Hostname: page-component-76d6cb85b7-2r2wp Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-07-15T18:43:04.125Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Cognitive primitives, learning, and the structure of early social relationship cognition

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 May 2026

Ashley J. Thomas Open the ORCID record for Ashley J. Thomas [Opens in a new window]
Ashley J. Thomas*
Affiliation:
Department of Psychology, Harvard University, Cambridge, MA, USA athomas@g.harvard.edu
*
*Corresponding author.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The broad range of commentaries addressed central debates in the origins, nature, and development of relationship knowledge. These debates mirror those that have played out in other domains: do infants possess innate, abstract primitives for representing relationships? Or is their understanding primarily the result of learning? Should we consider infants’ behavior in experiments a reflection of abstract cognitive concepts or as reflexes or embodied knowledge? The commentaries also raise questions about other possible cognitive primitives as well as the evolutionary roots of such knowledge. What is the result of statistical learning, and what are inductive biases? Ultimately, these commentaries examine how innate representations of relationships may facilitate the resolution of other learning challenges, including the acquisition of cultural norms, institutional roles, group dynamics, and moral principles. Ultimately, I argue that advancing our understanding will require integrative approaches drawing on developmental, comparative, computational, and cultural research. This exchange clarifies many pressing empirical puzzles, setting the stage for a research program that I hope others across disciplines and theoretical standpoints will join in.

Information

Type
Author’s Response
Information
Behavioral and Brain Sciences , Volume 49 , 2026 , e56
Check for updates
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2026. Published by Cambridge University Press

