Sam Gershman

Sam Gershman

@gershbrain.bsky.social

Professor, Department of Psychology and Center for Brain Science, Harvard University https://gershmanlab.com/

10.9K followers67 following984 posts

Sam Gershman reposted

🚨 Preprint alert! 👶🧠🌊 "The Emergence of a Distinction between Things and Stuff" osf.io/preprints/ps... So excited to share my first infant study, with the wonderful Sanghee Song and Liz Spelke.🎉 Do babies expect sand to behave differently from solid objects? 🧵1/5

This takes us a step closer to understanding how a hypothetical Newtonian physics engine in the brain interacts with other systems for physical prediction.

Sam Gershman reposted

Amazing work by @sromeropinto.bsky.social ! Sandra found that in Pavlovian tasks with hidden states, neural population dynamics in mouse OFC resemble beliefs/state-inference

bioRxiv Neuroscience@biorxiv-neursci.bsky.social

Dynamic belief representation and updating through learned attractor-like dynamics in the frontal cortex https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.64898/2026.09.17.752495v1

This is interesting, but I'm having trouble with parts of the argument. It says that the same phenomena support both radical positions, but it doesn't seem to be the same phenomena. The data from newborn chicks supports nativism, but the "data" from ML support empiricism. These are different.

Jake Quilty-Dunn@quiltydunn.bsky.social

New paper, co-authored with Justin Wood, in @cp-trendscognsci.bsky.social: The Nativist-Empiricist Debate Is Broken We argue that radical nativism and radical empiricism are compatible and, in some cases, both plausibly true. So something is wrong. 🧵 Author share link here, valid til Oct 31:

I also disagree that results from training artificial models can tell us anything positive about how real minds work, beyond sufficiency for certain competences. You can't go from existence proof to confirmation that it actually works that way in real minds.

Sam Gershman reposted

We present PlayTrain, a new Reinforcement Learning (RL) framework that reimagines how we build video-game environments for RL by harnessing LLMs’ ability to write JavaScript games. PlayTrain turns single-file JS browser games into RL environments ready for efficient training.

Pay attention to Arthur: he’s breathing fresh life into psychophysics.

Arthur Prat@arthurpr4t.bsky.social

We derived six laws of psychophysics from a single efficient-coding equation. The laws include Weber's law; scaling laws in visual working memory (which had been noted before, but with unclear theoretical justification); Wei & Stocker's law of human perception; arthurprat.com/pdfs/Prat-Ca...

Sam Gershman reposted

Yes, some people are worse at writing than an LLM. Those people are also usually incoherent thinkers. If they learned to write better, they would get better at thinking.

If this makes you mad, submit your cognitive science research to @openmindjournal.bsky.social No APCs, no subscription fees. It's funded by university libraries, at low cost.

Eric Schares@eschares.bsky.social

🚨Update: Our analysis of global APC expenditure has now been expanded to cover more publishers (7 -> 14) and more years (2019-2025). We estimate $15B in APCs paid over seven years, $3.7B in 2025 alone. Elsevier crosses the $1B threshold by itself in 2025. arxiv.org/abs/2608.16322 #ScholComm

@arthurpr4t.bsky.social has a new preprint with important results on a famous psychophysical law (Weber's law). It isn't, in fact, a law, because it can be broken. A more fundamental principle (efficient coding) shows when and why Weber's law holds true. www.biorxiv.org/content/10.6...

biorxiv.orgEfficient coding makes and breaks Weber's lawWeber's law is a rare quantitative regularity in psychology, yet its origins remain debated. Here we provide causal evidence that it arises from the more fundamental principle of efficient coding. Thi...
View full thread

This is a good time to remind everybody that if you communicate with university PR or journalists about correlational research, tell them that language like "linked to", "associated with" etc. is *not* neutral; readers will draw causal implicatures even if the work does not establish causation.

The key idea is that (in English) predicates which take the subject as cause are more frequent and syntactically simpler, thus favored by a cost-sensitive pragmatic reasoner.

I'm really excited about this work. In addition to a new genome assembly for Stentor, we show through transcriptomics that a pathway for long-term depression (in neurons) is involved in mechanosensory habituation... despite the cell having no synapses!

bioRxiv Molecular Biology@biorxiv-molbio.bsky.social

An improved Stentor coeruleus genome and time-resolved transcriptomics link cyclic nucleotide-dependent kinase signaling to single-cell habituation https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.64898/2026.07.23.740246v1

As a matter of experimental design, if you want to draw very broad conclusions, your stimuli and task need to be correspondingly broad. This is not the case for the IBL task, and I doubt any single task would be adequate. I worry that the IBL approach is not suitable for such broad questions.

There is a long history of carefully designing experiments with many controls to make strong claims about specific forms of selectivity in the brain. There are trade-offs (low coverage in the space of variables, so you miss things), which is why you need many experiments to make this work.

The authors acknowledge this concern at the end of the Discussion, raising the point that maybe clustering only arises in more complex tasks. I think the more important point is not about task-specific functional organization but rather about the questions that can be answered with a single task.

Sam Gershman reposted

calling all researchers who collect data from humans 🧠🧪 we are running a very brief survey (<1 min) about jsPsych, the software ecosystem for browser-based data collection. if you use jsPsych, or if you collect data with any other software, please fill it out at tinyurl.com/jspsych-census!

