Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Logic and Social Cognition

The Facts Matter, and so do Computational Models

  • Published:
Journal of Philosophical Logic Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This article takes off from Johan van Benthem’s ruminations on the interface between logic and cognitive science in his position paper “Logic and reasoning: Do the facts matter?”. When trying to answer Van Benthem’s question whether logic can be fruitfully combined with psychological experiments, this article focuses on a specific domain of reasoning, namely higher-order social cognition, including attributions such as “Bob knows that Alice knows that he wrote a novel under pseudonym”. For intelligent interaction, it is important that the participants recursively model the mental states of other agents. Otherwise, an international negotiation may fail, even when it has potential for a win-win solution, and in a time-critical rescue mission, a software agent may depend on a teammate’s action that never materializes. First a survey is presented of past and current research on higher-order social cognition, from the various viewpoints of logic, artificial intelligence, and psychology. Do people actually reason about each other’s knowledge in the way proscribed by epistemic logic? And if not, how can logic and cognitive science productively work together to construct more realistic models of human reasoning about other minds? The paper ends with a delineation of possible avenues for future research, aiming to provide a better understanding of higher-order social reasoning. The methodology is based on a combination of experimental research, logic, computational cognitive models, and agent-based evolutionary models.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Agotnes, T., & Alechina, N. (2007). The dynamics of syntactic knowledge. Journal of Logic and Computation, 17(1), 83–116.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Aiello, L. C. (1996). Hominine preadaptations for language and cognition. In K. Gibson, & P. Mellars (Eds.), Modelling the early human mind. (pp. 89–99). Cambridge: McDonald Institute for Archaeological Research.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Aktipis, C. A. (2004). Know when to walk away: Contingent movement and the evolution of cooperation. Journal of Theoretical Biology, 231, 249–260.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Alechina, N., Bertoli, P., Ghidini, C., Jago, M., Logan, B., & Serafini, L. (2006). Model checking space and time requirements for resource-bounded agents. In Proceedings of the fourth international workshop on model checking and artificial intelligence (pp. 16–30).

  5. Anderson, J. R. (2007). How can the human mind occur in the physical universe? New York: Oxford University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  6. Anderson, J. R., Bothell, D., Byrne, M. D., Douglass, S., Lebiere, C., & Qin, Y. (2004). An integrated theory of the mind. Psychological Review, 111(4), 1036–1060.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Anderson, J. R., & Lebiere, C. (1998). The atomic components of thought. Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Astington, J. W., Harris, P. L., & Olson, D. R. (Eds.) (1988). Developing theories of mind. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Axelrod, R. (1984). The evolution of cooperation. New York: Basic Books.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Bacharach, M. (2006). Beyond individual choice: Teams and frames in game theory. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Bacharach, M., & Stahl, D. O. (2000). Variable-frame level-n theory. Games and Economic Behavior, 32(2), 220–246.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Baltag, A., Moss, L. S., & Solecki, S. (2003). The logic of public announcements, common knowledge, and private suspicions. Technical report, Dept of Cognitive Science, Indiana University and Dept of Computing, Oxford University.

  13. Baron-Cohen, S., Leslie, A. M., & Frith, U. (1985). Does the autistic child have a theory of mind? Cognition, 21, 37–46.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Barwise, J. (1989). On the model theory of common knowledge. In: The situation in logic (pp. 201–221). Stanford: CSLI.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Barwise, J. (1989). The situation in logic. Stanford: CSLI.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Bello, P., & Cassimatis, N. (2006). Developmental accounts of theory-of-mind acquisition: Achieving clarity via computational cognitive modeling. In R. Sun, & N. Miyake (Eds.), Proceedings of twenty-eighth annual meeting of the cognitive science society (pp. 1014–1019). Vancouver: Cognitive Science Society.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Benz, A., & van Rooij, R. (2007). Optimal assertions, and what they implicate. A uniform game theoretic approach. Topoi, 26(1), 63–78 (Special issue on logic and psychology, edited by J.F.A.K. van Benthem, H. Hodges, and W. Hodges.)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Bonnay, D., & Égré, P. (2008). Margins for error in context. In M. Garcia-Carpintero, & M. Kölbel (Eds.), Relative truth (pp. 103–127). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Borst, J. P., Taatgen, N. A., & van Rijn, H. (2009). Problem representations in multitasking: An additional cognitive bottleneck. In A. Howes, D. Peebles, & R. Cooper (Eds.), Proceedings of the 9th international conference on cognitive modeling. Manchester: University of Manchester.

