Header logo is


2020


A Gamified App that Helps People Overcome Self-Limiting Beliefs by Promoting Metacognition
A Gamified App that Helps People Overcome Self-Limiting Beliefs by Promoting Metacognition

Amo, V., Lieder, F.

SIG 8 Meets SIG 16, September 2020 (conference) Accepted

Abstract
Previous research has shown that approaching learning with a growth mindset is key for maintaining motivation and overcoming setbacks. Mindsets are systems of beliefs that people hold to be true. They influence a person's attitudes, thoughts, and emotions when they learn something new or encounter challenges. In clinical psychology, metareasoning (reflecting on one's mental processes) and meta-awareness (recognizing thoughts as mental events instead of equating them to reality) have proven effective for overcoming maladaptive thinking styles. Hence, they are potentially an effective method for overcoming self-limiting beliefs in other domains as well. However, the potential of integrating assisted metacognition into mindset interventions has not been explored yet. Here, we propose that guiding and training people on how to leverage metareasoning and meta-awareness for overcoming self-limiting beliefs can significantly enhance the effectiveness of mindset interventions. To test this hypothesis, we develop a gamified mobile application that guides and trains people to use metacognitive strategies based on Cognitive Restructuring (CR) and Acceptance Commitment Therapy (ACT) techniques. The application helps users to identify and overcome self-limiting beliefs by working with aversive emotions when they are triggered by fixed mindsets in real-life situations. Our app aims to help people sustain their motivation to learn when they face inner obstacles (e.g. anxiety, frustration, and demotivation). We expect the application to be an effective tool for helping people better understand and develop the metacognitive skills of emotion regulation and self-regulation that are needed to overcome self-limiting beliefs and develop growth mindsets.

re

A gamified app that helps people overcome self-limiting beliefs by promoting metacognition [BibTex]


no image
How to navigate everyday distractions: Leveraging optimal feedback to train attention control

Wirzberger, M., Lado, A., Eckerstorfer, L., Oreshnikov, I., Passy, J., Stock, A., Shenhav, A., Lieder, F.

Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society, July 2020 (conference) Accepted

Abstract
To stay focused on their chosen tasks, people have to inhibit distractions. The underlying attention control skills can improve through reinforcement learning, which can be accelerated by giving feedback. We applied the theory of metacognitive reinforcement learning to develop a training app that gives people optimal feedback on their attention control while they are working or studying. In an eight-day field experiment with 99 participants, we investigated the effect of this training on people's productivity, sustained attention, and self-control. Compared to a control condition without feedback, we found that participants receiving optimal feedback learned to focus increasingly better (f = .08, p < .01) and achieved higher productivity scores (f = .19, p < .01) during the training. In addition, they evaluated their productivity more accurately (r = .12, p < .01). However, due to asymmetric attrition problems, these findings need to be taken with a grain of salt.

re sf

How to navigate everyday distractions: Leveraging optimal feedback to train attention control DOI Project Page [BibTex]


no image
Measuring the Costs of Planning

Felso, V., Jain, Y. R., Lieder, F.

CogSci 2020, July 2020 (poster) Accepted

Abstract
Which information is worth considering depends on how much effort it would take to acquire and process it. From this perspective people’s tendency to neglect considering the long-term consequences of their actions (present bias) might reflect that looking further into the future becomes increasingly more effortful. In this work, we introduce and validate the use of Bayesian Inverse Reinforcement Learning (BIRL) for measuring individual differences in the subjective costs of planning. We extend the resource-rational model of human planning introduced by Callaway, Lieder, et al. (2018) by parameterizing the cost of planning. Using BIRL, we show that increased subjective cost for considering future outcomes may be associated with both the present bias and acting without planning. Our results highlight testing the causal effects of the cost of planning on both present bias and mental effort avoidance as a promising direction for future work.

re

[BibTex]

[BibTex]


no image
Leveraging Machine Learning to Automatically Derive Robust Planning Strategies from Biased Models of the Environment

Kemtur, A., Jain, Y. R., Mehta, A., Callaway, F., Consul, S., Stojcheski, J., Lieder, F.

