Pub Date : 2025-07-01Epub Date: 2025-02-27DOI: 10.1037/rev0000541
Minyu Chang, Brendan T Johns, Charles J Brainerd
Previous research suggests that the MINERVA2 model can capture basic Deese/Roediger/McDermott (DRM) false recognition findings with either randomized representations or distributional semantic representations. In the current article, we extended this line of research by showing that MINERVA2 can accommodate not only basic DRM recognition findings but also the effects of various theory-driven manipulations. Importantly, we incorporated two assumptions of fuzzy-trace theory into MINERVA2: the verbatim-gist distinction and hierarchies of gist. To implement the verbatim-gist distinction, we represented local gist traces with distributional semantic vectors and verbatim traces with holographic word-form vectors. With separate representations incorporated, MINERVA2 successfully simulated a wide range of empirical effects in the DRM illusion, as well as remember/know and source judgments. To incorporate hierarchies of gist into the framework, we added an assumption that an item's storage quality depends on its semantic similarity to the preceding item. This accommodated the effect of global gist beyond that of local gist and solved the problem of storage independence in multitrace models of episodic memory. Our findings provided extensive evidence that MINERVA2 is a viable candidate for scalable modeling of the DRM illusion and strengthened the connection between computational modeling and substantive theories of false memory. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA, all rights reserved).
先前的研究表明,MINERVA2模型可以通过随机表示或分布语义表示捕获基本的Deese/Roediger/McDermott (DRM)错误识别结果。在本文中,我们通过展示MINERVA2不仅可以适应基本的DRM识别结果,还可以适应各种理论驱动操作的影响,扩展了这条研究线。重要的是,我们将模糊跟踪理论的两个假设纳入了MINERVA2:逐字-主旨区分和主旨层次。为了实现逐字-主旨区分,我们用分布语义向量表示局部主旨轨迹,用全息词形向量表示逐字轨迹。结合了单独的表示,MINERVA2成功地模拟了DRM错觉中的广泛经验效应,以及记忆/知道和源判断。为了将要点的层次结构合并到框架中,我们添加了一个假设,即项目的存储质量取决于其与前一个项目的语义相似性。这不仅适应了局部线索的影响,还适应了全局线索的影响,解决了多迹情景记忆模型的存储独立性问题。我们的研究结果提供了广泛的证据,证明MINERVA2是DRM错觉可扩展建模的可行候选,并加强了计算建模与虚假记忆实质性理论之间的联系。(PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA,版权所有)。
{"title":"True and false recognition in MINERVA2: Integrating fuzzy-trace theory and computational memory modeling.","authors":"Minyu Chang, Brendan T Johns, Charles J Brainerd","doi":"10.1037/rev0000541","DOIUrl":"10.1037/rev0000541","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Previous research suggests that the MINERVA2 model can capture basic Deese/Roediger/McDermott (DRM) false recognition findings with either randomized representations or distributional semantic representations. In the current article, we extended this line of research by showing that MINERVA2 can accommodate not only basic DRM recognition findings but also the effects of various theory-driven manipulations. Importantly, we incorporated two assumptions of fuzzy-trace theory into MINERVA2: the verbatim-gist distinction and hierarchies of gist. To implement the verbatim-gist distinction, we represented local gist traces with distributional semantic vectors and verbatim traces with holographic word-form vectors. With separate representations incorporated, MINERVA2 successfully simulated a wide range of empirical effects in the DRM illusion, as well as remember/know and source judgments. To incorporate hierarchies of gist into the framework, we added an assumption that an item's storage quality depends on its semantic similarity to the preceding item. This accommodated the effect of global gist beyond that of local gist and solved the problem of storage independence in multitrace models of episodic memory. Our findings provided extensive evidence that MINERVA2 is a viable candidate for scalable modeling of the DRM illusion and strengthened the connection between computational modeling and substantive theories of false memory. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA, all rights reserved).</p>","PeriodicalId":21016,"journal":{"name":"Psychological review","volume":" ","pages":"857-894"},"PeriodicalIF":5.8,"publicationDate":"2025-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143524201","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2025-07-01Epub Date: 2025-01-09DOI: 10.1037/rev0000535
Peter Ulric Tse
Our premodern ancestors had perceptual, motoric, and cognitive functional domains that were modularly encapsulated. Some of these came to interact through a new type of cross-modular binding in our species. This allowed previously domain-dedicated, encapsulated motoric and sensory operators to operate on operands for which they had not evolved. Such operators could at times operate nonvolitionally, while at other times they could be governed volitionally. In particular, motoric operations that derive from the same circuits that compute hand motions for object manipulation could now be retooled for virtual manipulation in a mental workspace in the absence of any physical hand or other effector movements. I hypothesize that the creativity of human imagination and mental models is rooted in premotor simulation of sequential manipulations of objects and symbols in the mental workspace, in analogy with the premotor theory of attention, which argues that attention evolved from "internalized" eye movement circuitry. Overall, operator "disencapsulation" led to a bifurcation of consciousness in humans: a concrete form centered on perception of the body in the physical world and an abstract form focused on explanatory mental models. One of the consequences of these new abilities was the advent of psychotic disorders that do not exist in species possessed solely of the concrete type of consciousness. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA, all rights reserved).
