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.

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


Optimal To-Do List Gamification
Optimal To-Do List Gamification

Stojcheski, J., Felso, V., Lieder, F.

arXiv, August 2020 (techreport)

Abstract
What should I work on first? What can wait until later? Which projects should I prioritize and which tasks are not worth my time? These are challenging questions that many people face every day. People’s intuitive strategy is to prioritize their immediate experience over the long-term consequences. This leads to procrastination and the neglect of important long-term projects in favor of seemingly urgent tasks that are less important. Optimal gamification strives to help people overcome these problems by incentivizing each task by a number of points that communicates how valuable it is in the long-run. Unfortunately, computing the optimal number of points with standard dynamic programming methods quickly becomes intractable as the number of a person’s projects and the number of tasks required by each project increase. Here, we introduce and evaluate a scalable method for identifying which tasks are most important in the long run and incentivizing each task according to its long-term value. Our method makes it possible to create to-do list gamification apps that can handle the size and complexity of people’s to-do lists in the real world.

link (url) Project Page [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)

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.

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.

[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.

Project Page [BibTex]

Project Page [BibTex]


no image
Automatic Discovery of Interpretable Planning Strategies

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

Machine Learning Journal, 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.

Automatic Discovery of Interpretable Planning Strategies The code for our algorithm and the experiments is available Project Page [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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

Life improvement science: a manifesto DOI [BibTex]


no image
Doing More with Less: Meta-Reasoning and Meta-Learning in Humans and Machines

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

Current Opinion in Behavioral Sciences, 29, pages: 24-30, October 2019 (article)

Abstract
Artificial intelligence systems use an increasing amount of computation and data to solve very specific problems. By contrast, human minds solve a wide range of problems using a fixed amount of computation and limited experience. We identify two abilities that we see as crucial to this kind of general intelligence: meta-reasoning (deciding how to allocate computational resources) and meta-learning (modeling the learning environment to make better use of limited data). We summarize the relevant AI literature and relate the resulting ideas to recent work in psychology.

DOI [BibTex]

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.

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.

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.

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.

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)

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.

link (url) Project Page [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.

link (url) [BibTex]


no image
Measuring How People Learn How to Plan

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

pages: 357-361, RLDM 2019, 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.

link (url) [BibTex]

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.

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

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

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

Abstract
Cognitive biases shape many decisions people come to regret. To help people overcome these biases, Clear-erThinking.org developed a free online tool, called the Decision Advisor (https://programs.clearerthinking.org/decisionmaker.html). The Decision Advisor assists people in big real-life decisions by prompting them to generate more alternatives, guiding them to evaluate their alternatives according to principles of decision analysis, and educates them about pertinent biases while they are making their decision. In a within-subjects experiment, 99 participants reported significantly fewer biases and less regret for a decision supported by the Decision Advisor than for a previous unassisted decision.

DOI [BibTex]

DOI [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.

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.

DOI [BibTex]


no image
Remediating Cognitive Decline with Cognitive Tutors

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

RLDM 2019, 2019 (conference)

Abstract
As people age, their cognitive abilities tend to deteriorate, including their ability to make complex plans. To remediate this cognitive decline, many commercial brain training programs target basic cognitive capacities, such as working memory. We have recently developed an alternative approach: intelligent tutors that teach people cognitive strategies for making the best possible use of their limited cognitive resources. Here, we apply this approach to improve older adults' planning skills. In a process-tracing experiment we found that the decline in planning performance may be partly because older adults use less effective planning strategies. We also found that, with practice, both older and younger adults learned more effective planning strategies from experience. But despite these gains there was still room for improvement-especially for older people. In a second experiment, we let older and younger adults train their planning skills with an intelligent cognitive tutor that teaches optimal planning strategies via metacognitive feedback. We found that practicing planning with this intelligent tutor allowed older adults to catch up to their younger counterparts. These findings suggest that intelligent tutors that teach clever cognitive strategies can help aging decision-makers stay sharp.

DOI [BibTex]

DOI [BibTex]


A Rational Reinterpretation of Dual Process Theories
A Rational Reinterpretation of Dual Process Theories

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

2019 (article)

Abstract
Highly influential "dual-process" accounts of human cognition postulate the coexistence of a slow accurate system with a fast error-prone system. But why would there be just two systems rather than, say, one or 93? Here, we argue that a dual-process architecture might be neither arbitrary nor irrational, but might instead reflect a rational tradeoff between the cognitive flexibility afforded by multiple systems and the time and effort required to choose between them. We investigate what the optimal set and number of cognitive systems would be depending on the structure of the environment. We find that the optimal number of systems depends on the variability of the environment and the difficulty of deciding when which system should be used. Furthermore, when having two systems is optimal, then the first system is fast but error-prone and the second system is slow but accurate. Our findings thereby provide a rational reinterpretation of dual-process theories.