    Google Scholar 

  20. Bratman, M. (1987). Intention, plans, and practical reason. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  21. Burkart, J., & Heschl, A. (2007). Perspective taking or behaviour reading? Understanding visual access in common marmosets (callithrix jacchus). Animal Behaviour, 73, 457–469.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Byrne, R. W., & Whiten, A. (1988). Machiavellian intelligence: Social expertise and the evolution of intellect in monkeys, apes and humans. Oxford: Clarendon.

    Google Scholar 

  23. Cadoli, M., & Lenzerini, M. (1994). The complexity of propositional closed world reasoning and circumscription. Journal of Computer and System Sciences, 48, 255–310.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Cadoli, M., & Schaerf, M. (1995). Approximate inference in default logic and circumscription. Fundamenta Informaticae, 23, 123–143.

    Google Scholar 

  25. Call, J., & Tomasello, M. (2008). Does the chimpanzee have a theory of mind? 30 years later. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 12, 187–192.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Camerer, C. (2003). Behavioral game theory: Experiments in strategic interaction. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  27. Cangelosi, A., & Parisi, D. (Eds.) (2002). Simulating the evolution of language. Berlin: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  28. Clayton, N. S., Dally, J. M., & Emery, N. J. (2007). Social cognition by food-caching corvids. The western scrub-jay as a natural psychologist. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological Sciences, 362, 507–522.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Cosmides, L. (1989). The logic of social exchange: Has natural selection shaped how humans reason? Studies with the Wason Selection Task. Cognition, 31, 187–276.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Dapretto, M. (2006). Understanding emotions in others: Mirror neuron dysfunction in children with autism spectrum. Nature Neuroscience, 9(1), 28–30.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. David, N., Aumann, C., et al. (2008). Differential involvement of the posterior temporal cortex in mentalizing but not perspective taking. Social Cognitive and Affective Neuroscience, 3, 279–289.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. de Boer, B. (2001). The origins of vowel systems. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  33. de Villiers, J. G., & de Villiers, P. A. (2000). Linguistic determinism and the understanding of false beliefs. In P. Mitchell, & K. J. Riggs (Eds.), Children’s reasoning and the mind (pp. 191–228). East Sussex: Psychology.

    Google Scholar 

  34. Dennett, D. (1995). Darwin’s dangerous idea: Evolution and the meanings of life. New York: Simon and Schuster.

    Google Scholar 

  35. Dignum, F., Dunin-Kȩplicz, B., & Verbrugge, R. (2001). Creating collective intention through dialogue. Logic Journal of the IGPL, 9, 145–158.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Donkers, H. H. L. M., Uiterwijk, J. W. H. M., & van den Herik, H. J. (2005). Selecting evaluation functions in opponent-model search. Theoretical Computer Science, 349, 245–267.

    Google Scholar 

  37. Dunbar, R. (1992). Neocortex size as a constraint on group size in primates. Journal of Human Evolution, 22, 469–493.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Dunbar, R. (1996). Grooming, gossip and the evolution of language. London: Faber and Faber.

    Google Scholar 

  39. Dunin-Kȩplicz, B., & Verbrugge, R. (2002). Collective intentions. Fundamenta Informaticae, 51(3), 271–295.

    Google Scholar 

  40. Dunin-Kȩplicz, B., & Verbrugge, R. (2004). A tuning machine for cooperative problem solving. Fundamenta Informaticae, 63, 283–307.

    Google Scholar 

  41. Dunin-Kȩplicz, B., & Verbrugge, R. (2006). Awareness as a vital ingredient of teamwork. In P. Stone, & G. Weiss (Eds.), Proceedings of the fifth international joint conference on autonomous agents and multiagent systems (AAMAS’06) (pp. 1017–1024). New York: IEEE /ACM.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  42. Dziubiński, M. (2007). Complexity of the logic for multiagent systems with restricted modal context. In B. Dunin-Kȩplicz, & R. Verbrugge (Eds.), Proceedings of the third workshop on formal approaches to multi-agent systems (FAMAS’007) (pp. 1–18). Durham: Durham University.