我们的前现代祖先具有模块化封装的感知、运动和认知功能域。其中一些通过一种新型的交叉模块结合在我们的物种中相互作用。这使得以前专用的、封装的运动和感官操作员可以在他们没有进化的操作数上操作。这些操作者有时可以非自愿地操作,而在其他时候,他们可以自愿地管理。尤其值得一提的是,在没有任何实际的手或其他效应器运动的情况下,源自计算手部运动的相同电路的运动操作,现在可以在心理工作空间中进行虚拟操作。我假设,人类想象力和心智模型的创造力根植于对心理工作空间中物体和符号的顺序操作的前运动模拟,这与注意力的前运动理论类似,该理论认为注意力是从“内化”的眼动回路进化而来的。总的来说,操作员的“拆解”导致了人类意识的分叉:一种以物理世界中对身体的感知为中心的具体形式,以及一种以解释心理模型为中心的抽象形式。这些新能力的后果之一是精神病的出现,这种疾病并不存在于只拥有具体类型意识的物种中。(PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA,版权所有)。
{"title":"The disencapsulated mind: A premotor theory of human imagination.","authors":"Peter Ulric Tse","doi":"10.1037/rev0000535","DOIUrl":"10.1037/rev0000535","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Our premodern ancestors had perceptual, motoric, and cognitive functional domains that were modularly encapsulated. Some of these came to interact through a new type of cross-modular binding in our species. This allowed previously domain-dedicated, encapsulated motoric and sensory operators to operate on operands for which they had not evolved. Such operators could at times operate nonvolitionally, while at other times they could be governed volitionally. In particular, motoric operations that derive from the same circuits that compute hand motions for object manipulation could now be retooled for virtual manipulation in a mental workspace in the absence of any physical hand or other effector movements. I hypothesize that the creativity of human imagination and mental models is rooted in premotor simulation of sequential manipulations of objects and symbols in the mental workspace, in analogy with the premotor theory of attention, which argues that attention evolved from \"internalized\" eye movement circuitry. Overall, operator \"disencapsulation\" led to a bifurcation of consciousness in humans: a concrete form centered on perception of the body in the physical world and an abstract form focused on explanatory mental models. One of the consequences of these new abilities was the advent of psychotic disorders that do not exist in species possessed solely of the concrete type of consciousness. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA, all rights reserved).</p>","PeriodicalId":21016,"journal":{"name":"Psychological review","volume":" ","pages":"895-915"},"PeriodicalIF":5.8,"publicationDate":"2025-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142954132","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2025-07-01Epub Date: 2024-09-19DOI: 10.1037/rev0000498
Tyler Malloy, Chris R Sims
The efficient representation of visual information is essential for learning and decision making due to the complexity and uncertainty of the world, as well as inherent constraints on the capacity of cognitive systems. We hypothesize that biological agents learn to efficiently represent visual information in a manner that balances performance across multiple potentially competing objectives. In this article, we examine two such objectives: storing information in a manner that supports accurate recollection (maximizing veridicality) and in a manner that facilitates utility-based decision making (maximizing behavioral utility). That these two objectives may be in conflict is not immediately obvious. Our hypothesis suggests that neither behavior nor representation formation can be fully understood by studying either in isolation, with information processing constraints exerting an overarching influence. Alongside this hypothesis we develop a computational model of representation formation and behavior motivated by recent methods in machine learning and neuroscience. The resulting model explains both the beneficial aspects of human visual learning, such as fast acquisition and high generalization, as well as the biases that result from information constraints. To test this model, we developed two experimental paradigms, in decision making and learning, to evaluate how well the model's predictions match human behavior. A key feature of the proposed model is that it predicts the occurrence of commonly found biases in human decision making, resulting from the desire to form efficient representations of visual information that are useful for behavioral goals in learning and decision making and optimized under an information processing constraint. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA, all rights reserved).
