi-Markov models. We tested this method on synthetic data and subsequently applied it to data from a lexical decision experiment (N=24) and recovered six processing events. Investigating the trial-level durations of the recovered events revealed that early visual and late decision-related processing were influenced differently by frequency and word-type.

**Authors:**

Joshua Krause: University of Groningen; Jelmer Borst: University of Groningen; Jacolien van Rij: University of Groningen

Recovering cognitive events from trial-level pupil time courses

The desire to move to music appears to be a human universal. This behavioral response seems to be supported by a tight coupling of auditory and motor networks, even in the absence of overt movement. The prevailing theories explain this phenomenon either in terms of passive brain network entrainment to musical periodicity or motor system involvement in predictive coding. Both explanations recognize the role of rhythmic complexity in modulating motor activity. However, the precise nature of the relationship between rhythmic complexity and motor activity remains unclear. In this work, we conducted an fMRI literature review to examine this relationship. Out of 110 screened articles, 24 met inclusion criteria, reporting findings ranging from non-existent to linear or Inverted-U-shaped relations. Underlying these findings, we encountered significant heterogeneity in the measurement and conceptualization of rhythmic complexity. We provide a summary of the associations found, the approaches to measuring rhythmic complexity and the different types of tasks and stimuli used. We conclude that, in order to move forward, more agreement is needed regarding measures and notions of complexity.

**Authors:**

Francisco Cossavella: Laboratorio de Inteligencia Artificial Aplicada Instituto de Investigación en Ciencias de la Computación, CONICET- UBA; Martin Miguel: McMaster University ; Diego Fernandez Slezak: Universidad de Buenos Aires 

The role of the motor system in the processing of rhythmic complexity: a critical review

Self-regulated learning may be crucial for goal setting, progress monitoring, and adaptive problem-solving. The ability to find and recognize relevant and reliable information has become increasingly valuable. Therefore, to understand self-regulated learning processes, we interviewed 138 9-11-year-olds to analyze their information-seeking behaviors when learning either novel or partially known concept by themselves.
Children’s responses were categorized into two groups: relying on People and opting for Platforms. Results revealed an overall preference for platforms (73.23%). Interestingly, when learning novel concepts, the proportion favoring human sources increased significantly (34.56% versus 18.80%).
Most of the children mentioned changing their strategy when stuck during the learning process (79.93%), with platform learners showing higher adaptability (89.34%) than those relying on humans (54.17%).
These findings deepen our understanding of children’s decision-making regarding learning, aiding teachers in guiding their learning processes more efficiently, valuable not only in educational settings, but also in their personal and professional lives.

**Authors:**

Julieta Goldstein: Universidad Torcuato Di Tella; Carolina A Gattei: Universidad Torcuato Di Tella; Cecilia Calero: Universidad Torcuato Di Tella

Differences in Learning Novel and Partially Known Concepts: Exploring Children’s Self-Regulated Choices

Procrastination is a universal phenomenon, with a significant proportion of the population reporting interference and even harm from such delays. Why do people put off tasks despite what are apparently their best intentions, and why do they deliberately defer in the face of prospective failure? Past research shows that procrastination is a heterogeneous construct with possibly diverse causes. To grapple with the complexity of the topic, we construct a taxonomy of different types of procrastination and potential sources for each type. We simulate completion patterns from three broad model types: temporal discounting, inconsistent discounting, and waiting for interesting tasks, and provide some preliminary evidence, through comparisons with real-world data, of the plausibility of multiple types of, and pathways for, procrastination.

**Authors:**

Sahiti Chebolu: Max Planck Institute for Biological Cybernetics; Peter Dayan: Max Planck Institute for Biological Cybernetics

Optimal and sub-optimal temporal decisions can explain procrastination in a real-world task

Sequential information is encoded through various systems, among which, chunking, rule recognition and nested tree structures. However, the computational and neural mechanisms connecting these systems remain largely unknown. Dehaene et al. (2022) propose that humans possess internal languages governed by symbolic rules, coined Language of Thought (LoT). Based on this assumption we developed the Language of Thought (LoT) algorithm, which processes sequences and produces descriptions as minimal programs. In an online experiment, participants reproduced spatial sequences. Structured sequences, defined by temporal regularities, were notably better reproduced than controls for temporal structure. Participants demonstrated the ability to compress structured sequences in working memory. Response times and performance suggested chunking around a repetition rule. Further analysis, suggested hierarchical organization of those chunks, following a syntactic rule - recursive repetition. LoT-complexity, equal to minimal description length (MDL) of the sequence in our LoT, outperformed other information theory models, aligning best with the data.

**Authors:**

Elyes Tabbane: CEA

Decoding Sequential Information: the Language of Thought for Human Cognitive Processing of Temporal Structure

Most alphabets are based on visual coding of phonemes and syllables, and similar visual codes were developed for visually conveying the sounds of speech to deaf people. Notably, Cued Speech (CS) allows for syllables to be specified by a combination of lip configuration, hand location and hand shape. The use of this communication system has been proven to improve general language skills in a deaf community characterized by low literacy. Meanwhile, the mechanisms of CS perception remain largely unknown.
In an fMRI study involving 3 groups of participants (deaf and hearing people proficient in CS and a group of hearing people naïve to CS), we identify the brain areas that process and, more specifically, encode the various components of CS. Particular attention is given to the role of expertise, and to the links between CS and reading, two coexisting visual codes for language that both compete and support each other.

**Authors:**

Annahita Sarré: Institut du Cerveau; Laurent Cohen: Institut du Cerveau

Premium content

Downloads

Next from CogSci 2024

Plasticity, gender, and the environment during numerical and spatial development

Similar lecture

Causal-Audit: Explicit and Auditable Graph-based Reasoning via Target-Aware Causal Chain Construction