3139B-001

Psychology 3139B-001

Cognitive Science

If there is a discrepancy between the outline posted below and the outline posted on the OWL course website, the latter shall prevail.

1.0    CALENDAR DESCRIPTION

Cognitive Science combines psychology, artificial intelligence, neuroscience, neuropsychology, linguistics, philosophy, and anthropology to study how people think. Students will learn how cognitive scientists approach problems in a diverse, integrated manner to help us understand how people learn and process, for example, concepts and language.

 

Prerequisites: Psychology 2820E or both Psychology 2800E and 2810, and one of Psychology 2115A/B, 2134A/B, 2135A/B

3 lecture/discussion hours, 0.5 course

 

Unless you have either the prerequisites for this course or written special permission from your Dean to enroll in it, you may be removed from this course and it will be deleted from your record.  This decision may not be appealed.  You will receive no adjustment to your fees in the event that you are dropped from a course for failing to have the necessary prerequisites.


2.0    COURSE INFORMATION

       Instructor:   Dr. Karen Hussey                                 

       Office: SSC 7250                                        

       Office Hours: Wednesdays 9:00am – 10:30am                    

       Email: khussey@uwo.ca                                                                

 

       Teaching Assistant: Mark McPhedran           

       Email: mmcphedr@uwo.ca                                     

 

       Time and Location of Classes:   Mondays 10:30am -12:30pm in WL258

                                                         Wednesdays 10:30am -11:30am in WL258


If you or someone you know is experiencing distress, there are several resources here at Western to assist you.  Please visit:  http://www.uwo.ca/uwocom/mentalhealth/ for more information on these resources and on mental health.

Please contact the course instructor if you require material in an alternate format or if you require any other arrangements to make this course more accessible to you. You may also wish to contact Services for Students with Disabilities (SSD) at 519-661-2111 ext 82147 for any specific question regarding an accommodation.

3.0  TEXTBOOK

There is no required textbook. We have foundational topic readings which are posted on Owl. THESE READINGS ARE MANDATORY. And you need to read these BEFORE our first lecture on that topic for the best results. Some topics may have more than a single paper as foundation for that topic.  Weekly content lectures will not appear as available immediately in January on Owl (since many are not finalized until students choose the topic by majority vote online) but will be made available no later than 7am Thursday BEFORE the week the topic is to be covered in class.  

4.0    COURSE OBJECTIVES

Students will learn about Cognitive Science, an exciting approach to how people think that combines multiples areas of psychology, computer science (artificial intelligence), neuroscience, neuropsychology, linguistics, philosophy of mind, and evolutionary theory. Students will learn about the disciplines that constitute Cognitive Science, particularly in terms of how they converge. We will focus on special topics that are chosen by the students based on areas not typically covered in standard psychology course.


   4.1    STUDENT LEARNING OUTCOMES

By the end of the course the successful student will:

 

-COMPARE and CONTRAST the various disciplines that make up cognitive science and how they contribute uniquely and independently to cognitive science (assessed by final exam)

-EXPLAIN the methodologies, concepts, and theories that are used by cognitive scientists (assessed by short papers, online discussions, and final exam)

-CRITIQUE and EVALUATE the methodologies, theories, and interpretations of evidence from cognitive science publications and other communications (assessed by final exam, short papers, and online discussions)

-IDENTIFY elements from studies in cognitive science that can be applied to our day-to-day lives and COMMUNICATE how research might be INTEGRATED into our day-to-day lives (assessed by short papers, online discussions, and final exam)

-PRODUCE connections between the laboratory work of cognitive science and real-life applications and practical usability (assessed by short papers and online discussions)

5.0     EVALUATION

There are THREE evaluative components that make up the final grade in the course.

 

5.1 - 40% - Final Exam (April Exam Period): This exam will be three hours long and will cover the entire course. It will be comprised of 8 short answer questions, one from each approach.

 

5.2 - 45% - Short Papers (3 papers X 15% each): For each of your three short papers you will consider the question, “How should (or perhaps shouldn’t) the research covered in class impact the real world and everyday life?”  In essence, you’ll be asking Who Cares?  These are primarily your own original thoughts and ideas put to papers.  We don’t have a lot of time in class to explicitly discuss real world applications for all that we uncover in class (and in readings) but I do want to get you thinking about practical applications where possible. 