由于世界的复杂性和不确定性,以及认知系统能力的内在限制,视觉信息的有效表征对于学习和决策至关重要。我们假设,生物制剂能学会以一种平衡多个潜在竞争目标的方式有效地表征视觉信息。在本文中,我们将探讨这样两个目标:以支持准确回忆(最大化真实性)和促进基于效用的决策(最大化行为效用)的方式存储信息。这两个目标可能存在冲突,这一点并不明显。我们的假设表明,孤立地研究行为或表征的形成都无法完全理解它们,信息处理的限制因素会对它们产生总体影响。在提出这一假设的同时,我们借鉴机器学习和神经科学的最新方法,建立了表征形成和行为的计算模型。由此产生的模型既能解释人类视觉学习的有利方面,如快速获取和高度泛化,也能解释信息限制导致的偏差。为了检验这一模型,我们开发了决策和学习两个实验范例,以评估模型的预测与人类行为的匹配程度。该模型的一个主要特点是,它能预测人类决策过程中常见偏差的出现,这些偏差是由于人类希望形成有效的视觉信息表征,以实现学习和决策过程中的行为目标,并在信息处理约束条件下进行优化。(PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, 版权所有)。
{"title":"Efficient visual representations for learning and decision making.","authors":"Tyler Malloy, Chris R Sims","doi":"10.1037/rev0000498","DOIUrl":"10.1037/rev0000498","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The efficient representation of visual information is essential for learning and decision making due to the complexity and uncertainty of the world, as well as inherent constraints on the capacity of cognitive systems. We hypothesize that biological agents learn to efficiently represent visual information in a manner that balances performance across multiple potentially competing objectives. In this article, we examine two such objectives: storing information in a manner that supports accurate recollection (maximizing veridicality) and in a manner that facilitates utility-based decision making (maximizing behavioral utility). That these two objectives may be in conflict is not immediately obvious. Our hypothesis suggests that neither behavior nor representation formation can be fully understood by studying either in isolation, with information processing constraints exerting an overarching influence. Alongside this hypothesis we develop a computational model of representation formation and behavior motivated by recent methods in machine learning and neuroscience. The resulting model explains both the beneficial aspects of human visual learning, such as fast acquisition and high generalization, as well as the biases that result from information constraints. To test this model, we developed two experimental paradigms, in decision making and learning, to evaluate how well the model's predictions match human behavior. A key feature of the proposed model is that it predicts the occurrence of commonly found biases in human decision making, resulting from the desire to form efficient representations of visual information that are useful for behavioral goals in learning and decision making and optimized under an information processing constraint. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA, all rights reserved).</p>","PeriodicalId":21016,"journal":{"name":"Psychological review","volume":" ","pages":"759-780"},"PeriodicalIF":5.8,"publicationDate":"2025-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142294109","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2025-07-01Epub Date: 2025-01-06DOI: 10.1037/rev0000533
Casimir J H Ludwig, Erik Stuchlý, Gaurav Malhotra
Cognitive scientists and neuroscientists are increasingly deploying computational models to develop testable theories of psychological functions and make quantitative predictions about cognition, brain activity, and behavior. Computational models are used to explain target phenomena such as experimental effects, individual, and/or population differences. They do so by relating these phenomena to the underlying components of the model that map onto distinct cognitive mechanisms. These components make up a "cognitive state space," where different positions correspond to different cognitive states that produce variation in behavior. We examine the rationale and practice of such model-based inferences and argue that model-based explanations typically miss a key ingredient: They fail to explain why and how agents occupy specific positions in this space. A critical insight is that the agent's position in the state space is not fixed, but that the behavior they produce is the result of a trajectory. Therefore, we discuss (a) the constraints that limit movement in the state space; (b) the reasons for moving around at all (i.e., agents' objectives); and (c) the information and cognitive mechanisms that guide these movements. We review existing research practices, from experimental design to the model-based analysis of data, and through simulations we demonstrate some of the inferential pitfalls that arise when we ignore these dynamics. By bringing the agent's perspective into sharp focus, we stand to gain better and more complete explanations of the variation in cognition and behavior over time, between different environmental conditions, and between different populations or individuals. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA, all rights reserved).