CogSci 2020, July 2020, Anirudha Kemtur and Yash Raj Jain contributed equally to this publication. (conference)

Abstract
Teaching clever heuristics is a promising approach to improve decision-making. We can leverage machine learning to discover clever strategies automatically. Current methods require an accurate model of the decision problems people face in real life. But most models are misspecified because of limited information and cognitive biases. To address this problem we develop strategy discovery methods that are robust to model misspecification. Robustness is achieved by model-ing model-misspecification and handling uncertainty about the real-world according to Bayesian inference. We translate our methods into an intelligent tutor that automatically discovers and teaches robust planning strategies. Our robust cognitive tutor significantly improved human decision-making when the model was so biased that conventional cognitive tutors were no longer effective. These findings highlight that our robust strategy discovery methods are a significant step towards leveraging artificial intelligence to improve human decision-making in the real world.

re

Project Page [BibTex]

Project Page [BibTex]


no image
Automatic Discovery of Interpretable Planning Strategies

Skirzyński, J., Becker, F., Lieder, F.

May 2020 (article) Submitted

Abstract
When making decisions, people often overlook critical information or are overly swayed by irrelevant information. A common approach to mitigate these biases is to provide decisionmakers, especially professionals such as medical doctors, with decision aids, such as decision trees and flowcharts. Designing effective decision aids is a difficult problem. We propose that recently developed reinforcement learning methods for discovering clever heuristics for good decision-making can be partially leveraged to assist human experts in this design process. One of the biggest remaining obstacles to leveraging the aforementioned methods for improving human decision-making is that the policies they learn are opaque to people. To solve this problem, we introduce AI-Interpret: a general method for transforming idiosyncratic policies into simple and interpretable descriptions. Our algorithm combines recent advances in imitation learning and program induction with a new clustering method for identifying a large subset of demonstrations that can be accurately described by a simple, high-performing decision rule. We evaluate our new AI-Interpret algorithm and employ it to translate information-acquisition policies discovered through metalevel reinforcement learning. The results of three large behavioral experiments showed that the provision of decision rules as flowcharts significantly improved people’s planning strategies and decisions across three different classes of sequential decision problems. Furthermore, a series of ablation studies confirmed that our AI-Interpret algorithm was critical to the discovery of interpretable decision rules and that it is ready to be applied to other reinforcement learning problems. We conclude that the methods and findings presented in this article are an important step towards leveraging automatic strategy discovery to improve human decision-making.

re

Automatic Discovery of Interpretable Planning Strategies The code for our algorithm and the experiments is available [BibTex]


no image
Advancing Rational Analysis to the Algorithmic Level

Lieder, F., Griffiths, T. L.

Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 43, E27, March 2020 (article)

Abstract
The commentaries raised questions about normativity, human rationality, cognitive architectures, cognitive constraints, and the scope or resource rational analysis (RRA). We respond to these questions and clarify that RRA is a methodological advance that extends the scope of rational modeling to understanding cognitive processes, why they differ between people, why they change over time, and how they could be improved.

re

Advancing rational analysis to the algorithmic level DOI [BibTex]

Advancing rational analysis to the algorithmic level DOI [BibTex]


no image
Learning to Overexert Cognitive Control in a Stroop Task

Bustamante, L., Lieder, F., Musslick, S., Shenhav, A., Cohen, J.

Febuary 2020, Laura Bustamante and Falk Lieder contributed equally to this publication. (article) In revision

Abstract
How do people learn when to allocate how much cognitive control to which task? According to the Learned Value of Control (LVOC) model, people learn to predict the value of alternative control allocations from features of a given situation. This suggests that people may generalize the value of control learned in one situation to other situations with shared features, even when the demands for cognitive control are different. This makes the intriguing prediction that what a person learned in one setting could, under some circumstances, cause them to misestimate the need for, and potentially over-exert control in another setting, even if this harms their performance. To test this prediction, we had participants perform a novel variant of the Stroop task in which, on each trial, they could choose to either name the color (more control-demanding) or read the word (more automatic). However only one of these tasks was rewarded, it changed from trial to trial, and could be predicted by one or more of the stimulus features (the color and/or the word). Participants first learned colors that predicted the rewarded task. Then they learned words that predicted the rewarded task. In the third part of the experiment, we tested how these learned feature associations transferred to novel stimuli with some overlapping features. The stimulus-task-reward associations were designed so that for certain combinations of stimuli the transfer of learned feature associations would incorrectly predict that more highly rewarded task would be color naming, which would require the exertion of control, even though the actually rewarded task was word reading and therefore did not require the engagement of control. Our results demonstrated that participants over-exerted control for these stimuli, providing support for the feature-based learning mechanism described by the LVOC model.

re

Learning to Overexert Cognitive Control in a Stroop Task DOI [BibTex]

Learning to Overexert Cognitive Control in a Stroop Task DOI [BibTex]


Toward a Formal Theory of Proactivity
Toward a Formal Theory of Proactivity

Lieder, F., Iwama, G.

