United States

We examine whether development of self-awareness influences infants’ ability to track and use others’ perspectives to make belief-based action predictions. Based on the altercentric hypothesis (Southgate, 2020), we expect that infants who do not yet have a self-perspective to make more accurate predictions of an agent’s actions on a non-verbal mentalizing task (NVMT) compared to infants who may encode the other’s and their own conflicting perspective. To test this, we presented 18-month-olds, half of whom passed the mirror self-recognition (MSR) task, with a NVMT and used anticipatory looking as a measure of action-based attribution. Contrary to our hypothesis, preliminary findings with 32 infants using the differential looking score, suggest that those who pass the MSR task are more accurate in their anticipatory looking compared to infants who do not pass the MSR task. All other preregistered analyses will be conducted once data collection is complete in June 2021.

CogSci 2021

The influence of the self-perspective in infant theory of mind

### 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.

poster

Children use accent to categorize speakers as in-group or out-group members (i.e., fellow speakers of language variety X or some other variety). This study tested how much 3- to 5-year-old children (N=159) consider both grammaticality and accent when categorizing speakers. After interacting with a native or non-native experimenter whose speech contained grammatical errors (or not), children completed a cultural categorization task, where they were asked where the experimenter likely grew up (a familiar- or unfamiliar-looking dwelling), as well as a resource allocation task, where children could share stickers with the experimenter. Results showed that children relied primarily on accent when deciding where the experimenter grew up, being more likely to associate native speakers with familiar dwellings than non-native speakers. However, children shared stickers with all speakers equally. The latter result contrasts with previous work using non-interactive paradigms, and may indicate that live interactions foster more favorable perceptions of non-native speakers.

‘Hello! *What your name?’ Children’s evaluations of ungrammatical speakers after live interaction

Near-misses sting: As adults, we intuitively understand that someone who just missed a desirable outcome (near-miss) feels worse than someone who missed by a far margin (far-miss). What cognitive capacities support these intuitions, and how do they emerge in early childhood? We presented adults (n=42) and six- to eight-year-olds (n=91; pre-registered) with various near-miss scenarios. We found that (1) adults generally infer that a near-miss character would feel worse than a far-miss character, (2) yet their inferences vary depending on the context, and (3) children show a strikingly different pattern from adults, robustly choosing the far-miss character as feeling worse. The tendency to judge the near-miss character as feeling worse increased with age, but even 8-year-olds were still below chance. These patterns raise the possibility that young children start with a distance-based bias that gradually gets replaced by adult-like inferences that involve counterfactual reasoning.

"If only Santa had one more present": Exploring the development of near-miss counterfactual reasoning

Children and adults show preferences for native speakers and judge them to be more credible sources of information than non-native speakers. Previous research with children has attributed this bias to a preference for in-group members. The present study investigated the role of processing fluency on children’s social judgements. Children were shown two speakers (one with a native accent and the other with a non-native accent) relaying a message from another individual. They were then asked to make credibility and social judgements about the speakers and their messages. Children were also asked a processing fluency question, and a question about the speakers’ comprehension of the original message. Responses to the processing fluency question and question about the speakers’ comprehension predicted credibility judgements, but did not predict preference. These findings suggest that processing fluency may play a role in developing biases towards non-native accented speakers. Implications are discussed.

Broken Telephone: Children's Judgments of Messages Delivered by Non-Native Speakers are Influenced by Processing Fluency

Space-based and object-based attention studies suggest these selective mechanisms can be involuntarily or voluntarily deployed. We performed two experiments exploring automatic deployment of object-mediated space-based attention. Subjects performed a modified flanker task with targets and distractors presented within the same or different object frames. If object selection occurs automatically, the flanker effect should be larger in the same condition. However, both object frame conditions produced equally large flanker effects within accuracy. Next, we manipulated the observer’s sustained attentional spotlight via an inducer task to determine whether object-mediated space-based selection depends on initial spotlight size. This time, object-based effects emerged only during narrow spotlight conditions. The results from both experiments suggest the deployment of object-based attention may occur when spatial attention is initially focused narrowly, even when such selection is suboptimal. These results add to the existing literature while reconciling previous inconsistent findings of object-based selection.

Suboptimal deployment of object-mediated space-based attention during a flanker task

From age 3-4, children are generally capable of telling stories about a topic free of choice. Over the years their stories become more sophisticated in content and structure, reflecting various aspects of cognitive development. Here we focus on children’s ability to construe characters with increasing levels of mental depth, arguably reflecting socio-cognitive capacities including Theory of Mind. Within our sample of 51 stories told by children aged 4-10, characters range from flat “actors” performing simple actions, to “agents” having basic perceptive, emotional, and intentional capacities, to fully-blown “persons” with complex inner lives. We argue for the underexplored potential of computationally extracted story-internal factors (e.g. lexical/syntactic complexity) in explaining variance in character depth, as opposed to story-external factors (e.g. age, socioeconomic status) on which existing work has focused. We show that especially lexical richness explains variance in character depth, and this effect is larger than and not moderated by age.

