Dear All,

Glenda Satne has been added to the list of speakers (see below). The workshop 
will now run until 4.30 p.m. in the same building, the Australian Hearing Hub. 
A campus map can be found here:

With the visit to Macquarie University of John Michael and Richard Moore, we 
are holding a workshop this Friday (13th April). All are welcome.

10.30 - 11.30 AHH Cognitive Science Seminar room level 3 (3.610)

The Chains of Habit: Repeated Coordination in Joint Decision-Making Boosts 
Cooperation by Eliciting a Sense of Commitment

John Michael (Warwick)

We tested the hypothesis that repeated coordination with a partner can elicit a 
sense of commitment, leading people to resist tempting alternatives and thereby 
sustaining cooperation through fluctuations in individuals’ interests. In our 
paradigm, participants performed a repeated joint decision-making task with the 
same partner in one block (Partner Condition), and with a different partner on 
each trial in a separate  block (Stranger Condition). When both players 
coordinated on the same option, both were rewarded. On some trials, 
participants were offered outside options presenting varying degrees of 
temptation to defect. Participants were informed that they were coordinating 
with a partner or partners who were in the lab with them. The results of their 
choices, as well as the trajectories of their mouse movements, indicated that 
participants in the Partner Condition were more resistant to the temptation to 
defect. I discuss these results against the background of recent theorizing 
about the ultimate and proximal mechanisms of human cooperation.

11.40 - 12.40 AHH Cognitive Science Seminar room level 3 (3.610)

Communication, Coordination, and the Evolution of the Stag Hunt

Richard Moore (Humboldt-Berlin School of Mind and Brain)

In this talk I will develop an account of the foundations of coordination in 
communication. I will argue against two hypotheses about Gricean communication 
defended by Tomasello (2008). They are (1) that Gricean communication is a form 
of joint action, and (2) that inferring communicative goals requires 
cooperative reasoning. Against these claims I will argue for a weaker view, 
namely that Gricean communication is made more effective when used by 
interlocutors who can engage in joint action and joint attention, and who do 
reason cooperatively. I will illustrate my arguments via a discussion of Stag 
Hunt coordination studies of children and great ape subjects.
My revisions to Tomasello's account are important because they make it possible 
to explain how simple forms of communicative coordination could support the 
emergence of more complex ones in phylogeny. Moreover, they suggest that the 
evolution of human language was enabled less by radical changes to hominin 
social cognition in phylogeny than by small tweaks to social attention, 
environmental changes, and a better diet that supported the development of 
superior domain general reasoning capacities.

2 - 3 AHH Seminar room level 5 (5.212)

Cultural Evolution and Emotion Development

Penny van Bergen (MQ) and Richard Menary (MQ)

In this review we highlight a new perspective on children's emotion 
development: the cultural evolutionary perspective. Past research shows that 
parent-child reminiscing has important benefits not only for children's memory 
development, but also for the understanding of emotions, emotional 
perspective-taking, and theory of mind. By reminiscing about emotional past 
events, both mundane and influential, parents have the opportunity to scaffold 
and extend children's understanding of their own emotional experiences at a 
time when children are no longer in a state of high arousal. They also can 
consider the emotional perspectives of other people present at the event, such 
as siblings, friends, or strangers, and explore the ways in which these 
peoples' mental experiences differ from one’s own. While individual differences 
in parents' scaffolding approaches are well known, no research to date has 
considered possible generational differences in how scaffolding is used to 
enhance children's emotion. Taking a cultural evolutionary perspective, we 
provide a sketch of a framework for understanding the cultural inheritance of 
emotional scaffolding.
3.30 - 4.30 AHH Seminar room level 5 (5.212)
Minimal Collective Intentionality in Evolution and Development
Glenda Satne (UOW and Alberto Hurtado University)
One important application of theories of collective intentionality concerns the 
evolution of human specific cognitive capacities (Tomasello 2014). A promising 
idea behind this explanatory attempt is the Cooperative Evolutionary Hypothesis 
(CEH), namely, the idea that humans’ capacity for social cooperation is at the 
heart of their ability to understand others’ mental states and behavior, 
leading to an explanation of how humans came to share thoughts and language. 
However, some of the most popular defenses of CEH face important problems. 
After identifying some of the central problems of the leading views, I propose 
and defend an alternative way of understanding shared intentionality that can 
help substantiate CEH: the Minimal Collective View. Psychological capacities 
for minimal collective intentionality are discussed vis à vis evidence of their 
developmental and evolutionary trajectories.
SydPhil mailing list

To unsubscribe, change your membership options, find answers to common 
problems, or visit our online archives, please go to the list information page:

Reply via email to