January 2020 (article) Submitted

Abstract
Beyond merely reacting to their environment and impulses, people have the remarkable capacity to proactively set and pursue their own goals. But the extent to which they leverage this capacity varies widely across people and situations. The goal of this article is to make the mechanisms and variability of proactivity more amenable to rigorous experiments and computational modeling. We proceed in three steps. First, we develop and validate a mathematically precise behavioral measure of proactivity and reactivity that can be applied across a wide range of experimental paradigms. Second, we propose a formal definition of proactivity and reactivity, and develop a computational model of proactivity in the AX Continuous Performance Task (AX-CPT). Third, we develop and test a computational-level theory of meta-control over proactivity in the AX-CPT that identifies three distinct meta-decision-making problems: intention setting, resolving response conflict between intentions and automaticity, and deciding whether to recall context and intentions into working memory. People's response frequencies in the AX-CPT were remarkably well captured by a mixture between the predictions of our models of proactive and reactive control. Empirical data from an experiment varying the incentives and contextual load of an AX-CPT confirmed the predictions of our meta-control model of individual differences in proactivity. Our results suggest that proactivity can be understood in terms of computational models of meta-control. Our model makes additional empirically testable predictions. Future work will extend our models from proactive control in the AX-CPT to proactive goal creation and goal pursuit in the real world.

re

Toward a formal theory of proactivity DOI Project Page [BibTex]


no image
ACTrain: Ein KI-basiertes Aufmerksamkeitstraining für die Wissensarbeit [ACTrain: An AI-based attention training for knowledge work]

Wirzberger, M., Oreshnikov, I., Passy, J., Lado, A., Shenhav, A., Lieder, F.

66th Spring Conference of the German Ergonomics Society, 2020 (conference)

Abstract
Unser digitales Zeitalter lebt von Informationen und stellt unsere begrenzte Verarbeitungskapazität damit täglich auf die Probe. Gerade in der Wissensarbeit haben ständige Ablenkungen erhebliche Leistungseinbußen zur Folge. Unsere intelligente Anwendung ACTrain setzt genau an dieser Stelle an und verwandelt Computertätigkeiten in eine Trainingshalle für den Geist. Feedback auf Basis maschineller Lernverfahren zeigt anschaulich den Wert auf, sich nicht von einer selbst gewählten Aufgabe ablenken zu lassen. Diese metakognitive Einsicht soll zum Durchhalten motivieren und das zugrunde liegende Fertigkeitsniveau der Aufmerksamkeitskontrolle stärken. In laufenden Feldexperimenten untersuchen wir die Frage, ob das Training mit diesem optimalen Feedback die Aufmerksamkeits- und Selbstkontrollfertigkeiten im Vergleich zu einer Kontrollgruppe ohne Feedback verbessern kann.

re sf

link (url) Project Page [BibTex]

2019


Life Improvement Science: A Manifesto
Life Improvement Science: A Manifesto

Lieder, F.

December 2019 (article) In revision

Abstract
Rapid technological advances present unprecedented opportunities for helping people thrive. This manifesto presents a road map for establishing a solid scientific foundation upon which those opportunities can be realized. It highlights fundamental open questions about the cognitive underpinnings of effective living and how they can be improved, supported, and augmented. These questions are at the core of my proposal for a new transdisciplinary research area called life improvement science. Recent advances have made these questions amenable to scientific rigor, and emerging approaches are paving the way towards practical strategies, clever interventions, and (intelligent) apps for empowering people to reach unprecedented levels of personal effectiveness and wellbeing.

re

Life improvement science: a manifesto DOI [BibTex]


How do people learn how to plan?
How do people learn how to plan?

Jain, Y. R., Gupta, S., Rakesh, V., Dayan, P., Callaway, F., Lieder, F.