 

These papers should be 4-5 pages double-spaced with regular margins and 12 point font.  There are no formatting requirements apart from that.  You will be graded primarily on the degree of interesting and careful thought that the paper conveys involving themes from cognitive science.  This is in contrast to a research paper in which you summarize others’ work and already published ideas.  You are expected to express yourself in a way that reflects that you are a senior undergraduate student.  That is, a thought paper is not synonymous with a stream of consciousness and I expect excellent quality writing. 

 

You may invoke papers beyond those we cover in class or read each week but be aware that the real theme of the paper is the APPLICATION of the research we discuss.  If you know of, or can find, application research papers or sources, feel free to use and reference them.

 

Each short paper will be graded out of 15 and they contribute 45% for your course grade.  Papers must be handed in to the professor in class by 10:30am. I also need an electronic copy submitted to ASSIGNMENTS on Owl. You lose TWO marks from the total 15 for every 24 hour period that your paper is late.  Therefore, if your paper is handed in/uploaded at 10:31am (missing the deadline by just one minute!) you will lose one mark.  If your grade is 10/15 it will be reduced to 8/15 to account for the penalty. Technology issues (E. g., your internet gave out at home, your printer ate your paper) will not be accepted. DO NOT LEAVE THESE SHORT PAPERS TO THE LAST MINUTE!

 

Relevant topics and research are those that are covered prior to the due date of the paper in the following schedule:

 

Paper 1 is due Monday, February 6 and therefore relevant topics would be those from the philosophical and cognitive approaches.

Paper 2 is due Monday, March 6 and therefore relevant topics would be the neuroscience and evolutionary approaches.

Paper 3 is due Monday, March 27 and therefore relevant topics would be the linguistic, social, and Artificial Intelligence approaches.

            RUBRIC for Short Papers (graded out of 15)

7/15 for your ability to relate the research to me and its importance for application in the real world.

5/15 for your writing ability, clarity of thought, coherence of the ideas, and the general grammar and spelling. Remember, editing is absolutely crucial and that though good writing is hard good reading is easy (and should be if you want me to understand you).

            3/15 for the originality and thought provoking nature of your ideas.

            5.3 - 15% - Online Discussions (3 discussions X 5% each): The aim of the online discussions is to communicate, in a short form, your ideas from your paper. You will be limited to 100 words to convey your idea to the group.  But more than simply demonstrating that you can communicate concisely and clearly I want to see how you critique and assess others’ ideas.  Therefore, you will also read other students’ ideas and create a conversation on at least 2 other students’ ideas.  The discussions will open the Monday mornings at 7am on the days the papers are due and will continue throughout the week.  The discussion will close Friday at midnight that same week.  Students are encouraged to post as soon as they possibly can Monday and the expectation is that students will post sometime before Monday evening (7pm).  To be considered for a grade of 3/5 and above, as described in the rubric below, means you have met this time-based expectation. 

NOTE 1: Our class is far too large to create the kind of more intimate and meaningful conversations that I think are likely to be fruitful.  For this reason, the class will be divided into THREE separate discussion groups to limit group size to about 20 students.

NOTE 2: I will not take kindly to discussion posts that appear two minutes to midnight Friday when the discussion closes.  You cannot participate in a conversation when you wait to the deadline to contribute.  If I see that you were mute until Friday, then you can expect that I will consider you to be a non-contributor to discussion and this will be reflected in your grade as described below.

            RUBRIC for Online Discussions (graded out of 5)

            0/5 – You decided to skip the discussion and were a non-contributor.

1/5 – You did not meet the expectations for the online discussion.  You may have posted a poorly constructed summary of your paper and then failed to contribute to other students’ posts or perhaps you only contributed without any particular perceived thought or effort.  Typing “What a great idea!” or “What a terrible idea!” or similar sentiments are not considered as meaningful contributions.