    Google Scholar 

  43. Dziubiński, M., Verbrugge, R., & Dunin-Kȩplicz, B. (2007). Complexity issues in multiagent logics. Fundamenta Informaticae, 75(1-4), 239–262.

    Google Scholar 

  44. van Eijck, J. (2007). DEMO—a demo of epistemic modelling. In J. van Benthem, D. Gabbay, & B. Löwe (Eds.), Interactive logic—proceedings of the 7th Augustus de M organ workshop, number 1 in texts in logic and games (pp. 305–363). Amsterdam: University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  45. Emery, N. J. (2005). The evolution of social cognition. In A. Easton, & N. J. Emery (Eds.), Cognitive neuroscience of social behaviour (pp. 115–156). London: Psychology.

    Google Scholar 

  46. Erdal, D., & Whiten, A. (1996). Egalitarianism and Machiavellian intelligence in human evolution. In K. Gibson, & P. Mellars (Eds.), Modelling the early human mind (pp. 139–150). Cambridge: McDonald Institute for Archaeological Research.

    Google Scholar 

  47. Hill, J. C., et al. (2005). A cooperative multi-agent approach to free flight. In F. Dignum, et al. (Eds.), AAMAS ’05: Proceedings of the fourth international joint conference on autonomous agents and multiagent systems (pp. 1083–1090). New York: ACM.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  48. Emery, N. J., et al. (2007). Cognitive adaptations of social bonding in birds. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological Sciences, 362, 489–505.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  49. Fagin, R., & Halpern, J. (1988). Belief, awareness, and limited reasoning. Artificial Intelligence, 34, 39–76.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  50. Fagin, R., Halpern, J. Y., Moses, Y., & Vardi, M. Y. (1995). Reasoning about knowledge, 2nd ed., 2003. Cambridge: MIT.

    Google Scholar 

  51. Flobbe, L., Verbrugge, R., Hendriks, P., & Krämer, I. (2008). Children’s application of theory of mind in reasoning and language. Journal of Logic, Language and Information, 17, 417–442. (Special issue on formal models for real people, edited by M. Counihan.)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  52. Foley, R. A. (1996). Measuring cognition in extinct hominids. In K. Gibson, & P. Mellars (Eds.), Modelling the early human mind (pp. 57–65). Cambridge: McDonald Institute for Archaeological Research.

    Google Scholar 

  53. Gabbay, D. M., & Woods, J. (2001). The new logic. Logic Journal of the IGPL, 9, 157–190.

    Google Scholar 

  54. Gabbay, D. M., & Woods, J. (2008). Resource-origins of nonmonotonicity. Studia Logica, 88, 85–112. (Special issue on logic and the new psychologism, edited by H. Leitgeb).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  55. Gallese, V., & Goldman, A. (1998). Mirror neurons and the simulation theory of mind reading. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 2(12), 493–501.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  56. Gallese, V., Keysers, C., & Rizzolatti, G. (2004). A unifying view of the basis of social cognition. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 8(9), 396–403.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  57. Gärdenfors, P. (2009). The communicative and cognitive demands of cooperation. In J. van Eijck, & R. Verbrugge (Eds.), Games, actions and social software. Oxford: Oxford University Press. (Earlier short version appeared in Hommage à Wlodek: Philosophical papers dedicated to Wlodek Rabinowicz.)