Sam Gershman reposted

We're looking for volunteers for our #CCN2026 community event's live problem-solving demos! Join a 10min think-aloud session solving an everyday planning task or playing a video game, and help kick off our panel discussions. 🎬 🙌 Please sign up here if you're interested: forms.gle/D7HNwFE1pet9...

forms.gleCCN 2026 Naturalistic Problem Solving event interest formPlease fill out this form if you're interested in attending our community event at CCN 2026! No sign-up required to join, but an RSVP helps us get a headcount. Time: Wednesday, 5th August 2026, 16:0...
Liu, Shuze@liushuze.bsky.social

Join us at both conferences this summer! Our #CogSci2026 workshop features a series of invited talks on problem representations and abstractions. Our #CCN2026 community event opens a broader discussion on naturalistic problem solving: frameworks, tasks, methods, and where the field should go next.

I've seen attempts to rehabilitate BF Skinner, arguing that he was unfairly maligned (most famously by Chomsky), that he was caricatured by cognitive scientists. I was surprised to hear even Josh Tenenbaum say that Skinner wasn't so bad. So I picked up "Science and Human Behavior" to see for myself.

View full thread

I'm reminded of what Hannah Arendt wrote about behaviorist theories in The Human Condition, that their problem is not "that they are wrong, but that they could become true." Now more than ever, we should be wary of such projects.

I've seen attempts to rehabilitate BF Skinner, arguing that he was unfairly maligned (most famously by Chomsky), that he was caricatured by cognitive scientists. I was surprised to hear even Josh Tenenbaum say that Skinner wasn't so bad. So I picked up "Science and Human Behavior" to see for myself.

View full thread

The reason he can maintain such an inconsistency is the non-computational nature of his explanations. Because he doesn't feel the need to show how the full stimulus-response mapping is implemented computationally, he doesn't detect his own blind spots.

My last point is sociological. Skinner views psychology's raison d'etre as control of behavior. This is troubling to me, because it very easily lends itself to totalitarian systems. He addresses this at the end, but his solution is basically "more control" (people controlling their government).

I've seen attempts to rehabilitate BF Skinner, arguing that he was unfairly maligned (most famously by Chomsky), that he was caricatured by cognitive scientists. I was surprised to hear even Josh Tenenbaum say that Skinner wasn't so bad. So I picked up "Science and Human Behavior" to see for myself.

View full thread

Second, his disavowal of "internal" (i.e., cognitive) explanation is inconsistent. His intuitions function as a kind of flotation device for behaviorist explanations. What was meant to be deflationary for cognitive explanation implicitly rests on subtle appeals to cognition.

For example, he discusses training animals to emit responses to stimulus relations. He presupposes that animals can identify relations. How do they do this? The "stimulus variables" in his account are in fact *outputs* of cognitive processes, but he doesn't want to admit this.

I've seen attempts to rehabilitate BF Skinner, arguing that he was unfairly maligned (most famously by Chomsky), that he was caricatured by cognitive scientists. I was surprised to hear even Josh Tenenbaum say that Skinner wasn't so bad. So I picked up "Science and Human Behavior" to see for myself.

There are several problems with Skinner. First, for someone so preoccupied with scientific rigor, it's ironic that a 450 page book about human behavior doesn't mention a single study of humans. It's all extrapolation from studies of pigeons and rats, interwoven with anecdotes.

Sam Gershman reposted

A brief history of Open Mind 2013: Dick Aslin was disillusioned with Cognition (Elsevier). Nick Lindsay (MIT Press) wanted to create an open access cognitive science journal Nick contacted Dick, and Open Mind started. Editorial, February 2017, issue 1 of Open Mind direct.mit.edu/opmi/article...

direct.mit.eduEditorialI am extremely pleased that Open Mind has gone from concept to reality with this inaugural issue of our first volume. It has been a long road. Nick Lindsay at MIT Press had a vision for creating an op...

Sam Gershman reposted

Sam Gershman reposted

It feels strange to share good news, but: I’m moving to UCSD in July!! 🥳 I'm very grateful for my time at Princeton and SO excited for what comes next. We're building multiplayer games to study how teams are shaped by the problems they solve. If that sounds fun to you, I'm accepting grad students!

Sam Gershman reposted

Join us at both conferences this summer! Our #CogSci2026 workshop features a series of invited talks on problem representations and abstractions. Our #CCN2026 community event opens a broader discussion on naturalistic problem solving: frameworks, tasks, methods, and where the field should go next.

Mark Ho@markkho.bsky.social

How do human minds make sense of big, messy problems? 😵‍💫🌀 How do we distill complexity into something simple enough to solve? 🤔💡 We’ll be tackling these questions (and more!) at two workshops on task representations, abstractions, and construals #CogSci2026 #CCN2026 🧵 framing-the-problem.github.io

Sam Gershman reposted

Sam Gershman reposted

In the 60s, an eccentric behavioral psychologist named James McConnell pureed a bunch of worms and fed them to other worms. For years after, he claimed that the cannibal worms learned the ground-up worms’ memories. Could he have been… right? www.quantamagazine.org/are-memories...

quantamagazine.orgAre Memories Transferable — or Edible? | Quanta MagazineIn the 1960s, worm-training experiments and their strange implications captivated the nation. Columnist Claire L. Evans follows the neuroscientists who attempted to recapture the magic.