3/5 – This is meeting the expectations of the online discussion.  You explained your paper within the word limit.  You also contributed to the conversations in at least two other students’ posts.  You were thoughtful in your responses.  To make this grade your own post was online by Monday evening (7pm) at the latest and your first contribution to another student happened before Tuesday evening (7pm) to qualify for this grade. You contributed to the conversation of at least two fellow classmates.

5/5 – You excelled in your online discussion.  You presented your idea in a concise, easy to read, easy to understand manner within the word limit. You created conversation with other students about their own ideas and this is beyond the minimum requirements for the discussion.  Additionally, you were using critique, not being critical, and you were clear and relevant in your contributions.  You exemplified the good communication practices we need to hone as cognitive scientists.  To make this grade your own post was online by Monday evening (7pm) and your first contribution to another student happened before Tuesday evening (7pm).  Additionally, you also actually created conversation online for at least two classmates, possibly more, not just filling space and you contributed in a meaningful and thoughtful way that added to our knowledge.

Part marks may be used.

            All evaluative components due dates are covered in section 6.0


Although the Psychology Department does not require instructors to adjust their course grades to conform to specific targets, the expectation is that course marks will be distributed around the following averages:


70%     1000-level and 2000-level courses
72%     2190-2990 level courses
75%     3000-level courses
80%     4000-level courses
   
The Psychology Department follows the University of Western Ontario grading guidelines, which are as follows (see http://www.uwo.ca/univsec/pdf/academic_policies/general/grades_undergrad.pdf ):

A+  90-100      One could scarcely expect better from a student at this level
A    80-89        Superior work that is clearly above average
B    70-79        Good work, meeting all requirements, and eminently satisfactory
C    60-69        Competent work, meeting requirements
D    50-59        Fair work, minimally acceptable
F    below 50    Fail



6.0  TEST AND EXAMINATION SCHEDULE

These are organized by due dates which includes non-class days. 

 

EVALUATIVE COMPONENT

DUE DATE

CONTRIBUTION

CUMULATIVE

Short Paper 1

Monday Feb 6

15%

15%

Online Discussion 1

Feb 6 - 10

5%

20%

Short Paper 2

Monday Mar 6

15%

35%

Online Discussion 2

Mar 6 - 10

5%

40%

Short Paper 3

Monday Mar 27

15%

55%

Online Discussion 3

Mar 27 - 31

5%

60%

Final Exam

TBA: April 9 - 30

40%

100%

 

Due Dates: Any assignment can be submitted before the Due Date and so there are no extensions on assignments.  All deadlines are at 11:55pm the date stated EXCEPT for the Short Papers which are due by classtime on the relevant Mondays.


7.0   CLASS SCHEDULE

Those classes marked with “TBA” are those for which the students will choose the special issue to be covered with the weekly topic.  There is a poll on Owl with summaries of the choices.  Students pick one of two choices present for each of the five topics that are labeled TBA. The choice for each topic with the most votes will be the special issue covered by the professor in class. After the poll closes on January 20 at midnight, the professor will post the results in our schedule on the home page. 

 

MONDAY 10:30-12:30

WEDNESDAY 10:30-11:30

Jan 9 

Hello and Intro

Jan 11

No class

Jan 16

Philosophical Approach

Jan 18

Philosophical Approach

Jan 23

Cognitive Approach

Jan 25

Cognitive Approach

Jan 30

Cognitive Approach

Feb 1

open if necessary

Feb 6

TBA Neuroscience Approach

Feb 8

TBA Neuroscience Approach

Feb 13

TBA Neuroscience Approach

Feb 15

open if necessary

Feb 20

READING WEEK

Feb 22

READING WEEK

Feb 27

TBA Evolutionary Approach

Mar 1

TBA Evolutionary Approach

Mar 6

TBA Linguistic Approach

Mar 8

TBA Linguistic Approach

Mar 13

TBA Social Approach

Mar 15

TBA Social Approach

Mar 20

TBA Artificial Intelligence Approach

Mar 22

TBA Artificial Intelligence Approach

Mar 27

Intelligent Agents and Embodiment

Mar 29

Intelligent Agents and Embodiment

Apr 3

Intelligent Agents and Embodiment

Apr 5

open if necessary

 

 

7.1 TBA Topics: To be decided in the online POLL before January 20 at midnight.

 

Topics with Brief Synopses. For each topic you can pick from Option 1 or Option 2.

