Hostname: page-component-6766d58669-kl59c Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-05-19T13:18:20.179Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

What is the purpose of cognition?

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 March 2020

Aba Szollosi Open the ORCID record for Aba Szollosi [Opens in a new window]  and
Ben R. Newell Open the ORCID record for Ben R. Newell [Opens in a new window]
Aba Szollosi
Affiliation:
School of Psychology, University of New South Wales, Sydney2052, Australia. aba.szollosi@gmail.comben.newell@unsw.edu.au
Ben R. Newell
Affiliation:
School of Psychology, University of New South Wales, Sydney2052, Australia. aba.szollosi@gmail.comben.newell@unsw.edu.au
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The purpose of human cognition depends on the problem people try to solve. Defining the purpose is difficult, because people seem capable of representing problems in an infinite number of ways. The way in which the function of cognition develops needs to be central to our theories.

Information

Type
Open Peer Commentary
Information
Behavioral and Brain Sciences , Volume 43 , 2020 , e25
Check for updates
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2020

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Gaissmaier, W. & Schooler, L. J. (2008) The smart potential behind probability matching. Cognition 109(3):416–22.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hammond, K. R. (2000) Coherence and correspondence theories in judgment and decision making. In: Judgment and decision making: An interdisciplinary reader, 2nd edition, ed. Conolly, T., Hammond, K. R. & Arkes, H., pp. 53–65. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Lieder, F. & Griffiths, T. L. (2017) Strategy selection as rational metareasoning. Psychological Review 124(6):762–94. doi:10.1037/rev0000075.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Marr, D. (1982) Vision: A computational investigation into the human representation and processing of visual information. MIT Press.Google Scholar
Newell, B. R. (2005) Re-visions of rationality? Trends in Cognitive Sciences 9(1):11–15.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Newell, B. R. & Shanks, D. R. (2014) Unconscious influences on decision making: A critical review. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 37(1):1–19.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Schulze, C. & Newell, B. R. (2016) More heads choose better than one: Group decision making can eliminate probability matching. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review 23:907–14.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Szollosi, A., Liang, G., Konstantinidis, E., Donkin, C. & Newell, B. R. (2019) Simultaneous underweighting and overestimation of rare events: Unpacking a paradox. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General 148(12):2207–17. Available at: http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/xge0000603.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Tran, R., Vul, E. & Pashler, H. (2017) How effective is incidental learning of the shape of probability distributions? Royal Society Open Science 4(8):170270.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Deutsch, D. (2011) The beginning of infinity. The Penguin Press.Google Scholar