Netherlands

High-frequency words are often assumed to be the most useful words for communication, as they provide the greatest coverage of texts. However, the relationship between text coverage and comprehension may not be straightforward -- some words may provide more information than others. In this study, we explore alternative methods of defining core vocabulary in addition to word frequency (e.g., words that are central hubs in semantic association networks). We report on the results of an empirical test of communicative utility using a text-based guessing game. We show that core words that reflect corpus-based distributional statistics (like frequency or co-occurrence centrality) were less useful for communication than others. This was evident both in terms of the size of the vocabulary that must be known and the proportion of the text that must be covered for successful communication.0

CogSci 2024

Are the most frequent words the most useful? Investigating core vocabulary in reading

Join us for CogSci2022! Our 44th Annual Conference will be centered around the theme of diversity, with an accompanying range of keynotes and invited speakers who themselves highlight the diversity of our field. Our three symposia are Cognition across Diverse Populations, Cognition within Diverse Societies, and Global Challenges for Cognitive Science. The conference is being offered in a fully hybrid environment for onsite and online attendees.
 
 [**The Program at a Glance can be found here**](https://cognitivesciencesociety.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/07/Cogsci-2022-PAAG-Detailed-July-12final-1.pdf)
 [**The Detailed Program can be found here**](https://cognitivesciencesociety.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/08/DeArmond-CogSci2022-program-v113-final.pdf)

This conference requires a registration to attend. Please use the link below to secure your ticket. The website will be available to all registered attendees on July 25th. 

[Register to Attend](https://cognitivesciencesociety.org/registration/)

Registration Is Required

CogSci 2022

The 44th Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society highlighted research on the theme Cognitive Diversity in addition to the full breadth and diversity of research topics offered by the society’s membership. 





technical paper

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** 
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** 
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) 
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) 
1415: [Invited Symposium: Dynamics between minds and the environment](https://underline.io/events/465/sessions?eventSessionId=18016&searchGroup=lecture) 
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) 

**Friday, July 26** 
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) 
1030: [Rumelhart Symposium: Childhood as exploration](https://underline.io/events/465/sessions/18038/lecture/100346-childhood-as-exploration) 
1415: [Elman Prize Symposium](https://underline.io/events/465/sessions?eventSessionId=18053&searchGroup=lecture) 
1600: [Invited Symposium: Dynamics between minds](https://underline.io/events/465/sessions?eventSessionId=18065&searchGroup=lecture) 
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) 

**Saturday, July 27** 
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) 
1000: [Glushko Talks](https://underline.io/events/465/sessions?eventSessionId=18086&searchGroup=lecture) 
1500: [Invited Symposium: Dynamics within minds](https://underline.io/events/465/sessions?eventSessionId=18100&searchGroup=lecture) 


#### **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** 
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** 
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.

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.

What factors contribute to the growth of children’s early vocabulary? One method for exploring this question is investigating predictors (e.g., frequency) that differentiate words learnt earlier from those learnt later. A more comprehensive account requires the examination of multiple language families and multiple levels of linguistic representation (e.g., phonological, morphosyntactic, semantic). Here, we studied 10 predictors of word ages of acquisition across 27 languages and dialects. We found that words that were more frequent, concrete, and associated with babies were learnt earlier, whereas words that had greater length in phonemes and mean length of utterance were learnt later. There was no reliable effect of other morphosyntactic predictors, or of phonological neighbourhood. We found evidence of a tradeoff between a language’s morphological complexity and the effect of syntactic complexity for predicates, supporting the competition model. Predictor coefficients revealed broad consistency across all languages, along with variability that reflected language family classifications.0

Predicting ages of acquisition for children's early vocabulary across 27 languages and dialects