 

The Neuroscience Approach

Option1 - Mind Reading

Cognitive Science being asked: Can we simulate mind?

            Recent work in our understanding of the brain and how it leads to conscious thought has been intriguing. There have been advances that allow us to predict, somewhat, what is in mind based on patterns of brain activation. Imagine if I could scan your brain and know if you were lying to me or if I could cause brain activation that would make you think of a green elephant shopping at the Gap. Sounds like science fiction but maybe the next time you’re asked to go down to the police station to prove that you aren’t the Mustang Murderer they will put you into an fMRI instead of an interrogation room.

 

Option 2 – Consciousness and Free Will

Cognitive Science question being asked: Is mind just the sum of ones and zeroes?

            Though cognitive science is a broad field that encompasses multiple disciplines, sometimes people see the aim of cognitive science as reducing the human mind to the excitation and inhibition of neurons in the cortex. This is reductionism.  Though it is pragmatically appealing because it seems, like mathematics, to give us equations that underlie behaviour, it is dangerous because it cannot explain the “mind”, only brain function.  Reductionism also is psychologically unappealing because a reductionist approach renders free will absent from the organism. Or maybe you have no free will at all and if I only knew what two neurons of yours to rub together I could turn you into an Einstein or a Picasso.

 

The Evolutionary Approach

Option 1 – The Cognitive Science of Religious Behaviour

Cognitive Science question being asked: has mind evolved to control other minds?

            Religious behaviour is uniquely human. It is one of those behaviours that has failed to disappear even when churches as institutions hold less and less influence over us and even when scientific progress reveals more and more answers to our natural world.  There are many varied explanations of how we have evolved a religious drive and we will discuss a few of these.  For instance, neurotheologists have suggested that our brain is set up to experience the Absolute Unitary Being whereas others claim that religious behaviour is simply a byproduct of other aspects of brain evolution. Is the reason you like to take psychedelics Saturday nights because it allows you to feel closer to God on Sunday morning? Or are you an atheist because your emotional responses are more robotic than theists?

 

Option 2 – Sexual Selection

Cognitive Science question being asked: Is mind only interested in one thing?

             In an age of cosmetics, plastic surgery, and flattering-angle selfies do physical sexual selection traits matter? Sexual selection is a driving force of change in species but have homo sapiens “thought” their way out of this?  We’ll look at how an evolutionary approach to the mind helps us to understand some interesting findings in how human choose mating partners.  For instance, is there a reason why more comics are male? Could humour be a trait used for sexual selection? And is it really a push-up bra and corset that make a female more attractive or is it her pheromones?

 

The Linguistic Approach

Option 1 - Language Programs the Mind

Cognitive Science question being asked: is language what creates mind?

            We are in a unique position as cognitive scientists. As one of my cognitive professors put it, it’s like looking for a horse while riding a horse (take a minute and think about that).  We are both the subject and the object of study. And arguably the only way we can even have the mind we have is because we have language. Though other species have great and fascinating communication systems, language is unique to humans. Can we use language to “program” behaviours? How much of the mind relies on language?

 

Option 2 – The Metaphorical Mind

Cognitive Science question being asked: is our thinking framed by analogical reasoning?

            When Rocket says that “Metaphors are gonna go over his head” in reference to Drax the Destroyer (from Guardians of the Galaxy), Drax says, “Nothing goes over my head. My reflexes are too fast. I would catch it”. But would Drax be able to communicate with humans (and other lifeforms like genetically engineered raccoons) if he didn’t understand metaphor?  Language is a limited tool of communication but it is the way in which we can create analogies to interactions with the world that allows us to truly enter into the minds of others. For this, we need metaphor and without it there is no ability to communicate about abstraction.

 

The Social Approach

Option 1 – Social Networking our Minds

Cognitive Science question being asked: is herd mentality helping to build mind?

