Netherlands

Some have speculated that higher-order cognitive functions repurpose mechanisms that evolved for perception and action. Expanding on these ideas, we explored whether creativity builds on our ability to strategically navigate through space (&#39;Creativity as Strategic Foraging&#39;). We establish a connection between different types of creative thinking—divergent and convergent—and corresponding spatial search strategies. Participants completed tests of both divergent and convergent creativity. Before each creativity trial, they searched a city map for which we manipulated the search pattern: half the participants searched for multiple dispersed locations, the rest converged repeatedly on a single location. Participants who engaged in divergent spatial search exhibited superior divergent thinking but poorer convergent thinking, while the opposite held true for participants who converged repeatedly on a single location. These findings highlight a targeted association between spatial foraging and creativity, contributing to a deeper understanding of the underpinnings and mechanisms of high-level cognitive processes.

**Authors:**

Soran Malaie: University of California, Merced; Michael Spivey: University of California, Merced; Tyler Marghetis: University of California, Merced

CogSci 2024

Different Forms of Creativity Are Rooted in Distinctive Evolutionarily-Ancient Foraging Strategies

### 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.

Some have speculated that higher-order cognitive functions repurpose mechanisms that evolved for perception and action. Expanding on these ideas, we explored whether creativity builds on our ability to strategically navigate through space ('Creativity as Strategic Foraging'). We establish a connection between different types of creative thinking—divergent and convergent—and corresponding spatial search strategies. Participants completed tests of both divergent and convergent creativity. Before each creativity trial, they searched a city map for which we manipulated the search pattern: half the participants searched for multiple dispersed locations, the rest converged repeatedly on a single location. Participants who engaged in divergent spatial search exhibited superior divergent thinking but poorer convergent thinking, while the opposite held true for participants who converged repeatedly on a single location. These findings highlight a targeted association between spatial foraging and creativity, contributing to a deeper understanding of the underpinnings and mechanisms of high-level cognitive processes.

**Authors:**

Soran Malaie: University of California, Merced; Michael Spivey: University of California, Merced; Tyler Marghetis: University of California, Merced

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/). 

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

This study compares creativity test performance in Individual versus Team settings, addressing a gap in research that mostly focuses on individual outcomes. A total of 120 individuals participated in two sessions. The first session involved cognitive assessments, including the Advanced Progressive Matrices (APM), the Creative Reasoning Test (CRT), and the Test for Creative Thinking–Drawing Production (TCT-DP), as well as mood and personality questionnaires. In the second session, participants were assigned to either an Individual or a Team condition (N=3 each), based on and controlling for APM scores. The same assessments, except for the personality questionnaire, were conducted in this second session. In the Team condition, members were encouraged to collaborate in solving the tasks. We tested whether the conditions have a differential effect on the second session performances, particularly on divergent and convergent thinking scores in CRT, and/or on TCT-DP scores and/or on APM scores.

**Authors:**

Zhino Ebrahimi: RPTU University of Kaiserslautern-Landau; Thomas Lachmann: RPTU University of Kaiserslautern-Landau; Saskia Jaarsveld Phd, Dr habil.: Technisc he Universität Kaiserslautern; Kirstin Bergström: University of Kaiserslautern-Landau

Individual Creativity Versus Team Setting: Where Do the Most Creative Ideas Flourish?

Decades of work exploring the development of children’s analogical reasoning illustrates that 3- and 4-year-old children struggle with reasoning by analogy (i.e. glove:hand::sock:___), preferring superficially related “object matches” (:shoe) over “relational matches” (:foot). However, one recent study demonstrated preschoolers’ ability to choose relational matches when a traditional relational-match-to-sample task is embedded in causal scaffolding, framing the target abstract relation as one between beginning and ending states of a causal transformation. Current work aims to discover which factors of causal framing facilitate this boost in early abstract reasoning. In Study 1, we replicate this effect while changing the transformation to involve two objects, showing that preservation of identity is not necessary for analogical reasoning in a causal context. In Study 2, we explore the replicated effect in a case of non-agentive causation, finding that the causal boost is weaker when scaffolding involves a machine vs. an agent.

