The dual role of culture for reconstructing early sapiens cognition.

Questions on early sapiens cognition, the cognitive abilities of our ancestors, are intriguing but notoriously hard to tackle. Leaving no hard traces in the archeological record, these abilities need to be inferred from indirect evidence, informed by our understanding of present-day cognition. Most of such attempts acknowledge the role that culture, as a faculty, has played for human evolution, but they underrate or even disregard the role of distinct cultural traditions and the ensuing diversity, both in present-day humans and as a dimension of past cognition. We argue that culture has exerted a profound impact on human cognition from the start in a dual manner: It scaffolds cognition through both development and evolution, and it thereby continually diversifies the form and content of human thinking. To unveil early sapiens cognition and retrace its evolutionary trajectories, this cognitive diversity must be considered. We present two strategies to achieve this: large-scale extrapolation and phylogenetic comparison. The former aims at filtering out diversity to determine what is basic and universal versus culturally shaped (illustrated for theory of mind abilities). The latter capitalizes on the diversity to reconstruct evolutionary trajectories (illustrated for religious beliefs). The two methods, in combination, advance our understanding of the cognitive abilities of our early sapiens ancestors and of how these abilities emerged and evolved. To conclude, we discuss the implications of this approach for our insights into early cognition itself and its scientific investigation. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).

The different paths to cultural convergence.

Morin envisions the adaptive landscape of graphic codes as an unfertile valley where writing rises as an isolated peak that humans managed to reach only on four occasions throughout all of history. By exploring the different paths to cultural convergence, we suggest an alternative landscape occupied by a mountain range of visual art systems. We conclude that graphic communication through visual art worked well enough to render writing contingent but not necessary in most cases.

Toward Greater Integration: Fellows Perspectives on Cognitive Science.

Cognitive science is a multidisciplinary field. Whereas debates on whether this is beneficial continue to spring up, this multidisciplinarity comes with at least one obvious challenge, namely, safeguarding an increasing integration across its subfields. The new and open-ended topic preluded here attempts to address this challenge by pursuing a multilayered agenda: to introduce the Fellows of the Cognitive Science Society and earn them the recognition and profile they deserve; to furnish a platform for reflection on cognitive science from a bird's eye view; and to present role models for younger generations. To achieve these goals, this topic provides all Fellows with an opportunity to showcase their scientific work, to outline what they consider to be its major contributions to cognitive science, and to elaborate on their visions for greater integration of the field.

The perception of quantity ain't number: Missing the primacy of symbolic reference.

Clarke and Beck's defense of the theoretical construct "approximate number system" (ANS) is flawed in serious ways - from biological misconceptions to mathematical naïveté. The authors misunderstand behavioral/psychological technical concepts, such as numerosity and quantical cognition, which they disdain as "exotic." Additionally, their characterization of rational numbers is blind to the essential role of symbolic reference in the emergence of number.

Knowledge is belief - and shaped by culture.

Phillips and colleagues claim that the representation of knowledge is more basic than the representation of belief, presupposing them to be categorically distinct mental states with distinct evolutionary purposes. We argue that the relationship between the two is much more complex, is further shaped by culture and language, and leaves its mark on manifestations of theory of mind and teaching.

A Scientific Marketplace.

Cognitive science thrives on the diversity of its (sub-)disciplines, and topiCS is the ideal journal for bringing the diversity to bear. In this welcome address as its incoming Executive Editor, I outline my view of the journal and my vision for how to sustain its inviting and integrative power.

The sense of obligation is culturally modulated.

Tomasello argues in the target article that, in generalizing the concrete obligations originating from interdependent collaboration to one's entire cultural group, humans become "ultra-cooperators." But are all human populations cooperative in similar ways? Based on cross-cultural studies and my own fieldwork in Polynesia, I argue that cooperation varies along several dimensions, and that the underlying sense of obligation is culturally modulated.

Being In Front Is Good-But Where Is In Front? Preferences for Spatial Referencing Affect Evaluation.

Speakers of English frequently associate location in space with valence, as in moving up and down the "social ladder." If such an association also holds for the sagittal axis, an object "in front of" another object would be evaluated more positively than the one "behind." Yet how people conceptualize relative locations depends on which frame of reference (FoR) they adopt-and hence on cross-linguistically diverging preferences. What is conceptualized as "in front" in one variant of the relative FoR (e.g., translation) is "behind" under another variant (reflection), and vice versa. Do such diverging conceptualizations of an object's location also lead to diverging evaluations? In two studies employing an implicit association test, we demonstrate, first, that speakers of German, Chinese, and Japanese indeed evaluate the object "in front of" another object more positively than the one "behind." Second, and crucially, the reversal of which object is conceptualized as "in front" involves a corresponding reversal of valence, suggesting an impact of linguistically imparted FoR preferences on evaluative processes.

Editors' Review and Introduction: The Cultural Evolution of Cognition.

This topic addresses a question of key interest to cognitive science, namely which factors may have triggered, constrained, or shaped the course of cognitive evolution. It highlights the relevance of culture as a driving force in this process, with a special focus on social learning and language, conceptual tools, and material culture. In so doing, the topic combines two goals: to provide an overview of current empirical and theoretical work leading this field, tailored for a wider cognitive science audience, and to investigate the potential for integrating multiple perspectives across several timescales and levels of analysis, from the microlevel of individual behavior to the macrolevel of cultural change and language diversification. One key purpose is to assess the extent to which the different research approaches can cross-fertilize each other, thereby also contributing to the advancement of cognitive science more broadly.

What Early Sapiens Cognition Can Teach Us: Untangling Cultural Influences on Human Cognition Across Time.

Evidence of cultural influences on cognition is accumulating, but untangling these cultural influences from one another or from non-cultural influences has remained a challenging task. As between-group differences are neither a sufficient nor a necessary indicator of cultural impact, cross-cultural comparisons in isolation are unable to furnish any cogent conclusions. This shortfall can be compensated by taking a diachronic perspective that focuses on the role of culture for the emergence and evolution of our cognitive abilities. Three strategies for reconstructing early human cognition are presented: the chaîne opératoire approach and its extension to brain-imaging studies, large-scale extrapolations, and phylogenetic comparative methods. While these strategies are reliant on our understanding of present-day cognition, they conversely also have the potential to advance this understanding in fundamental ways.

What Is Causal Cognition?

While gaining an understanding of cause-effect relations is the key goal of causal cognition, its components are less clearly delineated. Standard approaches in the field focus on how individuals detect, learn, and reason from statistical regularities, thereby prioritizing cognitive processes over content and context. This article calls for a broadened perspective. To gain a more comprehensive understanding of what is going on when humans engage in causal cognition-including its application to machine cognition-it is argued, we also need to take into account the content that informs the processing, the means and mechanisms of knowledge accumulation and transmission, and the cultural context in which both accumulation and transmission take place.