Conference on Cognitive Computational Neuroscience, September 2019 (conference)

Abstract
How does the brain learn how to plan? We reverse-engineer people's underlying learning mechanisms by combining rational process models of cognitive plasticity with recently developed empirical methods that allow us to trace the temporal evolution of people's planning strategies. We find that our Learned Value of Computation model (LVOC) accurately captures people's average learning curve. However, there were also substantial individual differences in metacognitive learning that are best understood in terms of multiple different learning mechanisms-including strategy selection learning. Furthermore, we observed that LVOC could not fully capture people's ability to adaptively decide when to stop planning. We successfully extended the LVOC model to address these discrepancies. Our models broadly capture people's ability to improve their decision mechanisms and represent a significant step towards reverse-engineering how the brain learns increasingly effective cognitive strategies through its interaction with the environment.

re

How do people learn to plan? How do people learn to plan? [BibTex]

How do people learn to plan? How do people learn to plan? [BibTex]


no image
Testing Computational Models of Goal Pursuit

Mohnert, F., Tosic, M., Lieder, F.

CCN2019, September 2019 (conference)

Abstract
Goals are essential to human cognition and behavior. But how do we pursue them? To address this question, we model how capacity limits on planning and attention shape the computational mechanisms of human goal pursuit. We test the predictions of a simple model based on previous theories in a behavioral experiment. The results show that to fully capture how people pursue their goals it is critical to account for people’s limited attention in addition to their limited planning. Our findings elucidate the cognitive constraints that shape human goal pursuit and point to an improved model of human goal pursuit that can reliably predict which goals a person will achieve and which goals they will struggle to pursue effectively.

re

link (url) DOI Project Page [BibTex]


Cognitive Prostheses for Goal Achievement
Cognitive Prostheses for Goal Achievement

Lieder, F., Chen, O. X., Krueger, P. M., Griffiths, T. L.

Nature Human Behavior, 3, August 2019 (article)

Abstract
Procrastination and impulsivity take a significant toll on people’s lives and the economy at large. Both can result from the misalignment of an action's proximal rewards with its long-term value. Therefore, aligning immediate reward with long-term value could be a way to help people overcome motivational barriers and make better decisions. Previous research has shown that game elements, such as points, levels, and badges, can be used to motivate people and nudge their decisions on serious matters. Here, we develop a new approach to decision support that leveragesartificial intelligence and game elements to restructure challenging sequential decision problems in such a way that it becomes easier for people to take the right course of action. A series of four increasingly more realistic experiments suggests that this approach can enable people to make better decisions faster, procrastinate less, complete their work on time, and waste less time on unimportant tasks. These findings suggest that our method is a promising step towards developing cognitive prostheses that help people achieve their goals by enhancing their motivation and decision-making in everyday life.

re

DOI [BibTex]

DOI [BibTex]


no image
Measuring How People Learn How to Plan

Jain, Y. R., Callaway, F., Lieder, F.

Proceedings 41st Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society, pages: 1956-1962, CogSci2019, 41st Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society, July 2019 (conference)

Abstract
The human mind has an unparalleled ability to acquire complex cognitive skills, discover new strategies, and refine its ways of thinking and decision-making; these phenomena are collectively known as cognitive plasticity. One important manifestation of cognitive plasticity is learning to make better–more far-sighted–decisions via planning. A serious obstacle to studying how people learn how to plan is that cognitive plasticity is even more difficult to observe than cognitive strategies are. To address this problem, we develop a computational microscope for measuring cognitive plasticity and validate it on simulated and empirical data. Our approach employs a process tracing paradigm recording signatures of human planning and how they change over time. We then invert a generative model of the recorded changes to infer the underlying cognitive plasticity. Our computational microscope measures cognitive plasticity significantly more accurately than simpler approaches, and it correctly detected the effect of an external manipulation known to promote cognitive plasticity. We illustrate how computational microscopes can be used to gain new insights into the time course of metacognitive learning and to test theories of cognitive development and hypotheses about the nature of cognitive plasticity. Future work will leverage our computational microscope to reverse-engineer the learning mechanisms enabling people to acquire complex cognitive skills such as planning and problem solving.

re

link (url) Project Page [BibTex]

link (url) Project Page [BibTex]


no image
Extending Rationality

Pothos, E. M., Busemeyer, J. R., Pleskac, T., Yearsley, J. M., Tenenbaum, J. B., Goodman, N. D., Tessler, M. H., Griffiths, T. L., Lieder, F., Hertwig, R., Pachur, T., Leuker, C., Shiffrin, R. M.