认知科学家和神经科学家越来越多地使用计算模型来开发可测试的心理功能理论,并对认知、大脑活动和行为进行定量预测。计算模型用于解释目标现象,如实验效应、个体和/或群体差异。他们通过将这些现象与映射到不同认知机制的模型的潜在组成部分联系起来来做到这一点。这些成分构成了一个“认知状态空间”,不同的位置对应不同的认知状态,从而产生不同的行为。我们研究了这种基于模型的推理的基本原理和实践,并认为基于模型的解释通常忽略了一个关键因素:它们无法解释代理为什么以及如何占据这个空间的特定位置。一个关键的见解是,智能体在状态空间中的位置不是固定的,但它们产生的行为是轨迹的结果。因此,我们讨论(a)在状态空间中限制运动的约束;(b)移动的原因(即代理商的目标);(c)引导这些动作的信息和认知机制。我们回顾了现有的研究实践,从实验设计到基于模型的数据分析,并通过模拟展示了当我们忽略这些动态时出现的一些推断陷阱。通过将主体的视角聚焦到焦点上,我们可以更好、更完整地解释认知和行为随时间、不同环境条件之间、不同群体或个体之间的变化。(PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA,版权所有)。
{"title":"Grounding computational cognitive models.","authors":"Casimir J H Ludwig, Erik Stuchlý, Gaurav Malhotra","doi":"10.1037/rev0000533","DOIUrl":"10.1037/rev0000533","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Cognitive scientists and neuroscientists are increasingly deploying computational models to develop testable theories of psychological functions and make quantitative predictions about cognition, brain activity, and behavior. Computational models are used to explain target phenomena such as experimental effects, individual, and/or population differences. They do so by relating these phenomena to the underlying components of the model that map onto distinct cognitive mechanisms. These components make up a \"cognitive state space,\" where different positions correspond to different cognitive states that produce variation in behavior. We examine the rationale and practice of such model-based inferences and argue that model-based explanations typically miss a key ingredient: They fail to explain <i>why</i> and <i>how</i> agents occupy specific positions in this space. A critical insight is that the agent's position in the state space is not fixed, but that the behavior they produce is the result of a <i>trajectory</i>. Therefore, we discuss (a) the constraints that limit movement in the state space; (b) the reasons for moving around at all (i.e., agents' objectives); and (c) the information and cognitive mechanisms that guide these movements. We review existing research practices, from experimental design to the model-based analysis of data, and through simulations we demonstrate some of the inferential pitfalls that arise when we ignore these dynamics. By bringing the agent's perspective into sharp focus, we stand to gain better and more complete explanations of the variation in cognition and behavior over time, between different environmental conditions, and between different populations or individuals. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA, all rights reserved).</p>","PeriodicalId":21016,"journal":{"name":"Psychological review","volume":" ","pages":"973-1001"},"PeriodicalIF":5.8,"publicationDate":"2025-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142932103","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2025-07-01Epub Date: 2024-09-19DOI: 10.1037/rev0000489
Jiaqi Huang, Jerome R Busemeyer, Zo Ebelt, Emmanuel M Pothos
One of the most important challenges in decision theory has been how to reconcile the normative expectations from Bayesian theory with the apparent fallacies that are common in probabilistic reasoning. Recently, Bayesian models have been driven by the insight that apparent fallacies are due to sampling errors or biases in estimating (Bayesian) probabilities. An alternative way to explain apparent fallacies is by invoking different probability rules, specifically the probability rules from quantum theory. Arguably, quantum cognitive models offer a more unified explanation for a large body of findings, problematic from a baseline classical perspective. This work addresses two major corresponding theoretical challenges: first, a framework is needed which incorporates both Bayesian and quantum influences, recognizing the fact that there is evidence for both in human behavior. Second, there is empirical evidence which goes beyond any current Bayesian and quantum model. We develop a model for probabilistic reasoning, seamlessly integrating both Bayesian and quantum models of reasoning and augmented by a sequential sampling process, which maps subjective probabilistic estimates to observable responses. Our model, called the Quantum Sequential Sampler, is compared to the currently leading Bayesian model, the Bayesian Sampler (J. Zhu et al., 2020) using a new experiment, producing one of the largest data sets in probabilistic reasoning to this day. The Quantum Sequential Sampler embodies several new components, which we argue offer a more theoretically accurate approach to probabilistic reasoning. Moreover, our empirical tests revealed a new, surprising systematic overestimation of probabilities. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA, all rights reserved).