    Google Scholar 

  58. Gattis, M., Bekkering, H., & Wohlschläger, A. (2002). Goal-directed imitation. In A. Meltzoff, & W. Prinz (Eds.), The imitative mind: development, evolution, and brain bases (pp. 183–205). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  59. Gilbert, N., & Troitzsch, K. G. (Eds.) (2005). Simulation for the social scientist. Maidenhead: Open University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  60. Hala, S., Hug, S., & Henderson, A. (2003). Executive function and false-belief understanding in preschool children: Two tasks are harder than one. Journal of Cognition and Development, 4, 275–298.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  61. Halpern, J. (1995). The effect of bounding the number of primitive propositions and the depth of nesting on the complexity of modal logic. Artificial Intelligence, 75, 361–372.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  62. Halpern, J. Y., & Moses, Y. (1990). Knowledge and common knowledge in a distributed environment. Journal of the ACM, 37, 549–587.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  63. Harbers, M., Verbrugge, R., Sierra, C., & Debenham, J. (2008). The examination of an information-based approach to trust. In P. Noriega, & J. Padget (Eds.), Coordination, organizatiosn, institutions and norms in agent systems III. Lecture notes in computer science (Vol. 4870, pp. 71–82). Berlin: Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  64. Hedden, T., & Zhang, J. (2002). What do you think I think you think? Strategic reasoning in matrix games. Cognition, 85, 1–36.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  65. Hendriks, P., & Spenader, J. (2006). When production precedes comprehension: An optimization approach to the acquisition of pronouns. Language Acquisition, 13(4), 319–348.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  66. Hendriks, P., van Rijn, H., & Valkenier, B. (2007). Learning to reason about speakers’ alternatives in sentence comprehension: A computational account. Lingua, 117(11), 1879–1896.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  67. Heyes, C. M. (1998). Theory of mind in non-human primates. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 21, 101–148.

    Google Scholar 

  68. Hintikka, J. (1962). Knowledge and belief. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  69. Hogrefe, G., & Wimmer, H. (1986). Ignorance versus false belief: A developmental lag in attribution of epistemic states. Child Development, 57, 567–582.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  70. Hurley, S. (2005). Social heuristics that make us smarter. Philosophical Psychology, 18(5), 585–611.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  71. Hurley, S. (2008). The shared circuits model: How control, mirroring and simulation can enable imitation, deliberation, and mindreading. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 31, 1–22.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  72. Jager, W., Popping, R., & van de Sande, H. (2001). Clustering and fighting in two-party crowds: Simulating the approach-avoidance conflict. Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, 4(3). http://jasss.soc.surrey.ac.uk/4/3/7.html .

  73. Jennings, N. R., & Bussmann, S. (2003). Agent-based control systems: Why are they suited to engineering complex systems? IEEE Control Systems Magazine, 23(3), 61–74.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  74. Jennings, N. R., Sycara, K., & Wooldridge, M. (1998). A roadmap of agent research and development. Autonomous Agents and Multi-agent Systems, 1, 7–38.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  75. Kaplan, F., & Hafner, V. (2004). The challenge of joint attention. In L. Barthouze, et al. (Eds.), Proceedings of the fourth conference on epigenetic robotics: modelling cognitive development in robotic systems (pp. 67–74). Lund: Lund University.

    Google Scholar 

  76. Karmiloff-Smith, A. (1992). Beyond modularity: A developmental perspective on cognitive science. Cambridge: MIT.

    Google Scholar 

  77. Kennedy, W. G., & Trafton, J. G. (2007). Using simulations to model shared mental models. In R. L. Lewis, T. A. Polk, & J. E. Laird (Eds.), Proceedings of the eighth international conference on cognitive modeling (pp. 253–245). London: Psychology / Taylor and Francis.

    Google Scholar 

  78. Keysar, B., Lin, S., & Barr, D. J. (2003). Limits on theory of mind use in adults. Cognition, 89, 25–41.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  79. Keysers, C., & Gazzola, V. (2007). Integrating simulation and theory of mind: From self to social cognition. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 11(5), 194–196.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  80. Knauff, M. (2007). How our brains reason logically. Topoi, 26(1), 19–36. (Special issue on logic and psychology, edited by J.F.A.K. van Benthem, H. Hodges, and W. Hodges.)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  81. Krause, J., & Ruxton, G. D. (2002). Living in groups. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  82. Kripke, S. (1959). A completeness theorem in modal logic. Journal of Symbolic Logic, 24, 1–14.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  83. Lebiere, C., Wallach, D., & West, R. (2000). A memory-based account of the prisoner’s dilemma and other 2x2 games. In N. A. Taatgen, & J. Aasman (Eds.), Proceedings of third international conference on cognitive modeling (pp. 185–193). Veenendaal: Universal Press.

    Google Scholar 

  84. Leitgeb, H. (2008). Introduction to the special issue. Studia Logica, 88, 1–2. (Special issue on logic and the new psychologism, edited by H. Leitgeb.)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  85. Levesque, H. J., Cohen, P. R., & Nunes, J. H. T. (1990). On acting together. In Proceedings eighth national conference on AI (AAAI90) (pp. 94–99). Menlo Park: AAAI and MIT.