Proceedings of the 41st Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society, pages: 39-40, CogSci 2019, July 2019 (conference)

re

Proceedings of the 41st Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society [BibTex]

Proceedings of the 41st Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society [BibTex]


How should we incentivize learning? An optimal feedback mechanism for educational games and online courses
How should we incentivize learning? An optimal feedback mechanism for educational games and online courses

Xu, L., Wirzberger, M., Lieder, F.

41st Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society, July 2019 (conference)

Abstract
Online courses offer much-needed opportunities for lifelong self-directed learning, but people rarely follow through on their noble intentions to complete them. To increase student retention educational software often uses game elements to motivate students to engage in and persist in learning activities. However, gamification only works when it is done properly, and there is currently no principled method that educational software could use to achieve this. We develop a principled feedback mechanism for encouraging good study choices and persistence in self-directed learning environments. Rather than giving performance feedback, our method rewards the learner's efforts with optimal brain points that convey the value of practice. To derive these optimal brain points, we applied the theory of optimal gamification to a mathematical model of skill acquisition. In contrast to hand-designed incentive structures, optimal brain points are constructed in such a way that the incentive system cannot be gamed. Evaluating our method in a behavioral experiment, we find that optimal brain points significantly increased the proportion of participants who instead of exploiting an inefficient skill they already knew-attempted to learn a difficult but more efficient skill, persisted through failure, and succeeded to master the new skill. Our method provides a principled approach to designing incentive structures and feedback mechanisms for educational games and online courses. We are optimistic that optimal brain points will prove useful for increasing student retention and helping people overcome the motivational obstacles that stand in the way of self-directed lifelong learning.

re

link (url) Project Page [BibTex]


no image
Measuring How People Learn How to Plan

Jain, Y. R., Callaway, F., Lieder, F.

RLDM 2019, July 2019 (conference)

re

[BibTex]

[BibTex]


no image
What’s in the Adaptive Toolbox and How Do People Choose From It? Rational Models of Strategy Selection in Risky Choice

Mohnert, F., Pachur, T., Lieder, F.

41st Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society, July 2019 (conference)

Abstract
Although process data indicates that people often rely on various (often heuristic) strategies to choose between risky options, our models of heuristics cannot predict people's choices very accurately. To address this challenge, it has been proposed that people adaptively choose from a toolbox of simple strategies. But which strategies are contained in this toolbox? And how do people decide when to use which decision strategy? Here, we develop a model according to which each person selects decisions strategies rationally from their personal toolbox; our model allows one to infer which strategies are contained in the cognitive toolbox of an individual decision-maker and specifies when she will use which strategy. Using cross-validation on an empirical data set, we find that this rational model of strategy selection from a personal adaptive toolbox predicts people's choices better than any single strategy (even when it is allowed to vary across participants) and better than previously proposed toolbox models. Our model comparisons show that both inferring the toolbox and rational strategy selection are critical for accurately predicting people's risky choices. Furthermore, our model-based data analysis reveals considerable individual differences in the set of strategies people are equipped with and how they choose among them; these individual differences could partly explain why some people make better choices than others. These findings represent an important step towards a complete formalization of the notion that people select their cognitive strategies from a personal adaptive toolbox.

re

link (url) [BibTex]


no image
A Cognitive Tutor for Helping People Overcome Present Bias

Lieder, F., Callaway, F., Jain, Y. R., Krueger, P. M., Das, P., Gul, S., Griffiths, T. L.

RLDM 2019, July 2019, Falk Lieder and Frederick Callaway contributed equally to this publication. (conference)