决策理论中最重要的挑战之一,就是如何协调贝叶斯理论的规范性预期与概率推理中常见的明显谬误。近来,贝叶斯模型受到这样一种观点的推动,即表面谬误是由于抽样误差或估计(贝叶斯)概率时的偏差造成的。另一种解释明显谬误的方法是援引不同的概率规则,特别是量子理论中的概率规则。可以说,量子认知模型为大量从基线经典视角来看存在问题的研究结果提供了更为统一的解释。这项工作解决了两大相应的理论挑战:首先,需要一个同时包含贝叶斯和量子影响的框架,承认人类行为中同时存在这两种影响的证据这一事实。其次,经验证据超越了任何现有的贝叶斯和量子模型。我们开发了一个概率推理模型,无缝整合了贝叶斯推理模型和量子推理模型,并通过顺序采样过程进行增强,将主观概率估计映射到可观察的反应。我们的模型被称为量子顺序采样器(Quantum Sequential Sampler),通过一项新的实验与目前领先的贝叶斯模型--贝叶斯采样器(J. Zhu et al.量子序列采样器包含几个新的组成部分,我们认为它们为概率推理提供了一种理论上更精确的方法。此外,我们的实证测试还发现了一种新的、令人惊讶的系统性概率高估。(PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, 版权所有)。
{"title":"Bridging the gap between subjective probability and probability judgments: The quantum sequential sampler.","authors":"Jiaqi Huang, Jerome R Busemeyer, Zo Ebelt, Emmanuel M Pothos","doi":"10.1037/rev0000489","DOIUrl":"10.1037/rev0000489","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>One of the most important challenges in decision theory has been how to reconcile the normative expectations from Bayesian theory with the apparent fallacies that are common in probabilistic reasoning. Recently, Bayesian models have been driven by the insight that apparent fallacies are due to sampling errors or biases in estimating (Bayesian) probabilities. An alternative way to explain apparent fallacies is by invoking different probability rules, specifically the probability rules from quantum theory. Arguably, quantum cognitive models offer a more unified explanation for a large body of findings, problematic from a baseline classical perspective. This work addresses two major corresponding theoretical challenges: first, a framework is needed which incorporates both Bayesian and quantum influences, recognizing the fact that there is evidence for both in human behavior. Second, there is empirical evidence which goes beyond any current Bayesian and quantum model. We develop a model for probabilistic reasoning, seamlessly integrating both Bayesian and quantum models of reasoning and augmented by a sequential sampling process, which maps subjective probabilistic estimates to observable responses. Our model, called the Quantum Sequential Sampler, is compared to the currently leading Bayesian model, the Bayesian Sampler (J. Zhu et al., 2020) using a new experiment, producing one of the largest data sets in probabilistic reasoning to this day. The Quantum Sequential Sampler embodies several new components, which we argue offer a more theoretically accurate approach to probabilistic reasoning. Moreover, our empirical tests revealed a new, surprising systematic overestimation of probabilities. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA, all rights reserved).</p>","PeriodicalId":21016,"journal":{"name":"Psychological review","volume":" ","pages":"916-955"},"PeriodicalIF":5.8,"publicationDate":"2025-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142294107","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2025-07-01Epub Date: 2025-01-06DOI: 10.1037/rev0000519
Joost de Jong, Aaron R Voelker, Terrence C Stewart, Elkan G Akyürek, Chris Eliasmith, Hedderik van Rijn
Time is a central dimension against which perception, action, and cognition play out. From anticipating when future events will happen to recalling how long ago previous events occurred, humans and animals are exquisitely sensitive to temporal structure. Empirical evidence seems to suggest that estimating time prospectively (i.e., in passing) is qualitatively different from estimating time in retrospect (i.e., after the event is over). Indeed, computational models that attempt to explain both prospective and retrospective timing assume a fundamental separation of their underlying processes. We, in contrast, propose a new neurocomputational model of timing, the unified temporal coding (UTC) model that unifies prospective and retrospective timing through common principles. The UTC model assumes that both stimulus and timing information are represented inside the same rolling window of input history. As a consequence, the UTC model explains a wide range of phenomena typically covered by specialized models, such as conformity to and violations of the scalar property, one-shot learning of intervals, neural responses underlying timing, timing behavior under normal and distracting conditions, common capacity limits in timing and working memory, and how timing depends on attention. Strikingly, by assuming that prospective and retrospective timing rely on the same principles and are implemented in the same neural network, a simple attentional gain mechanism can resolve the apparently paradoxical effect of cognitive load on prospective and retrospective timing. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA, all rights reserved).