    Google Scholar 

  86. Lin, R., & Krauss, S., et al. (2008). Negotiating with bounded rational agents in environments with incomplete information using an automated agent. Artificial Intelligence Journal, 172(6–7), 823–851.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  87. Litman, L., & Reber, A. S. (2005). Implicit cognition and thought. In K. J. Holyoak, & R. G. Morrison (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of thinking and reasoning (pp. 431–453). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  88. Liu, F. (2006). Diversity of agents. In T. Agotnes, & N. Alechina (Eds.), Proceedings of the workshop on resource-bounded agents (pp. 88–98). European Summer School on Logic, Language and Information, Malaga.

  89. Mant, C. M., & Perner, J. (1988). The child’s understanding of commitment. Developmental Psychology, 24, 343–351.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  90. Marr, D. (1982). Vision. New York: Freeman.

    Google Scholar 

  91. Matessa, M. (2001). Interactive models of collaborative communication. In J. D. Moore, & K. Stenning (Eds.), Proceedings of the twenty-third annual meeting of the cognitive science society (pp. 606–610). Mahwah: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  92. McCarthy, J., Minsky, M., Rochester, N., & Shannon, C. (1955). Proposal for the Dartmouth summer research project on artificial intelligence. Technical report, Dartmouth College.

  93. McKelvey, R. D., & Palfrey, T. R. (1992). An experimental study of the centipede game. Econometrica, 60(4), 803–836.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  94. Melis, A. P., Hare, B., & Tomasello, M. (2006). Chimpanzees recruit the best collaborators. Science, 311, 1297–1300.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  95. Modica, S., & Rustichini, A. (1999). Unawareness and partitional information structures. Games and Economic Behavior, 27, 265–298.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  96. Moll, H., & Tomasello, M. (2007). Cooperation and human cognition: The Vygotskian intelligence hypothesis. Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences, 362, 639–648.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  97. Nagel, R. (1995). Unraveling in guessing games: An experimental study. American Economical Review, 85, 1313–1326.

    Google Scholar 

  98. Nichols, S., & Stich, S. (2003). Mindreading: An integrated account of pretence, self-awareness, and understanding of other minds. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  99. Oakman, J. (2002). The Camp D avid Accords: A case study on international negotiation. Technical report, Princeton University, Woodrow Wilson School of Public and International Affairs.

  100. Onishi, K. H., & Baillargeon, R. (2005). Do 15-month-old infants understand false beliefs? Science, 308, 255–258.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  101. Pacuit, E., Parikh, R., & Cogan, E. (2006). The logic of knowledge based obligation. Synthese: Knowledge, Rationality and Action, 149, 57–87.

    Google Scholar 

  102. Parikh, R. (2003). Levels of knowledge, games, and group action. Research in Economics, 57, 267–281.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  103. Parikh, R. (2007). Logical omniscience in the many agent case. Technical report, City University of New York, New York.

  104. Parker, G.A., & Maynard Smith, J. (1990). Optimality theory in evolutionary biology. Nature, 348, 27–33.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  105. Pauly, M. (2002). A modal logic for coalitional power in games. Journal of Logic and Computation, 12, 149–166.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  106. Perner, J. (1988). Higher-order beliefs and intentions in children’s understanding of social interaction. In J. W. Astington, P. L. Harris, & D. R. Olson (Eds.), Developing theories of mind (pp. 271–294). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  107. Perner, J., & Wimmer, H. (1985). “John thinks that Mary thinks that ...”: Attribution of second-order beliefs by 5- to 10-year old children. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 5, 125–137.

    Google Scholar 

  108. Povinelli, D., & Vonk, J. (2003). Chimpanzee minds: Suspiciously human? Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 7, 157–160.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  109. Premack, D., & Woodruff, G. (1978). Does the chimpanzee have a theory of mind? Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 4, 515–526.

    Google Scholar 

  110. Pynadath, D. V., & Marsella, S. C. (2005). PsychSim: Modeling theory of mind with decision-theoretic agents. In L. Kaelbling, & A. Saffiotti (Eds.), Proceedings of the 19th international joint conference on artificial intelligence (pp. 1181–1186). Edinburgh: Professional Bookcenter.