DOI [BibTex]

DOI [BibTex]

2013


no image
Controllability and Resource-Rational Planning

Lieder, F., Goodman, N. D., Huys, Q. J.

In Computational and Systems Neuroscience (Cosyne), pages: 112, 2013 (inproceedings)

Abstract
Learned helplessness experiments involving controllable vs. uncontrollable stressors have shown that the perceived ability to control events has profound consequences for decision making. Normative models of decision making, however, do not naturally incorporate knowledge about controllability, and previous approaches to incorporating it have led to solutions with biologically implausible computational demands [1,2]. Intuitively, controllability bounds the differential rewards for choosing one strategy over another, and therefore believing that the environment is uncontrollable should reduce one’s willingness to invest time and effort into choosing between options. Here, we offer a normative, resource-rational account of the role of controllability in trading mental effort for expected gain. In this view, the brain not only faces the task of solving Markov decision problems (MDPs), but it also has to optimally allocate its finite computational resources to solve them efficiently. This joint problem can itself be cast as a MDP [3], and its optimal solution respects computational constraints by design. We start with an analytic characterisation of the influence of controllability on the use of computational resources. We then replicate previous results on the effects of controllability on the differential value of exploration vs. exploitation, showing that these are also seen in a cognitively plausible regime of computational complexity. Third, we find that controllability makes computation valuable, so that it is worth investing more mental effort the higher the subjective controllability. Fourth, we show that in this model the perceived lack of control (helplessness) replicates empirical findings [4] whereby patients with major depressive disorder are less likely to repeat a choice that led to a reward, or to avoid a choice that led to a loss. Finally, the model makes empirically testable predictions about the relationship between reaction time and helplessness.

[BibTex]

2013

[BibTex]


no image
Learned helplessness and generalization

Lieder, F., Goodman, N. D., Huys, Q. J. M.

In 35th Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society, 2013 (inproceedings)

[BibTex]

[BibTex]


no image
Reverse-Engineering Resource-Efficient Algorithms

Lieder, F., Goodman, N. D., Griffiths, T. L.

In NIPS Workshop Resource-Efficient Machine Learning, 2013 (inproceedings)

[BibTex]

[BibTex]


no image
Modelling trial-by-trial changes in the mismatch negativity

Lieder, F., Daunizeau, J., Garrido, M. I., Friston, K. J., Stephan, K. E.

{PLoS} {C}omputational {B}iology, 9(2):e1002911, Public Library of Science, 2013 (article)

[BibTex]

[BibTex]


no image
A neurocomputational model of the mismatch negativity

Lieder, F., Stephan, K. E., Daunizeau, J., Garrido, M. I., Friston, K. J.

{PLoS Computational Biology}, 9(11):e1003288, Public Library of Science, 2013 (article)

[BibTex]

[BibTex]

2006


no image
Die Effektivität von schriftlichen und graphischen Warnhinweisen auf Zigarettenschachteln

Petersen, L., Lieder, F.

Zeitschrift für Sozialpsychologie, 37(4):245-258, Verlag Hans Huber, 2006 (article)

Abstract
In der vorliegenden Studie wurde die Effektivität von furchterregenden Warnhinweisen bei jugendlichen Rauchern und Raucherinnen analysiert. 336 Raucher/-innen (Durchschnittsalter: 15 Jahre) wurden schriftliche oder graphische Warnhinweise auf Zigarettenpackungen präsentiert (Experimentalbedingungen; n = 96, n = 119), oder sie erhielten keine Warnhinweise (Kontrollbedingung; n = 94). Anschließend wurden die Modellfaktoren des revidierten Modells der Schutzmotivation (Arthur & Quester, 2004) erhoben. Die Ergebnisse stützen die Hypothese, dass die Faktoren «Schweregrad der Schädigung» und «Wahrscheinlichkeit der Schädigung» die Verhaltenswahrscheinlichkeit, weniger oder leichtere Zigaretten zu rauchen, vermittelt über den Mediator «Furcht» beeinflussen. Die Verhaltenswahrscheinlichkeit wurde dagegen nicht von den drei experimentellen Bedingungen beeinflusst. Auch konnten die Faktoren «Handlungswirksamkeitserwartungen» und «Selbstwirksamkeitserwartungen» nicht als Moderatoren des Zusammenhangs zwischen Furcht und Verhaltenswahrscheinlichkeit bestätigt werden.

DOI [BibTex]

2006

DOI [BibTex]