时间是感知、行动和认知的中心维度。从预测未来事件发生的时间到回忆之前发生的事件的时间,人类和动物对时间结构非常敏感。经验证据似乎表明,预估时间(即,过去)与预估时间(即,事件结束后)在质量上是不同的。事实上,试图解释前瞻性和回顾性时间的计算模型假设它们的潜在过程是基本分离的。相比之下,我们提出了一种新的时序神经计算模型,即统一时间编码(UTC)模型,该模型通过共同原则统一了前瞻性和回顾性时序。UTC模型假设刺激和定时信息都在输入历史的相同滚动窗口中表示。因此,UTC模型解释了通常由专门模型涵盖的广泛现象,例如符合和违反标量性质,间隔的一次性学习,计时的神经反应,正常和分散条件下的计时行为,计时和工作记忆的共同容量限制,以及计时如何取决于注意力。值得注意的是,假设前瞻和回顾计时依赖于相同的原理,并在相同的神经网络中实现,一个简单的注意获得机制可以解决认知负荷对前瞻和回顾计时明显矛盾的影响。(PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA,版权所有)。
{"title":"A unified neurocomputational model of prospective and retrospective timing.","authors":"Joost de Jong, Aaron R Voelker, Terrence C Stewart, Elkan G Akyürek, Chris Eliasmith, Hedderik van Rijn","doi":"10.1037/rev0000519","DOIUrl":"10.1037/rev0000519","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Time is a central dimension against which perception, action, and cognition play out. From anticipating when future events will happen to recalling how long ago previous events occurred, humans and animals are exquisitely sensitive to temporal structure. Empirical evidence seems to suggest that estimating time prospectively (i.e., in passing) is qualitatively different from estimating time in retrospect (i.e., after the event is over). Indeed, computational models that attempt to explain both prospective and retrospective timing assume a fundamental separation of their underlying processes. We, in contrast, propose a new neurocomputational model of timing, the unified temporal coding (UTC) model that unifies prospective and retrospective timing through common principles. The UTC model assumes that both stimulus and timing information are represented inside the same rolling window of input history. As a consequence, the UTC model explains a wide range of phenomena typically covered by specialized models, such as conformity to and violations of the scalar property, one-shot learning of intervals, neural responses underlying timing, timing behavior under normal and distracting conditions, common capacity limits in timing and working memory, and how timing depends on attention. Strikingly, by assuming that prospective and retrospective timing rely on the same principles and are implemented in the same neural network, a simple attentional gain mechanism can resolve the apparently paradoxical effect of cognitive load on prospective and retrospective timing. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA, all rights reserved).</p>","PeriodicalId":21016,"journal":{"name":"Psychological review","volume":" ","pages":"781-827"},"PeriodicalIF":5.8,"publicationDate":"2025-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142931560","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2025-07-01Epub Date: 2025-02-17DOI: 10.1037/rev0000540
Suaad S Al Hadhrami, Lea M Bartsch, Klaus Oberauer
We examined how elements are integrated into larger units in working memory (WM). Four contrasting conceptual models exist with regard to this question: (a) a unitization model, in which there is a single integrated representation which is retrieved in an all-or-none fashion; (b) a unitization-with-element-failure model, in which a single integrated representation is retrieved as a whole, but access to its elements can still fail individually; (c) a pairwise-binding model, in which elements of a unit are represented separately and are bound together in pairs; (d) a hybrid model that includes an integrated representation as well as pairwise bindings between element representations. We developed four multinomial process tree models to test these theories. In three experiments, participants memorized multiple units which were random combinations of three elements. They were given one element as a cue and prompted to report the other two elements. The model-comparison analysis revealed that the hybrid model provides the best quantitative fit to the data. We conclude that multielement units are represented on two levels, as an integrated unit retrieved in an all-or-none manner, and in addition through pairwise bindings between their elements. Moreover, the assumption that bindings of nonspatial elements are mediated through their shared spatial location-a special case of the pairwise-binding model-was not supported by the data. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA, all rights reserved).
我们研究了工作记忆(WM)中的元素是如何整合成更大的单元的。关于这个问题,存在四种截然不同的概念模型:(a)统一模型,其中有一个单一的集成表示,以全有或全无的方式检索;(b)单元失效统一模型,其中单个集成表示作为一个整体被检索,但对其元素的访问仍然可能单独失效;(c)成对结合模型,其中一个单元的元素分别表示,并成对结合在一起;(d)一个混合模型,它包括一个集成的表示以及元素表示之间的成对绑定。我们开发了四个多项式过程树模型来检验这些理论。在三个实验中,参与者记住了三个元素随机组合的多个单元。给他们一个元素作为提示,并提示他们报告另外两个元素。模型对比分析表明,混合模型对数据的定量拟合效果最好。我们得出结论,多元素单元在两个层次上表示,作为以全有或全无方式检索的集成单元,以及通过它们的元素之间的成对绑定。此外,数据不支持非空间元素的绑定是通过它们共享的空间位置进行中介的假设(成对绑定模型的一个特殊情况)。(PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA,版权所有)。
{"title":"A multinomial model-based analysis of bindings in working memory.","authors":"Suaad S Al Hadhrami, Lea M Bartsch, Klaus Oberauer","doi":"10.1037/rev0000540","DOIUrl":"10.1037/rev0000540","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>We examined how elements are integrated into larger units in working memory (WM). Four contrasting conceptual models exist with regard to this question: (a) a unitization model, in which there is a single integrated representation which is retrieved in an all-or-none fashion; (b) a unitization-with-element-failure model, in which a single integrated representation is retrieved as a whole, but access to its elements can still fail individually; (c) a pairwise-binding model, in which elements of a unit are represented separately and are bound together in pairs; (d) a hybrid model that includes an integrated representation as well as pairwise bindings between element representations. We developed four multinomial process tree models to test these theories. In three experiments, participants memorized multiple units which were random combinations of three elements. They were given one element as a cue and prompted to report the other two elements. The model-comparison analysis revealed that the hybrid model provides the best quantitative fit to the data. We conclude that multielement units are represented on two levels, as an integrated unit retrieved in an all-or-none manner, and in addition through pairwise bindings between their elements. Moreover, the assumption that bindings of nonspatial elements are mediated through their shared spatial location-a special case of the pairwise-binding model-was not supported by the data. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA, all rights reserved).</p>","PeriodicalId":21016,"journal":{"name":"Psychological review","volume":" ","pages":"828-856"},"PeriodicalIF":5.1,"publicationDate":"2025-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143441922","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Tianwei Gong, M Pacer, Thomas L Griffiths, Neil R Bramley