Abstract
People's reliance on suboptimal heuristics gives rise to a plethora of cognitive biases in decision-making including the present bias, which denotes people's tendency to be overly swayed by an action's immediate costs/benefits rather than its more important long-term consequences. One approach to helping people overcome such biases is to teach them better decision strategies. But which strategies should we teach them? And how can we teach them effectively? Here, we leverage an automatic method for discovering rational heuristics and insights into how people acquire cognitive skills to develop an intelligent tutor that teaches people how to make better decisions. As a proof of concept, we derive the optimal planning strategy for a simple model of situations where people fall prey to the present bias. Our cognitive tutor teaches people this optimal planning strategy by giving them metacognitive feedback on how they plan in a 3-step sequential decision-making task. Our tutor's feedback is designed to maximally accelerate people's metacognitive reinforcement learning towards the optimal planning strategy. A series of four experiments confirmed that training with the cognitive tutor significantly reduced present bias and improved people's decision-making competency: Experiment 1 demonstrated that the cognitive tutor's feedback can help participants discover far-sighted planning strategies. Experiment 2 found that this training effect transfers to more complex environments. Experiment 3 found that these transfer effects are retained for at least 24 hours after the training. Finally, Experiment 4 found that practicing with the cognitive tutor can have additional benefits over being told the strategy in words. The results suggest that promoting metacognitive reinforcement learning with optimal feedback is a promising approach to improving the human mind.

re

DOI [BibTex]

DOI [BibTex]


no image
Introducing the Decision Advisor: A simple online tool that helps people overcome cognitive biases and experience less regret in real-life decisions

Iwama, G., Greenberg, S., Moore, D., Lieder, F.

40th Annual Meeting of the Society for Judgement and Decision Making, June 2019 (conference)

re

[BibTex]

[BibTex]


no image
The Goal Characteristics (GC) questionannaire: A comprehensive measure for goals’ content, attainability, interestingness, and usefulness

Iwama, G., Wirzberger, M., Lieder, F.

40th Annual Meeting of the Society for Judgement and Decision Making, June 2019 (conference)

Abstract
Many studies have investigated how goal characteristics affect goal achievement. However, most of them considered only a small number of characteristics and the psychometric properties of their measures remains unclear. To overcome these limitations, we developed and validated a comprehensive questionnaire of goal characteristics with four subscales - measuring the goal’s content, attainability, interestingness, and usefulness respectively. 590 participants completed the questionnaire online. A confirmatory factor analysis supported the four subscales and their structure. The GC questionnaire (https://osf.io/qfhup) can be easily applied to investigate goal setting, pursuit and adjustment in a wide range of contexts.

re

DOI [BibTex]


no image
Resource-rational analysis: Understanding human cognition as the optimal use of limited computational resources

Lieder, F., Griffiths, T. L.

Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 43, E1, Febuary 2019 (article)

Abstract
Modeling human cognition is challenging because there are infinitely many mechanisms that can generate any given observation. Some researchers address this by constraining the hypothesis space through assumptions about what the human mind can and cannot do, while others constrain it through principles of rationality and adaptation. Recent work in economics, psychology, neuroscience, and linguistics has begun to integrate both approaches by augmenting rational models with cognitive constraints, incorporating rational principles into cognitive architectures, and applying optimality principles to understanding neural representations. We identify the rational use of limited resources as a unifying principle underlying these diverse approaches, expressing it in a new cognitive modeling paradigm called resource-rational analysis. The integration of rational principles with realistic cognitive constraints makes resource-rational analysis a promising framework for reverse-engineering cognitive mechanisms and representations. It has already shed new light on the debate about human rationality and can be leveraged to revisit classic questions of cognitive psychology within a principled computational framework. We demonstrate that resource-rational models can reconcile the mind's most impressive cognitive skills with people's ostensive irrationality. Resource-rational analysis also provides a new way to connect psychological theory more deeply with artificial intelligence, economics, neuroscience, and linguistics.

re

DOI [BibTex]

DOI [BibTex]


no image
Spatial Continuity Effect vs. Spatial Contiguity Failure. Revising the Effects of Spatial Proximity Between Related and Unrelated Representations

Beege, M., Wirzberger, M., Nebel, S., Schneider, S., Schmidt, N., Rey, G. D.

Frontiers in Education, 4:86, 2019 (article)

Abstract
The split-attention effect refers to learning with related representations in multimedia. Spatial proximity and integration of these representations are crucial for learning processes. The influence of varying amounts of proximity between related and unrelated information has not yet been specified. In two experiments (N1 = 98; N2 = 85), spatial proximity between a pictorial presentation and text labels was manipulated (high vs. medium vs. low). Additionally, in experiment 1, a control group with separated picture and text presentation was implemented. The results revealed a significant effect of spatial proximity on learning performance. In contrast to previous studies, the medium condition leads to the highest transfer, and in experiment 2, the highest retention score. These results are interpreted considering cognitive load and instructional efficiency. Findings indicate that transfer efficiency is optimal at a medium distance between representations in experiment 1. Implications regarding the spatial contiguity principle and the spatial contiguity failure are discussed.

re

link (url) DOI [BibTex]


no image
Doing more with less: Meta-reasoning and meta-learning in humans and machines

Griffiths, T., Callaway, F., Chang, M., Grant, E., Krueger, P. M., Lieder, F.