Dual language learners (DLLs) constitute a large portion of the population, but relatively little is known about the best ways in which to assess their vocabulary knowledge. Past research has used both conceptual vocabulary knowledge, assessing whether a child knows a word in either language, as well as total vocabulary knowledge, assessing what words a child knows in each language separately. The present work uses neural networks to predict specific word learning for individual Cantonese-English DLLs. As its input, The model utilizes word2vec embeddings that either represent children’s’ conceptual word knowledge or total word knowledge. We find that using total word knowledge results in higher predictive accuracy, suggesting that knowing what specific words DLLs know in each of their languages provides the most accurate picture of DLLs’ vocabulary knowledge. The present work has many implications for both identification of at-risk individuals and the creation of learning materials for DLL populations.0

How Should We Represent Bilingual Vocabulary Knowledge?

Whereas principles of communicative efficiency and legal doctrine dictate that laws be comprehensible to the common world, empirical evidence suggests legal documents are largely incomprehensible to lawyers and laypeople alike. Here, a corpus analysis (n=59
million words) first replicated and extended prior work revealing laws to contain strikingly higher rates of complex syntactic structures relative to six baseline genres of English.

Next, two pre-registered text generation experiments (n=280) tested two leading hypotheses regarding how these complex structures enter into legal documents in the first place. In line with the \textit{magic spell hypothesis}, we found people tasked with writing official laws wrote in a more convoluted manner than when tasked with writing unofficial legal texts of equivalent conceptual complexity. Contrary to the \textit{copy-and-edit hypothesis}, we did not find evidence that people editing a legal document wrote in a more convoluted manner than when writing the same document from scratch.

From a cognitive perspective, these results suggest law to be a rare exception to the general tendency in human language towards communicative efficiency. In particular, these findings indicate law's complexity to be derived from its performativity, whereby low-frequency structures may be inserted to signal law’s authoritative, world-state-altering nature, at the cost of increased processing demands on readers. From a law and policy perspective, these results suggest that the tension between the ubiquity and impenetrability of the law is not an inherent one, and that laws can be simplified without a loss or distortion of communicative content.0

Even Laypeople Use Legalese

Science can be viewed as a collective, epistemic endeavor. However, a variety of factors- such as the publish-or-perish culture, institutional incentives, and publishers who favor novel and positive findings- may challenge the ability of science to accurately aggregate information about the world. Evidence of the shortcomings in the current structure of science can be seen in the replication crisis that faces psychology and other disciplines. We analyze scientific publishing through the lens of cultural evolution, framing the scientific process as a multi-generational interplay between scientists and publishers in a multi-armed bandit setting. We examine the dynamics of this model through simulations, exploring the effect that different publication policies have on the accuracy of the published scientific record. Our findings highlight the need for replications and caution against behaviors that prioritize factors uncorrelated with result accuracy.0

Publish or Perish: Simulating the Impact of Publication Policies on Science

Understanding referring expression generation has long been of interest to psycholinguistics, pragmatics, and sociolinguistics. Experimental data in the former two has shown that referring expression generation is modulated by both pragmatic and cognitive considerations, and the latter suggests that referring expressions have social meaning beyond their literal referential utility. This project integrates these three accounts by extending Burnett (2017)'s socially-enriched implementation of the Rational Speech Act (RSA) framework to account for variation in referring expressions used to denote transgender women in two politically opposed media corpora. Our findings highlight the utility of the RSA framework in explaining socially-modulated variation while also accounting for pragmatic and cognitive considerations. Finally, this paper contributes to growing literatures that address the relationship between (alt-)right ideologies about gender and language by highlighting the use of bioessentialist language such as 'biological male' in the propagation of anti-trans rhetoric in the United States.0

Biological Males’ and ‘Trans(gender) Women’: Social Considerations in the Production of Referring Expressions

