Mental labour

By Wouter Kool, Matthew Botvinick. 2018

270 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Cognitive Neuroscience, General Decision Sciences, Safety Research

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Cognitive Neuroscience

In General Decision Sciences

In Safety Research

Citations in the corpus

Recurrent Independent Mechanisms (2019, background): “…Our work is also related to work in behavioural research that deals with two modes of decision making (Dickinson, 1985; Botvinick & Braver, 2015; Kool & Botvinick, 2018): an automatic systems that relies on habits and a controlled system that uses some privileged information for making decision…”
Inductive biases for deep learning of higher-level cognition (2020, background): “This observation suggests that system 2 cognition is crucial in order to achieve the kind of flexibility and robustness to changes in distribution required in the natural world (Shenhav et al., 2017; Kool and Botvinick, 2018).”
To Trust or to Think (2021, background): “Because evaluating every explanation requires substantial cognitive effort, which humans are averse to [38], this assumption is likely incorrect.”
Explanations Can Reduce Overreliance on AI Systems During Decision-Making (2022, background): “In line with prior work examining cost-benefit analyses in the allocation of mental effort [46], we provide evidence that humans engage in cost-benefit analyses when choosing how to collaborate with an AI when making decisions.”
Proxy tasks and subjective measures can be misleading in evaluating explainable AI systems (2020, background): “However, people are reluctant to exert cognitive effort [24, 25] unless they are motivated or forced to do so.”
InfoBot: Transfer and Exploration via the Information Bottleneck (2019, background): “Humans too demonstrate an afﬁnity for relying on default behaviour when they can (Kool and Botvinick, 2018), which we take as encouraging support for this line of work (Hassabis et al., 2017).”
Metacognition in Psychology (2019, background): “Furthermore, individual differences in cognitive control, as measured with, for example, the Need for Cognition scale, are related to cognitive effort in a range of tasks (Kool & Botvinick, 2018) and to overriding intuitive but wrong responses (Toplak, West, & Stanovich, 2011).”
Information asymmetry in KL-regularized RL (2019, background): “This intuition has been explored across multiple ﬁelds, from cognitive science (e.g. Kool & Botvinick, 2018) to neuroscience and machine learning.”