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

Afshordi, N., & Liberman, Z. (2021). Keeping friends in mind: Development of friendship concepts in early childhood. Social Development, 30(2), 331–342.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bas, J., Sebastian-Galles, N., Csibra, G., & Mascaro, O. (2022). Infants’ representation of asymmetric social influence. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 226, 105564.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Biro, S., Alink, L. R. A., Huffmeijer, R., Bakermans-Kranenburg, M. J., & van IJzendoorn, M. H. (2015). Attachment and maternal sensitivity are related to infants’ monitoring of animated social interactions. Brain and Behavior, 5(12), e00410.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Biro, S., Peltola, M. J., Huffmeijer, R., Alink, L. R. A., Bakermans-Kranenburg, M. J., & van IJzendoorn, M. H. (2021). Frontal EEG asymmetry in infants observing separation and comforting events: The role of infants’ attachment relationship. Developmental Cognitive Neuroscience, 48, 100941.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bowlby, J. (1982). Attachment and loss: Vol. 1. Attachment. Basic Books. (Original work published 1969).Google Scholar
Carey, S. (2009). The origin of concepts (Google eBook) (p. 608). Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chen, A. M., & Saxe, R. (2025). Expectations of reciprocal generosity are specific to equal relationships. PsyArXiv. https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/7j6k8_v1 Google Scholar
Cheney, D. L., & Seyfarth, R. M. (2008). Baboon metaphysics: The evolution of a social mind. University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Chesney, D., Bjalkebring, P., & Peters, E. (2015). How to estimate how well people estimate: Evaluating measures of individual differences in the approximate number system. Attention, Perception & Psychophysics, 77(8), 2781–2802.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Chuey, Gweon, Thomas. (in prep). preschooler’s representations of real-world networks of classrooms.Google Scholar
Cushman, F. (2025). Moral Judgment. In Gilbert, D. T., Fiske, S. T., Finkel, E. J., & Mendes, W. B. (Eds.). The handbook of social psychology, (6th ed.). Situational Press. https://doi.org/10.70400/NYKH3013.Google Scholar
Feigenson, L., Carey, S., & Hauser, M. (2002). The representations underlying infants’ choice of more: Object files versus analog magnitudes. Psychological Science, 13(2), 150–156.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Fentress, J. C., & Ryon, J. (1982). A long-term study of distributed pup feeding in captive wolves. In Harrington, F. H., & Paquet, P. C. (Eds.), Wolves of the world: perspectives of behavior, ecology, and conservation (pp. 238–261). Park Ridge, New Jersey, USA: Noyes publications. Wolves of the world.Google Scholar
Fiske, A. P. (2010). Dispassionate heuristic rationality fails to sustain social relationships. In Mates, A., Mikesell, L., & Smith, M. (Eds.), Discourse, sociality, and frontotemporal dementia: Reverse engineering the social brain (pp. 197–239). London, England: Equinox.Google Scholar
Fiske, S. T. (2018). Stereotype content: Warmth and competence endure. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 27(2), 67–73.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gergely, G., & Csibra, G. (2003). Teleological reasoning in infancy: The nai;ve theory of rational action. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 7(7), 287–292.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gershman, S. J., Horvitz, E. J., & Tenenbaum, J. B. (2015). Computational rationality: A converging paradigm for intelligence in brains, minds, and machines. Science, 349(6245), 273–278.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gill, I. K., & Sommerville, J. A. (2023). Generalizing across moral sub-domains: Infants bidirectionally link fairness and unfairness to helping and hindering. Frontiers in Psychology, 14, 1213409.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Goodman, N. D., Ullman, T. D., & Tenenbaum, J. B. (2011). Learning a theory of causality. Psychological Review, 118(1), 110–119.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gopnik, A., & Schulz, L. (2007). Causal learning: Psychology, philosophy, and computation. Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Graham, J., Haidt, J., Koleva, S., Motyl, M., Iyer, R., Wojcik, S. P., & Ditto, P. H. (2013). Moral foundations theory: The pragmatic validity of moral pluralism. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 47, 55–130.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Griffiths, T. L., & Chater, N. (2024). Bayesian models of cognition. MIT Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Heider, F., & Simmel, M. (1944). An experimental study of apparent behavior. The American Journal of Psychology, 57(2), 243–259.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hrdy, S. B., & Burkart, J. M. (2022). How reliance on allomaternal care shapes primate development with special reference to the genus homo. In Evolutionary Perspectives on Infancy (pp. 161–188). Cham: Springer International Publishing.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jara-Ettinger, J., & Dunham, Y. (2025). The institutional stance. PsyArXiv. https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/pefsx_v2 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Johnson, S. C., Dweck, C. S., & Chen, F. S. (2007). Evidence for infants’ internal working models of attachment. Psychological Science, 18(6), 501–502.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Juffer, F., Struis, E., Werner, C., & Bakermans-Kranenburg, M. J. (2017). Effective preventive interventions to support parents of young children: Illustrations from the Video-feedback intervention to promote positive parenting and sensitive discipline (VIPP-SD). Journal of Prevention & Intervention in the Community, 45(3), 202–214.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kagan, J. (2009). The long shadow of temperament. Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Kasper, C., Voelkl, B., & Huber, L. (2008). Tolerated mouth-to-mouth food transfers in common marmosets. Primates; Journal of Primatology, 49(2), 153–156.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kleppesto, T. H., Czajkowski, N. O., Vassend, O., Roysamb, E., Eftedal, N. H., Sheehy-Skeffington, J., Ystrom, E., Kunst, J. R., Gjerde, L. C., & Thomsen, L. (2024). Attachment and political personality are heritable and distinct systems, and both share genetics with interpersonal trust and altruism. Behavior Genetics, 54(4), 321–332.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kosakowski, H. L., Cohen, M. A., Herrera, L., Nichoson, I., Kanwisher, N., & Saxe, R. (2024). Cortical face-selective responses emerge early in human infancy. eNeuro, 11(7).CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kudrnova, V., Spelke, E. S., & Thomas, A. J. (2024). Infants infer social relationships between individuals who engage in imitative social interactions. Open Mind, 8, 202–216.