    Google Scholar 

  111. Raiffa, H. (1982). The art and science of negotiation. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  112. Rao, A., & Georgeff, M. (1991). Modeling rational agents within a BDI-architecture. In R. Fikes, & E. Sandewall (Eds.), Proceedings of the second conference on knowledge representation and reasoning (pp. 473–484). San Francisco: Morgan Kaufman

    Google Scholar 

  113. Rose, H., & Rose, S. (Eds.) (2000). Alas, poor Darwin: Arguments against evolutionary psychology. New York: Random House.

    Google Scholar 

  114. Rosenschein, J. S., & Zlotkin, G. (1994). Rules of encounter: Designing conventions for automated negotiation among computers. Cambridge: MIT.

    Google Scholar 

  115. Rosenthal, R. (1981). Games of perfect information, predatory pricing, and the chain store. Journal of Economic Theory, 25, 92–100.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  116. Roy, O. (2006). Commitment-based decision making for bounded agents. In T. Agotnes, & N. Alechina (Eds.), Proceedings of the workshop on resource-bounded agents (pp. 112–123). European Summer School on Logic, Language and Information, Malaga.

  117. Rubinstein, A. (1998). Modeling bounded rationality. Cambridge: MIT.

    Google Scholar 

  118. Russell, S., & Norvig, P. (2003). Artificial intelligence: A modern approach, 2nd ed. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  119. Salvucci, D., & Taatgen, N. A. (2008). Threaded cognition: An integrated theory of concurrent multitasking. Psychological Review, 115, 101–130.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  120. Saxe, R., Carey, S., & Kanwisher, N. (2004). Understanding other minds: Linking developmental psychology and functional neuroimaging. Annual Review of Psychology, 55, 87–124.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  121. Schomaker, L., Hoenkamp, E., & Mayberry, M. (1998). Towards collaborative agents for automatic handwriting recognition. In Proceedings of the third European workshop on handwriting analysis and recognition. Digest, (Volume 1998/440 pp. 13/1–13/6). London: The Institution of Electrical Engineers.

    Google Scholar 

  122. Schurr, N., Marecki, J., Tambe, M., & Scerri, P. (2005). Towards flexible coordination of human-agent teams. Multiagent and Grid Systems, 1(1), 3–16.

    Google Scholar 

  123. Slingerland, I., Mulder, M., van der Vaart, E., & Verbrugge, R. (2009). A multi-agent systems approach to gossip and the evolution of language. In N. Taatgen, et al. (Eds.), Proceedings of the 31st annual meeting of the cognitive science society (CogSci’09) (pp. 1609–1614). Amsterdam.

  124. Southgate, V., Senju, A., & Csibra, G. (2007). Action anticipation through attribution of false belief by 2-year-olds. Psychological Science, 18(7), 587–592.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  125. Stahl, D. O., & Wilson, P. W. (1995). On players’ models of other players: Theory and experimental evidence. Games and Economic Behavior, 10, 218–254.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  126. Stalnaker, R. (1984). Inquiry. Cambridge: MIT.

    Google Scholar 

  127. Stenning, K., & van Lambalgen, M. (2001). Semantics as a foundation for psychology: A case study of Wason’s selection task. Journal of Logic, Language and Information, 10, 273–317.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  128. Stenning, K., & van Lambalgen, M. (2007). Logic in the study of psychatric disorders: Executive function and rule-following. Topoi, 26(1), 97–114. (Special issue on logic and psychology, edited by J.F.A.K. van Benthem, H. Hodges, and W. Hodges).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  129. Stenning, K., & van Lambalgen, M. (2008). Human reasoning and cognitive science. Cambridge: MIT.

    Google Scholar 

  130. Sterelny, K. (2003). Thought in a hostile world: The evolution of human cognition. Oxford: Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  131. Stulp, F., & Verbrugge, R. (2002). A knowledge-based algorithm for the internet protocol TCP. Bulletin of Economic Research, 54(1), 69–94.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  132. Sycara, K., & Lewis, M. (2004). Integrating intelligent agents into human teams. In E. Salas, & S. Fiore (Eds.), Team cognition: Understanding the factors that drive process and performance (pp. 203–232). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  133. Taatgen, N. A., & Anderson, J. R. (2002). Why do children learn to say “broke”? A model of learning the past tense without feedback. Cognition, 86(2)(2), 123–155.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  134. Taatgen, N. A., Huss, D., & Anderson, J. R. (2006). How cognitive models can inform the design of instructions. In D. Fum, F. del Missier, & A. Stocco (Eds.), Proceedings of the seventh international conference on cognitive modeling (pp. 304–309). University of Trieste.