A longstanding focus in the causal learning literature has been on inferring causal relations from contingencies, where these abstract away from time by collating independent instances or by aggregating over regularly demarcated trials. In contrast, individual causal learners encounter events in their daily lives that occur in a continuous temporal flow with no such demarcation. Consequently, the process of learning causal relationships in naturalistic environments is comparatively less understood. In this article, we lay out a rational framework that foregrounds the role of time in causal learning. We work within the Bayesian rational analysis tradition, starting by considering how causal relations induce dependence between events in continuous time and how this can be modeled by stochastic processes from the Poisson-Gamma distribution family. We derive the qualitative signatures of causal influence and the general computations needed to infer structure from temporal patterns. We show that this rational account can parsimoniously explain the human preference for causal models that invoke shorter, more reliable, and more predictable causal influences. Furthermore, we show this provides a unifying explanation for human judgments across a wide variety of tasks in the reanalysis of seven experimental data sets. We anticipate the framework will help researchers better understand the many manifestations of continuous-time causal learning across human cognition and the tasks that probe it, from explicit causal structure induction settings to implicit associative or reinforcement learning settings. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA, all rights reserved).
长期以来,因果学习文献的焦点一直是从偶然事件中推断因果关系,这些偶然事件通过整理独立的实例或通过定期划分的试验汇总来抽象时间。相反,个体因果学习者在日常生活中遇到的事件发生在一个连续的时间流中,没有这样的界限。因此,在自然环境中学习因果关系的过程相对较少被理解。在这篇文章中,我们提出了一个合理的框架,突出了时间在因果学习中的作用。我们在贝叶斯理性分析传统中工作,首先考虑因果关系如何诱导连续时间事件之间的依赖关系,以及如何通过泊松-伽马分布族的随机过程来建模。我们推导出因果影响的定性特征和从时间模式推断结构所需的一般计算。我们表明,这种理性的解释可以简洁地解释人类对因果模型的偏好,这些因果模型调用更短、更可靠、更可预测的因果影响。此外,我们表明,这为重新分析七个实验数据集的各种任务中的人类判断提供了统一的解释。我们预计该框架将帮助研究人员更好地理解人类认知中连续时间因果学习的许多表现形式,以及探究它的任务,从显性因果结构归纳设置到内隐联想或强化学习设置。(PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA,版权所有)。
{"title":"Rational causal induction from events in time.","authors":"Tianwei Gong, M Pacer, Thomas L Griffiths, Neil R Bramley","doi":"10.1037/rev0000570","DOIUrl":"10.1037/rev0000570","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>A longstanding focus in the causal learning literature has been on inferring causal relations from contingencies, where these abstract away from time by collating independent instances or by aggregating over regularly demarcated trials. In contrast, individual causal learners encounter events in their daily lives that occur in a continuous temporal flow with no such demarcation. Consequently, the process of learning causal relationships in naturalistic environments is comparatively less understood. In this article, we lay out a rational framework that foregrounds the role of time in causal learning. We work within the Bayesian rational analysis tradition, starting by considering how causal relations induce dependence between events in continuous time and how this can be modeled by stochastic processes from the Poisson-Gamma distribution family. We derive the qualitative signatures of causal influence and the general computations needed to infer structure from temporal patterns. We show that this rational account can parsimoniously explain the human preference for causal models that invoke shorter, more reliable, and more predictable causal influences. Furthermore, we show this provides a unifying explanation for human judgments across a wide variety of tasks in the reanalysis of seven experimental data sets. We anticipate the framework will help researchers better understand the many manifestations of continuous-time causal learning across human cognition and the tasks that probe it, from explicit causal structure induction settings to implicit associative or reinforcement learning settings. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA, all rights reserved).</p>","PeriodicalId":21016,"journal":{"name":"Psychological review","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":5.8,"publicationDate":"2025-06-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144507975","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Mario Belledonne, Eivinas Butkus, Brian J Scholl, Ilker Yildirim
A key role for attention is to continually focus visual processing to satisfy our goals. How does this work in computational terms? Here we introduce adaptive computation-a new computational mechanism of human attention that bridges the momentary application of perceptual computations with their impact on decision outcomes. Adaptive computation is a dynamic algorithm that rations perceptual computations across objects on-the-fly, enabled by a novel and general formulation of task relevance. We evaluate adaptive computation in a case study of multiple object tracking (MOT)-a paradigmatic example of selection as a dynamic process, where observers track a set of target objects moving amid visually identical distractors. Adaptive computation explains the attentional dynamics of object selection with unprecedented depth. It not only recapitulates several classic features of MOT (e.g., trial-level tracking accuracy and localization error of targets), but also captures properties that have not previously been measured or modeled-including both the subsecond patterns of attentional deployment between objects, and the resulting sense of subjective effort. Critically, this approach captures such data within a framework that is in-principle domain-general, and, unlike past models, without using any MOT-specific heuristic components. Beyond this case study, we also look to the future, discussing how adaptive computation may apply more generally, providing a new type of mechanistic model for the dynamic operation of many forms of visual attention. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA, all rights reserved).
