iiinova — where your digital self keeps evolving

Reposted by David G. Kamper

Heejung Jung @jungheejung.bsky.social · 04/09/2025

New Open dataset alert: 🧠 Introducing "Spacetop" – a massive multimodal fMRI dataset that bridges naturalistic and experimental neuroscience! N = 101 x 6 hours each = 606 functional iso-hours combining movies, pain, faces, theory-of-mind and other cognitive tasks! 🧵below

411658

Reposted by David G. Kamper

Chaz Firestone @chazfirestone.bsky.social · 05/08/2025

Out today! www.nature.com/articles/s41...

Screenshot of the first page of Tal and Chaz's paper, "The psychophysics of style"

36118

Reposted by David G. Kamper

Vanessa Cheung @vanessachg.bsky.social · 12/08/2025

Our new research paper is out in NHB, which we apparently coauthored with acclaimed actor Ryan Reynolds. Critics are calling it his best work since Deadpool.

064

Reposted by David G. Kamper

Chaz Firestone @chazfirestone.bsky.social · 19/05/2025

Out today!

Screenshot of the first page of Amir, D., & Firestone, C. (2025). Is visual perception WEIRD? The Müller-Lyer illusion and the Cultural Byproduct Hypothesis. Psychological Review.

27210

Reposted by David G. Kamper

Brian Weatherson @bweatherson.bsky.social · 15/05/2025

I built a little Shiny app that shows how often various words were used in 20 prominent philosophy journals from 1980-2019. bweatherson.shinyapps.io/t20-graphs/

bweatherson.shinyapps.io

Word Usage in Philosophy Journals

59726

David G. Kamper @dgkamper.bsky.social · 14/05/2025

Paper: doi.org/10.1016/j.co... Data/code:

doi.org

Redirecting

000

David G. Kamper @dgkamper.bsky.social · 14/05/2025

We think this helps clarify decades of debate: Inhibitory demands in false belief tasks aren't monolithic. Some subprocesses matter more than others, and only some link tightly to theory of mind growth.

100

David G. Kamper @dgkamper.bsky.social · 14/05/2025

Bottom line: False belief understanding isn’t just about knowing that minds can misrepresent reality. It’s also about which cognitive control processes get recruited, and how those demands change as kids' theory of mind develops.

100

David G. Kamper @dgkamper.bsky.social · 14/05/2025

Adults, by contrast, showed a surprise: They actually initiated faster on false belief trials than true belief ones. Maybe because being asked about a true belief is so pragmatically weird: everyone knows it already.

100

David G. Kamper @dgkamper.bsky.social · 14/05/2025

Our big finding? Children’s conflict monitoring didn’t differ between true vs. false belief trials. But conflict resolution did. As kids' theory of mind improved, they needed less conflict resolution effort to pick the correct (false belief) answer: more adult-like.

110

David G. Kamper @dgkamper.bsky.social · 14/05/2025

We used 3D manual reach tracking to do just that. Kids (and adults) made belief judgments by reaching to screen locations while we tracked their finger movement in space. Two key measures: – Initiation latency (conflict monitoring) – Curvature deviance (conflict resolution)

110

David G. Kamper @dgkamper.bsky.social · 14/05/2025

Inhibitory control isn't just one thing. It includes: - Monitoring for conflict (realizing your belief conflicts with someone else’s) – Resolving that conflict (choosing the other’s perspective, not your own) Can we tease these apart?

100

David G. Kamper @dgkamper.bsky.social · 14/05/2025

For decades, research has shown that 4- to 6-year-olds begin to succeed at false belief tasks, predicting that someone will act on a mistaken belief. But success depends on more than knowing others have minds. It also takes inhibitory control. But what kind?

100

David G. Kamper @dgkamper.bsky.social · 14/05/2025

How do children figure out what other people believe, especially when those beliefs are wrong? And what kinds of mental effort does it take to get that right? New paper out now:

163

David G. Kamper @dgkamper.bsky.social · 01/05/2025

We find: 1) Modification level matters most — dramatic edits = more transformative 2) Creator attribution (AI vs. human) barely moved judgments 3) Less effort was sometimes seen as more creative

100

David G. Kamper @dgkamper.bsky.social · 01/05/2025

This is because AI is assumed to be incompatible with qualities that define human authorship. We empirically test lay intuitions related to these assumptions in two studies (N = 235, N = 119) by investigating how creator attribution of initial source material.

110

David G. Kamper @dgkamper.bsky.social · 01/05/2025

For #CogSci2025, myself, Alice Lin, and Keith Holyoak ask: Does AI derivative artwork have an “Original Sin”? We find that they do not. Recent legal rulings have denied copyright to artworks derived from AI-generated sources.

120

Reposted by David G. Kamper

Brian Flanagan @lawstuff.bsky.social · 18/11/2024

X-Jur has arrived -

172

Reposted by David G. Kamper

Brian Flanagan @lawstuff.bsky.social · 12/10/2023

Looking forward to presenting Wikipedia research at the University of Chicago tomorrow for the Conference on Empirical Legal Studies 2023.

021

Reposted by David G. Kamper

Yarrow Dunham @yarrowdunham.bsky.social · 29/09/2023

Americans overwhelmingly believe that people should inherit near 100% of their parents' assets but near 0% of their parents' debts (including when parents have both assets and debts!). Are there coherent arguments justifying these beliefs? (data with Pinar Aldan)

6144