In spoken languages, new information is often expressed with a longer duration than given information. We investigated whether signers use duration to mark information status. Fifty deaf Chinese Sign Language (CSL) signers retold a cartoon clip, and we examined how they tracked references. The results showed that CSL signers mostly used nominals, classifiers and constructed actions, but rarely used any pointing or zero anaphora. When focusing on nominals, newly introduced references had a longer duration than the maintained and re-introduced ones, while the durations of maintained and re-introduced nominals did not differ. Additionally, there was a gradient decrease in sign duration over the first three mentions followed by an increase for the fourth and fifth mentions. Furthermore, between two nominal mentions, the more non-nominal referring there were, the shorter the duration of the current nominal mention. Thus, CSL signers vary the duration of nominals to indicate the degree of accessibility.0

Long absent, NOT soon forgotten: Prosodic marking of information status in Chinese Sign Language

Studies of reinforcement learning in humans and animals have demonstrated a preference for options that yielded relatively better outcomes in the past, even when those options are associated with lower absolute reward. The present study tested whether large language models would exhibit a similar bias. We had gpt-4-1106-preview (GPT-4 Turbo) and Llama-2-70B make repeated choices between pairs of options with the goal of maximizing payoffs. A complete record of previous outcomes was included in each prompt. Both models exhibited relative value decision biases similar to those observed in humans and animals. Making relative comparisons among outcomes more explicit magnified the bias, whereas prompting the models to estimate expected outcomes caused the bias to disappear. These results have implications for the potential mechanisms that contribute to context-dependent choice in human agents.0

Relative Value Biases in Large Language Models

Simulating sampling algorithms with people has proven a useful method for efficiently probing and understanding their mental representations. We propose that the same methods can be used to study the representations of Large Language Models (LLMs). While one can always directly prompt either humans or LLMs to disclose their mental representations introspectively, we show that increased efficiency can be achieved by using LLMs as elements of a sampling algorithm. We explore the extent to which we recover human-like representations when LLMs are interrogated with Direct Sampling and Markov chain Monte Carlo (MCMC). We found a significant increase in efficiency and performance using adaptive sampling algorithms based on MCMC. We also highlight the potential of our method to yield a more general method of conducting Bayesian inference with LLMs.0

Recovering Mental Representations from Large Language Models with Markov Chain Monte Carlo

The Abstraction Reasoning Corpus (ARC) is a visual analogical reasoning test designed for humans and machines (Chollet, 2019). We compared human and large language model (LLM) performance on a new child-friendly set of ARC items. Results show that both children and adults outperform most LLMs on these tasks. Error analysis revealed a similar "fallback" solution strategy in LLMs and young children, where part of the analogy is simply copied. In addition, we found two other error types, one based on seemingly grasping key concepts (e.g., Inside-Outside) and the other based on simple combinations of analogy input matrices. On the whole, "concept" errors were more common in humans, and "matrix" errors were more common in LLMs. This study sheds new light on LLM reasoning ability and the extent to which we can use error analyses and comparisons with human development to understand how LLMs solve visual analogies.0

Do large language models solve ARC visual analogies like people do?

Transformer large language models (LLMs) perform exceptionally well across a variety of linguistic tasks. These models represent relationships between words in a sentence via “attention heads”, which assign weights between different words. Some attention heads automatically learn to “specialize” in identifying particular syntactic dependencies. Are syntactic computations in such heads encapsulated from non-syntactic information? Or are they penetrable to external information, like the human mind where information sources such as semantics influence parsing from the earliest moments? Here, we tested whether syntax-specialized attention heads in two LLMs (BERT, GPT-2) are modulated by the semantic plausibility of their preferred dependency. In 6 out of 7 cases, we found that implausible sentences reduce attention between words constituting a head’s preferred dependency. Therefore, even in heads that are best candidates for syntactic encapsulation, syntax is penetrable to semantics. These data are broadly consistent with the integration of syntax and semantics in human minds.0

Premium content

Downloads

Next from CogSci 2024

Predicting ages of acquisition for children's early vocabulary across 27 languages and dialects

Similar lecture

Core words in semantic representation

Stay up to date with the latest Underline news!

PRESENTATIONS

CONFERENCES

COMPANY

RESOURCES