Modelling Characters’ Mental Depth in Stories Told by Children Aged 4-10

Although the severity of the COVID-19 outbreak varies from time to time, pandemic has affected larger audiences all around the world. Given the increasingly severe measures taken by the authorities, healthcare professionals have experienced positive and negative effects of the events, both personally and vicariously. The main aim is to examine how remembering influences vicarious traumatization and post-traumatic growth in a sample of healthcare workers. We proposed a multiple mediation model testing of distinct roles of stress components (hypervigilance, avoidance, intrusion) on the link between recollective features of remembering and post-traumatic growth, which allows to characterize memory-linked mechanisms underlying the effects of traumatic stress on growth. We demonstrated unique pathways by which remembering influenced traumatic growth. For the links of emotional intensity and imagery with growth, we found full mediation through avoidance and intrusion Individuals recalling events with high emotional intensity and imagery tend to experience more intrusions of trauma, which then resulted in traumatic growth. On the other hand, the opposite pattern was found for avoidance. Emotionally intense and vivid recall of events increased avoidance responses, but high avoidance reduced traumatic growth. With respect to reliving, while the pattern was similar, we found a partial mediation, showing significant role reliving has in supporting traumatic growth.

Recollection & Traumatic Growth: Unique Mediational Pathways Through Traumatic Stress Components

People sometimes criticize others for feeling sad, especially when they judge that person's sadness to be irrational. According to canonical models of blame, these reactions reflect attributions of control over the negative emotion. However, some scholars have recently suggested that blame reactions towards other's emotions ignore attributions of control, and instead, reflect negative reactions to the emotion itself. We present a study that adjudicates between these two competing views. Our results support control-based models of blame and criticism. We also identify two cues that people rely on when attributing control over emotions; namely, how well calibrated the emotion is to its eliciting circumstances and the sufferer’s capacity to think rationally. In sum: People will criticize others for their emotional suffering when they judge both that the suffering is irrational, and that the sufferer is sufficiently rational to recognize this fact, and so can choose to stop feeling upset.

Why do people criticize others for suffering irrationally?

Research on contrastive category learning has revealed a robust tendency for learners to develop caricaturized representations (elsewhere: ideals or extreme points) to support successful discriminative classification. These representations are defined by extreme values on some task-relevant dimension and are often indicated as highly representative of their categories. Work in this area has elaborated the task constraints and contexts necessary for these representations to emerge, but little research has scrutinized whether caricatured representations extend beyond a category’s known range of feature values. To these ends, across two experiments, we investigated whether the most representative items for a category can extend beyond the training set. Data from pairwise typicality comparisons following learning suggests that caricatured categories may be supported by representations that extend past the feature range present in training. The findings are better explained by certain representational frameworks (e.g., adaptive reference points, boundaries) than others (e.g., exemplars, clusters).

Extrapolation Under Caricatured Representations

The increased prevalence of “fake news" in recent years makes it important for us to better understand how we decide which information to trust and accept as true. Existing research has identified the important roles of factors such as trust in the source of the information and reading ability. We report on the results of a study on how the style of writing, and specifically the difficulty level of the text providing the information, affects our trust in the information provided. Participants trusted the information more in texts that were more difficult to read, regardless of whether the information presented was correct or incorrect. Regardless of readability, participants trusted paragraphs providing truthful information more than those providing false information. This result has important implications for information on social media platforms, where the source may or may not be readily available and is often not an expert on the topic.

The impact of readability on trust in information

When laypeople decide if a costly intervention is an overreaction or an appropriate response, they likely base those judgments on mental simulation about what could happen, or what would have happened without an intervention. To narrow down from the infinite set of possibilities they could consider, they may engage in a process of sampling. We examine whether judgments of overreaction can be explained by a utility- weighted sampling account from the JDM literature, or a norm- weighted sampling account from the causal judgment literature, both, or neither. Three experiments test whether these judgments are overly influenced by low-risk bad outcomes (utility-weighted sampling), or by what is likely and prescriptively good (norm-weighted sampling). Overall, participants’ judgments indicate that they disregard low-risk bad outcomes, and even when a high-risk outcome is successfully avoided, the intervention is an overreaction. These results favor a norm-weighted sampling account in the specific case of evaluating overreactions.

The influence of the self-perspective in infant theory of mind

Downloads

Next from CogSci 2021

‘Hello! *What your name?’ Children’s evaluations of ungrammatical speakers after live interaction

Similar lecture

Who went fishing? Inferences from social evaluations

Stay up to date with the latest Underline news!

PRESENTATIONS

CONFERENCES

COMPANY

RESOURCES

The influence of the self-perspective in infant theory of mind

.css-70qvj9{display:-webkit-box;display:-webkit-flex;display:-ms-flexbox;display:flex;-webkit-align-items:center;-webkit-box-align:center;-ms-flex-align:center;align-items:center;}Downloads

Next from CogSci 2021

‘Hello! *What your name?’ Children’s evaluations of ungrammatical speakers after live interaction

Similar lecture

Who went fishing? Inferences from social evaluations

Stay up to date with the latest Underline news!

PRESENTATIONS

CONFERENCES

COMPANY

RESOURCES

Downloads