  135. Taatgen, N. A., & Lee, F. J. (2003). Production compilation: A simple mechanism to model complex skill acquisition. Human Factors, 45(1), 61–76.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  136. Tager-Flussberg, H., & Sullivan, K. (1994). A second look at second-order belief attribution in autism. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 24, 577–586.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  137. Tomasello, M., Call, J., & Hare, B. (2003). Chimpanzees understand psychological states – the question is which ones and to what extent. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 7, 153–156.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  138. Tooby, J., & Cosmides, L. (Eds.) (2000). Evolutionary psychology: Foundational papers. Cambridge: MIT.

    Google Scholar 

  139. van Benthem, J. F. A. K. (2005). Correspondence theory. In D. M. Gabbay, & F. Guenthner (Eds.), Handbook of philosophical logic (2nd ed., Vol. 3, pp. 325–408). Kluwer: Dordrecht. (An earlier version appeared in volume II of the first edition of the Handbook.).

    Google Scholar 

  140. van Benthem, J. F. A. K. (2007). Cognition as interaction. In Proceedings symposium on cognitive foundations of interpretation (pp. 27–38). Amsterdam: KNAW.

    Google Scholar 

  141. van Benthem, J. F. A. K. (2008). Logic and reasoning: Do the facts matter? Studia Logica, 88, 67–84. (Special issue on logic and the new psychologism, edited by H. Leitgeb)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  142. van Benthem, J. F. A. K., Gerbrandy, J., & Pacuit, E. (2007). Merging frameworks for interaction: DEL and ETL. In D. Samet (Ed.), Theoretical aspects of rationality and knowledge: Proceedings of the eleventh conference, TARK 2007 (pp. 72–81). Louvain-la-Neuve: Presses Universitaires de Louvain.

  143. van Benthem, J. F. A. K., Hodges, H., & Hodges, W. (2007). Introduction. Topoi, 26(1), 1–2. (Special issue on logic and psychology, edited by J.F.A.K. van Benthem, H. Hodges, and W. Hodges.).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  144. van Benthem, J. F. A. K., van Eijck, J., & Kooi, B. (2006). Logics of communication and change. Information and Computation, 204(11), 1620–1662.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  145. van der Hoek, W., & Verbrugge, R. (2002). Epistemic logic: A survey. In L. A. Petrosjan, & V. V. Mazalov (Eds.), Game theory and applications (Vol. 8, pp. 53–94). New York: Nova Science.

    Google Scholar 

  146. van der Hoek, W., & Wooldridge, M. (2003). Time, knowledge and cooperation: Alternating-time temporal epistemic logic and its applications. Studia Logica, 75(1), 125–157.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  147. van der Maas, H. L. J., & Jansen, B. R. J. (2003). What response times tell of children’s behavior on the balance scale task. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 85, 141–177.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  148. van der Vaart, E., Hankel, A., de Boer, B., & Verheij, B. (2006). Agents adopting agriculture: Modeling the agricultural transition. In From animals to animats 9: Ninth international conference on simulation of adaptive behavior. LNCS (Vol. 4095, pp. 750–761). Berlin: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  149. van der Vaart, E., Hemelrijk, C., & Verbrugge, R. (2009). A cognitive model for corvids: Learning where (not) to cache. In N. Taatgen et al. (Eds.), Proceedings of the 31st annual meeting of the cognitive science society (CogSci’09) (pp. 2420–2425). Amsterdam.

  150. van der Vaart, E., & Verbrugge, R. (2008). Agent-based models for animal cognition: A proposal and a prototype. In International conference on autonomous agents and multi-agent systems (AAMAS) (pp. 1145–1152). New York: ACM.

    Google Scholar 

  151. van der Vaart, E., Verbrugge, R., & Hemelrijk, C. (2009). Memory in Clark’s nutcrackers: A cognitive model for corvids. In A. Howes, D. Peebles, & R. Cooper (Eds.), Proceedings of the 9th international conference on cognitive modeling. Manchester: University of Manchester.