**Authors:**

Emily Rose Reagan: UC Berkeley; Verity Pinter: UC Berkeley; Mariel K. Goddu: UC Berkeley; Alison Gopnik: University of California at Berkeley

Enhancing Effects of Causal Scaffolding on Preschoolers' Analogical Reasoning Abilities

Numerous investigations of parent-child interaction suggest that higher levels of collaboration between parents and children during free play results in children’s greater engagement with the activity. A concern with these findings is that parents who are less collaborative in setting goals tend to have children who are younger than parents who are more collaborative or hands off. Thus, these children might be less naturally engaged with the activity. The present study assigned parents and 3-4-year-olds (N=82; 44 boys and 38 girls) to one of three conditions, in which parents were instructed to be directive, collaborative, or more hands-off as the dyad learned a novel causal system. Regardless of the assigned condition, children whose parents were actually more collaborative during the interaction played longer with the causal system, suggesting they were more engaged by the activity. These data suggest that the actual nature of the parent-child interaction during a free play activity relates to children’s engagement, but also that parents’ natural interactive with children is not easy to manipulate.

**Authors:**

David M. Sobel: Brown University; Angela Li: Brown University

Parent-Child Interaction and Children’s Engagement with and Learning of a Causal System: A Conversation Card Manipulation

People often display essentialist biases, which can lead them to underestimate within-species variability. This bias is especially pronounced when traits are described as advantageous for survival. However, it is unclear whether this bias is limited to the specified trait or encompasses complex trait interactions. We used Markov Chain Monte Carlo with People (MCMCp) to analyze people’s representations of biological variability, using ladybeetles as a model species. Participants either received contextual information about the benefits of ladybeetle color for survival, or survival-irrelevant information.
Overall, participants held consistent beliefs about ladybeetle features, but those with survival-relevant context produced lighter and larger ladybeetles; this difference was consistent with survey responses. However, we found no significant interaction between MCMCp variability and essentialism scores, given our context manipulation. We discuss potential explanations for these results and highlight advantages of MCMCp for assessing biological variability, particularly when studying the development of essentialist biases.

**Authors:**

Pablo Leon Villagra: Brown University; Olympia N. Mathiaparanam: University of Rochester; Karl Rosengren: University of Rochester; Daphna Buchsbaum: Brown University

How Red Is a Ladybeetle? Examining People's Notions of Biological Variability

People learn new words in narrative contexts. Little is known about the potential influence of emotional valence of the text on word learning. In a pre-registered experiment, we investigated whether emotional narrative context shapes word learning. English adults (N = 76) read 30 novel words embedded in 60 short narratives (20 positive, 20 negative, and 20 neutral valence). Post-tests assessed learning (immediate and 24 hours later) and investigated whether there was a transfer of contextual valence to the novel word. Compared to the neutral context, emotional contexts (both positive and negative) facilitated word form learning in the immediate post-tests, but only negative emotion words were recognized better 24 hours later. Furthermore, the valence of the context was reflected in the word meanings participants generated for each novel word. These findings are discussed with reference to theories of embodied cognition and its implications for supporting the learning of abstract concepts.

**Authors:**

Yuzhen Dong: University of Oxford; Matthew HC Mak: University of Warwick; Robert Hepach: University of Oxford; Kate Nation: University of Oxford

The Influence of Emotional Narrative Context on Word Learning

In our study, we address conflicts between individuals and groups, such as cyberbully on social media, as a challenge related to the distinction between the self and others. To address this issue using technology, we propose the concept of introducing facial synchronization in the virtual realm as a means to manipulate the boundary between oneself and others.
We designed an experiment using Cyberball that simulates an ostracism environment, effectively partitioning the boundary between the self and others. This task was conducted in Virtual Reality (VR), with the agent's facial expressions synchronized with those of the participant.
Our findings indicated a reduction in feelings of alienation within the ostracism environment. This discovery has potential implications for communication media, particularly in enhancing interfaces for individuals who may experience exclusionary behavior on social media.