            Who isn’t following someone on Twitter? Babies, very old people, and people living on an iceberg in the middle of the wifi-free Atlantic, that’s who.  What does the sheeplike nature of human information sharing reveal about the functions of our minds?  Even the most misanthropic of us are drawn to others like ourselves and part of the function of our minds is based on social action and getting inside each other’s heads.  What does it mean when that part of the mind is missing? Viral networking allow us to see some of the best and worst of effects of this sociality. And a side effect of living life online is that we have created massive amounts of data that are just there waiting on the salivating social scientist.

 

Option 2 – Parasitic Stress Models of Human Sociality

Cognitive Science question being asked: has environment created mind?

            And speaking of social drives, what about recent theory of human culture and social differences that suggests that we should consider how parasitic infestation may have guided many of the differences between us as social groups. Though many researchers look to the big picture, the environment, to explain the differences between us, a parasitic stress model tells us to look inward to our messy, delicate, and sometimes pained innards to find answers. As one reviewer puts it, parasites can make “Ridley Scott’s Alien look tame.” So why not consider them as able to guide our behaviours?

 

Artificial Intelligence Approach

Option 1 – Building a Human Brain

Cognitive Science question being asked: can we create a mind from nonhuman components?

            We have attempted multiple ways in which we can model the human brain.  With this topic we will explore some recent and varied attempts to create a human brain; Spaun, the Human Brain Project, and iCub. Each of these three take very different approaches to creating something that resembles the way in which the human mind functions.    Do I even need to go through the exhausting and stretchmarking dangers of incubating a new human brain or can I build one in my garage instead?

 

Option 2 – Video Gaming our Brains

Cognitive Science question being asked: can we train out minds to be better, last longer?

            The next time that someone in your life gets down on you about how much of your life you’re wasting playing video games you can tell them that you have a doctor’s prescription for exactly as many hours of playtime as you want. No longer something to be embarrassed about video gaming has been shown to improve a number of cognitive functions, but just make sure that you’re playing Call of Duty, not Tetris.  We’ll examine some of the claims around gaming as well as the industry of keeping dementia at bay known as Luminosity. We’ll also examine the ways in which Watson tried to play games with us. 


8.0     STATEMENT ON ACADEMIC OFFENCES

Students are responsible for understanding the nature and avoiding the occurrence of plagiarism and other scholastic offenses. Plagiarism and cheating are considered very serious offenses because they undermine the integrity of research and education. Actions constituting a scholastic offense are described at the following link:  http://www.uwo.ca/univsec/pdf/academic_policies/appeals/scholastic_discipline_undergrad.pdf

As of Sept. 1, 2009, the Department of Psychology will take the following steps to detect scholastic offenses. All multiple-choice tests and exams will be checked for similarities in the pattern of responses using reliable software, and records will be made of student seating locations in all tests and exams. All written assignments will be submitted to TurnItIn, a service designed to detect and deter plagiarism by comparing written material to over 5 billion pages of content located on the Internet or in TurnItIn’s databases. All papers submitted for such checking will be included as source documents in the reference database for the purpose of detecting plagiarism of papers subsequently submitted to the system. Use of the service is subject to the licensing agreement, currently between Western and Turnitin.com http://www.turnitin.com

Possible penalties for a scholastic offense include failure of the assignment, failure of the course, suspension from the University, and expulsion from the University.



9.0    POLICY ON ACCOMMODATION FOR MEDICAL ILLNESS

Western’s policy on Accommodation for Medical Illness can be found at:
http://www.westerncalendar.uwo.ca/2016/pg117.html

Students must see the Academic Counsellor and submit all required documentation in order to be approved for certain accommodation:
http://counselling.ssc.uwo.ca/procedures/medical_accommodation.html


10.0        OTHER INFORMATION

Office of the Registrar web site:  http://registrar.uwo.ca

Student Development Services web site: http://www.sdc.uwo.ca

Please see the Psychology Undergraduate web site for information on the following:

    http://psychology.uwo.ca/undergraduate/student_responsibilities/index.html

- Policy on Cheating and Academic Misconduct
- Procedures for Appealing Academic Evaluations
- Policy on Attendance
- Policy Regarding Makeup Exams and Extensions of Deadlines
- Policy for Assignments
- Short Absences
- Extended Absences
- Documentation
- Academic Concerns
- 2016 Calendar References

No electronic devices, including cell phones, will be allowed during exams.