    Google Scholar 

  152. van Ditmarsch, H., & French, T. (2009). Awareness and forgetting of facts and agents. In WLIAMAS, proceedings of the 2009 IEEE/WIC/ACM international joint conferences on web intelligence and intelligent agent technologies (WI-IAT 2009). Milan: IEEE Computer Society.

    Google Scholar 

  153. van Ditmarsch, H., & Labuschagne, W. (2007). My beliefs about your beliefs: A case study in theory of mind and epistemic logic. Synthese: Knowledge, Rationality and Action, 155, 191–209.

    Google Scholar 

  154. van Ditmarsch, H., van Eijck, J., & Verbrugge, R. (2009). Common knowledge and common belief. In J. van Eijck, & R. Verbrugge (Eds.), Discourses on social software. Texts in games and logic (Vol. 5). Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  155. van Ditmarsch, H. P. (2002). The description of game actions in Cluedo. In L. A. Petrosjan, & V. V. Mazalov (Eds.), Game theory and applications (Vol. 8, pp. 1–28). New York: Nova Science.

  156. van Ditmarsch, H. P., van der Hoek, W., & Kooi, B. P. (2007). In Dynamic epistemic logic, Synthese library series (Vol. 337). Berlin: Springer.

  157. van Eijck, J., & Verbrugge, R. (Eds.) (2009). Discourses on social software. Texts in games and logic (Vol. 5). Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press.

  158. van Lambalgen, M., & Counihan, M. (2008). Formal models for real people. Journal of Logic, Language and Information, 17, 385–389. (Special issue on formal models for real people, edited by M. Counihan.).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  159. Van Maanen, L., & Van Rijn, H. (2007). An accumulator model of semantic interference. Cognitive Systems Research, 8, 174–181.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  160. van Rijn, H., van Someren, M., & van der Maas, H. (2003). Modeling developmental transitions on the balance scale task. Cognitive Science, 27(2), 227–257.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  161. van Rooij, I. (2008). The tractable cognition thesis. Cognitive Science, 32, 939–984.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  162. Verberne, A., van Harmelen, F., & ten Teije, A. (2000). Anytime diagnostic reasoning using approximate boolean constraint propagation. In A. G. Cohn, F. Giunchiglia, & B. Selman (Eds.), Proceedings of the seventh international conference on principles of knowledge representation and reasoning (pp. 323–332).

  163. Verbrugge, R., & Mol, L. (2008). Learning to apply theory of mind. Journal of Logic, Language and Information, 17, 489–511. (Special issue on formal models for real people, edited by M. Counihan.).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  164. von Wright, G. H. (1951). An essay in modal logic. Amsterdam: North Holland.

    Google Scholar 

  165. Wason, P. C. (1966). Reasoning. In B. M. Foss (Ed.), New Horizons in Psychology I, (pp. 135–151). Harmondsworth: Penguin.

    Google Scholar 

  166. Wellman, H. (1991). From desires to beliefs: Acquisition of a theory of mind. In A. Whiten (Ed.), Natural theories of mind (pp. 19–38). Oxford: Basil Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  167. West, R. L., Lebiere, C., & Bothell, D. J. (2006). Cognitive architectures, game playing, and human evolution. In R. Sun (Ed.), Cognition and multi-agent interaction: From cognitive modeling to social simulation (pp. 103–123). New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  168. Whiten, A., & Byrne, R. W. (1997). Machiavellian intelligence II. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  169. Williamson, T. (2000). Knowledge and its limits. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  170. Wimmer, H., & Perner, J. (1983). Beliefs about beliefs: Representation and constraining function of wrong beliefs in young children’s understanding of deception. Cognition, 13, 103–128.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  171. Wooldridge, M. J. (2002). An introduction to multiagent systems. Chichester: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Institute of Artificial Intelligence, University of Groningen, PO Box 407, 9700 AK, Groningen, The Netherlands

    Rineke Verbrugge

Authors
  1. Rineke Verbrugge
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Rineke Verbrugge.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Verbrugge, R. Logic and Social Cognition. J Philos Logic 38, 649–680 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10992-009-9115-9

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10992-009-9115-9

Keywords

Search

Navigation