Current Opinion in Behavioral Sciences, 2019 (article)

re

DOI [BibTex]

DOI [BibTex]


no image
Remediating cognitive decline with cognitive tutors

Das, P., Callaway, F., Griffiths, T., Lieder, F.

RLDM 2019, 2019 (conference)

re

[BibTex]

[BibTex]


no image
A rational reinterpretation of dual process theories

Milli, S., Lieder, F., Griffiths, T.

2019 (article)

re

DOI [BibTex]

DOI [BibTex]

2018


no image
Discovering and Teaching Optimal Planning Strategies

Lieder, F., Callaway, F., Krueger, P. M., Das, P., Griffiths, T. L., Gul, S.

In The 14th biannual conference of the German Society for Cognitive Science, GK, September 2018 (inproceedings)

re

Project Page [BibTex]

2018


Project Page [BibTex]


no image
Discovering Rational Heuristics for Risky Choice

Gul, S., Krueger, P. M., Callaway, F., Griffiths, T. L., Lieder, F.

The 14th biannual conference of the German Society for Cognitive Science, GK, The 14th biannual conference of the German Society for Cognitive Science, GK, September 2018 (conference)

Abstract
How should we think and decide to make the best possible use of our precious time and limited cognitive resources? And how do people’s cognitive strategies compare to this ideal? We study these questions in the domain of multi-alternative risky choice using the methodology of resource-rational analysis. To answer the first question, we leverage a new meta-level reinforcement learning algorithm to derive optimal heuristics for four different risky choice environments. We find that our method rediscovers two fast-and-frugal heuristics that people are known to use, namely Take-The-Best and choosing randomly, as resource-rational strategies for specific environments. Our method also discovered a novel heuristic that combines elements of Take-The-Best and Satisficing. To answer the second question, we use the Mouselab paradigm to measure how people’s decision strategies compare to the predictions of our resource-rational analysis. We found that our resource-rational analysis correctly predicted which strategies people use and under which conditions they use them. While people generally tend to make rational use of their limited resources overall, their strategy choices do not always fully exploit the structure of each decision problem. Overall, people’s decision operations were about 88% as resource-rational as they could possibly be. A formal model comparison confirmed that our resource-rational model explained people’s decision strategies significantly better than the Directed Cognition model of Gabaix et al. (2006). Our study is a proof-of-concept that optimal cognitive strategies can be automatically derived from the principle of resource-rationality. Our results suggest that resource-rational analysis is a promising approach for uncovering people’s cognitive strategies and revisiting the debate about human rationality with a more realistic normative standard.

re

link (url) Project Page [BibTex]

link (url) Project Page [BibTex]


no image
Learning to select computations

Callaway, F., Gul, S., Krueger, P. M., Griffiths, T. L., Lieder, F.

In Uncertainty in Artificial Intelligence: Proceedings of the Thirty-Fourth Conference, August 2018, Frederick Callaway and Sayan Gul and Falk Lieder contributed equally to this publication. (inproceedings)

Abstract
The efficient use of limited computational resources is an essential ingredient of intelligence. Selecting computations optimally according to rational metareasoning would achieve this, but this is computationally intractable. Inspired by psychology and neuroscience, we propose the first concrete and domain-general learning algorithm for approximating the optimal selection of computations: Bayesian metalevel policy search (BMPS). We derive this general, sample-efficient search algorithm for a computation-selecting metalevel policy based on the insight that the value of information lies between the myopic value of information and the value of perfect information. We evaluate BMPS on three increasingly difficult metareasoning problems: when to terminate computation, how to allocate computation between competing options, and planning. Across all three domains, BMPS achieved near-optimal performance and compared favorably to previously proposed metareasoning heuristics. Finally, we demonstrate the practical utility of BMPS in an emergency management scenario, even accounting for the overhead of metareasoning.

re

link (url) Project Page [BibTex]

link (url) Project Page [BibTex]