**Authors:**

Ryunosuke Baba: Shizuoka University; Junya Morita: Shizuoka University

Changes of self-others relation by synchronizing facial expressions

Contrary to common intuition, groups of people recalling information together remember less than the same number of individuals recalling alone (i.e., the collaborative inhibition effect). To understand this effect in a free recall task, we build a computational model of collaborative recall in groups, extended from the Context Maintenance and Retrieval (CMR) model which captures how individuals recall information alone (Polyn, Norman, & Kahana, 2009). We propose that in collaborative recall, one not only uses their previous recall as an internal retrieval cue, but also listens to someone else's recall and uses it as an external retrieval cue. Attending to this cue updates the listener's context to be more similar to the context of someone else's recall. Over an existing dataset of individual and collaborative recall in small and large groups (Gates, Suchow, & Griffiths, 2022), we show that our model successfully captures the difference in memory performance between individual recall and collaborative recall across different group sizes from 2 to 16, as well as additional recall patterns such as recency effects and semantic clustering effects. Our model further shows that the contexts of collaborating individuals converge more than the contexts of individuals who recall alone. We discuss contributions of our modeling results in relation to previous accounts of the collaborative inhibition effect.

**Authors:**

Hemali Angne: Rutgers University - New Brunswick; Charlotte Cornell: Rutgers University--New Brunswick; Qiong Zhang: Rutgers University - New Brunswick

Why Two Heads Together are Worse Than Apart: A Context-Based Account of Collaborative Inhibition in Memory Search

In logical theories of meaning, threshold and prototype models are two distinctive formal approaches. In cognitive science
literature, however, where the two models are operationalized,
there is support for the use of a threshold model in categorization (Schmidt, Goodman, Barner, & Tenenbaum, 2009; Ramotowska, Haaf, Van Maanen, & Szymanik, 2022) as well as support for the prototype model (Douven, 2016),(Douven, Wenmackers, Jraissati, & Decock, 2017), and in many cases the
two models are used interchangeably (Kruschke, 2008). We
test for the case of relative gradable adjectives whether a) there
is a difference between predicted degrees of membership from
the two models when relying on explicit reports of threshold
and prototype values, and b) which of the models better predicts behavioral data from categorization tasks. Results suggest that prototype and threshold models are highly predictive
of behaviour in a categorization task and that the two models
yield similar results with a slight advantage of the threshold
model.

**Authors:**

Tamar Johnson: University of Amsterdam; Alexandra Sarafoglou: University of Amsterdam ; Julia M Haaf: University of Potsdam ; Ingmar Visser: University of Amsterdam; Jakub Szymanik: University of Trento

Comparing the Threshold and Prototype Model for Gradable Adjectives

Distributional models (such as neural network language models) have been successfully used to model a wide range of linguistic semantic behaviors. However, they lack a way to distinctly represent different kinds of semantic relations within a single semantic space. Here, we propose that neural network language models can sensibly be interpreted as representing syntagmatic (co-occurrence) relations using their input-output mappings, and as representing paradigmatic (similarity) relations using the similarity of their internal representations. We tested and found support for this hypothesis on four neural network architectures (SRNs, LSTMs, Word2Vec and GPT-2) using a carefully constructed artificial language corpus. Using this corpus, we show that the models display interesting but understandable differences in their ability to represent these two kinds of relationships. This work demonstrates distributional models can simultaneously learn multiple kinds of relationships, and that systematic investigation of these models can lead to a deeper understanding of how they work.

**Authors:**

Jingfeng Zhang: University of Illinois Urbana Champaign; Jon Willits: University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign

Distributional Language Models and the Representation of Multiple Kinds of Semantic Relations

Action descriptions can include or omit various types of information. In this paper, we are interested in the inclusion of manner in verbs. We use the notion of descriptive verbs, first introduced by Snell-Hornby (1983), and hypothesise that the use of descriptive verbs is reliant on having enough context to determine if the descriptive verb is correct and preferred as opposed to a more general non-descriptive verb. We conduct two online experiments in which participants are asked to indicate their preference for a verb after seeing varying amounts of textual and visual context. Our results show that textual context does not contribute to verb choice. However, we find evidence that videos contain information which creates agreement between participants, suggesting there are objective reasons to choose a descriptive or non-descriptive verb.

**Authors:**

Radina Dobreva: University of Edinburgh; Frank Keller: University of Edinburgh; Alexandra Birch: University of Edinburgh

Premium content

Downloads

Next from CogSci 2024

Individual Creativity Versus Team Setting: Where Do the Most Creative Ideas Flourish?

Similar lecture

The Maze of Creative Thinking Pathways of Traits, States, and Intelligence in Shaping Creativity

Stay up to date with the latest Underline news!

PRESENTATIONS

CONFERENCES

COMPANY

RESOURCES