注意力的一个关键作用是持续地集中视觉处理来满足我们的目标。这在计算方面是如何工作的呢?在这里,我们介绍了自适应计算——一种新的人类注意力计算机制,它将感知计算的瞬时应用与其对决策结果的影响联系起来。自适应计算是一种动态算法,它通过一种新的、通用的任务相关性公式,动态地分配跨对象的感知计算。我们在多目标跟踪(MOT)的案例研究中评估了自适应计算——这是一个动态过程选择的典型例子,观察者跟踪一组在视觉上相同的干扰物中移动的目标物体。自适应计算以前所未有的深度解释了对象选择的注意动力学。它不仅概括了MOT的几个经典特征(例如,试验级跟踪精度和目标定位误差),而且还捕获了以前没有被测量或建模的属性——包括物体之间注意力部署的亚秒模式,以及由此产生的主观努力感。关键的是,这种方法在原则上是域通用的框架中捕获这些数据,并且与过去的模型不同,它不使用任何特定于mot的启发式组件。除了这个案例研究之外,我们还展望了未来,讨论了自适应计算如何更广泛地应用,为多种形式的视觉注意的动态操作提供了一种新型的机制模型。(PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA,版权所有)。
{"title":"Adaptive computation as a new mechanism of dynamic human attention.","authors":"Mario Belledonne, Eivinas Butkus, Brian J Scholl, Ilker Yildirim","doi":"10.1037/rev0000572","DOIUrl":"10.1037/rev0000572","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>A key role for attention is to continually focus visual processing to satisfy our goals. How does this work in computational terms? Here we introduce <i>adaptive computation</i>-a new computational mechanism of human attention that bridges the momentary application of perceptual computations with their impact on decision outcomes. Adaptive computation is a dynamic algorithm that rations perceptual computations across objects on-the-fly, enabled by a novel and general formulation of task relevance. We evaluate adaptive computation in a case study of multiple object tracking (MOT)-a paradigmatic example of selection as a dynamic process, where observers track a set of target objects moving amid visually identical distractors. Adaptive computation explains the attentional dynamics of object selection with unprecedented depth. It not only recapitulates several classic features of MOT (e.g., trial-level tracking accuracy and localization error of targets), but also captures properties that have not previously been measured or modeled-including both the subsecond patterns of attentional deployment between objects, and the resulting sense of subjective effort. Critically, this approach captures such data within a framework that is in-principle domain-general, and, unlike past models, without using any MOT-specific heuristic components. Beyond this case study, we also look to the future, discussing how adaptive computation may apply more generally, providing a new type of mechanistic model for the dynamic operation of many forms of visual attention. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA, all rights reserved).</p>","PeriodicalId":21016,"journal":{"name":"Psychological review","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":5.8,"publicationDate":"2025-06-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144507974","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Richard Schweitzer, Mara Doering, Thomas Seel, Jörg Raisch, Martin Rolfs
{"title":"Saccadic omission revisited: What saccade-induced smear looks like.","authors":"Richard Schweitzer, Mara Doering, Thomas Seel, Jörg Raisch, Martin Rolfs","doi":"10.1037/rev0000574","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1037/rev0000574","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":21016,"journal":{"name":"Psychological review","volume":"12 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":5.4,"publicationDate":"2025-06-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144340942","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}