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lake, B. M., Ullman, T. D., Tenenbaum, J. B., & Gershman, S. J. (2017). Building machines that learn and think like people. The Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 40, e253.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lameira, A. R. (2024). The evolutionary origin of human kissing. Evolutionary Anthropology, 33(6), e22050.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lew-Levy, S., & Amir, D. (2024). Children as agents of cultural adaptation. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 1–68.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Liberman, Z., Kinzler, K. D., & Woodward, A. L. (2021). Origins of homophily: Infants expect people with shared preferences to affiliate. Cognition, 212, 104695.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Liu, S., Raz, G., Kamps, F., Grossmann, T., & Saxe, R. (2023). No evidence for discontinuity between infants and adults. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 27(8), 694–695.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Liu, S., Ullman, T. D., Tenenbaum, J. B., & Spelke, E. S. (2017). Ten-month-old infants infer the value of goals from the costs of actions. Science, 358(6366), 1038–1041.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Marr, D. (2010). Vision. MIT Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mascaro, O., & Csibra, G. (2012). Representation of stable social dominance relations by human infants. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 109, 6862–6867.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mascaro, O., Goupil, N., Pantecouteau, H., Depierreux, A., Van der Henst, J.-B., & Claidière, N. (2023). Human and animal dominance hierarchies show a pyramidal structure guiding adult and infant social inferences. Nature Human Behaviour, 7(8), 1294–1306.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Nettle, D., & Scott-Phillips, T. (2023). Is a non-evolutionary psychology possible? In Evolutionary thinking across disciplines: problems and perspectives in generalized Darwinism (pp. 21–42). Cham: Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/wky9h CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pepe, B., Woo, B. M., Thomas, A. J., & Powell, L. J. (2025). Infants use helping to infer the existence and strength of caring relationships. PsyArXiv. https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/7rbs2_v1 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Perry, S., Baker, M., Fedigan, L., Gros-Louis, J., Jack, K., MacKinnon, K. C., Manson, J. H., Panger, M., Pyle, K., & Rose, L. (2003). Social conventions in wild white-faced Capuchin monkeys. Current Anthropology, 44(2), 241–268.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pietraszewski, D. (2022). Towards a computational theory of social groups: A finite set of cognitive primitives for representing any and all social groups in the context of conflict. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 45, e97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pun, A., Birch, S. A. J., & Baron, A. S. (2021). The power of allies: Infants’ expectations of social obligations during intergroup conflict. Cognition, 211(104630), 104630.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sarnecka, B. W. (2016). How numbers are like the earth (and unlike faces, loitering, or knitting). Core Knowledge and Conceptual Change, 151–170.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sehl, C. G., Friedman, O., & Denison, S. (2022). The social network: How people infer relationships from mutual connections. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 152(4), 925. https://doi.org/10.1037/xge0001330 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Spelke, E. S. (2022a). Core social cognition. In What babies know (pp. 300–C8.P131). Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Spelke, E. S. (2022b). What babies know: Core knowledge and composition volume 1. Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stahl, A. E., & Kibbe, M. M. (2022). Great expectations: The construct validity of the violation-of-expectation method for studying infant cognition. Infant and Child Development, 31(6), e2359. https://doi.org/10.1002/icd.2359 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Steele, C., & Thomas, A. J. (2025). Navigating family ties: Young children’s cognitive representations of the family network. In Proceedings of the Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society, (Vol. 47). https://escholarship.org/uc/item/6ff0f593 Google Scholar
Surian, L., Ueno, M., Itakura, S., & Meristo, M. (2018). Do infants attribute moral traits? Fourteen-month-olds’ expectations of fairness are affected by agents’ antisocial actions. Frontiers in Psychology, 9, 1649.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Thomas (in prep). Toddlers know can identify the faces of their friend’s parents in a daycare classroom.Google Scholar
Thomas, A. J., & Sarnecka, B. W. (2019). Infants choose those who defer in conflicts. Current Biology, 29(13), 2183–2189. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cub.2019.05.054 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Thomas, A. J., Saxe, R., & Spelke, E. S. (2022). Infants infer potential social partners by observing the interactions of their parent with unknown others. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 119(32), e2121390119.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Thomas, A. J., Thomsen, L., Lukowski, A. F., Abramyan, M., & Sarnecka, B. W. (2018). Toddlers prefer those who win but not when they win by force. Nature Human Behaviour, 2(9), 662–669.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thomas, A. J., Woo, B., Nettle, D., Spelke, E. S., & Saxe, R. (2022). Early concepts of intimacy: Young humans use saliva sharing to infer close relationships. Science, 375(6578), 311–315.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ullman, T. D., & Tenenbaum, J. B. (2020). Bayesian models of conceptual development: Learning as building models of the world. Annual Review of Developmental Psychology, 2(1), 533–558. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-devpsych-121318-084833 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vélez, N., Christian, B., Hardy, M., Thompson, B. D., & Griffiths, T. L. (2023). How do humans overcome individual computational limitations by working together?. Cognitive Science, 47(1), e13232.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Woo, B. M., Peng, H., Yu, E., & Thomas, A. J. (2025). Infants track the social targets of their parents’ gaze. PsyArXiv. https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/85mnq_v1 CrossRefGoogle Scholar