Featured Research

from universities, journals, and other organizations

Understanding the difference between 'human smart' and 'computer smart'

Date:
October 30, 2013
Source:
Elsevier
Summary:
Considering 798 to be an odd number is endemic to human cognition, reveals a new study. A common assumption in the cognitive sciences is that thinking consists of following sets of rules (as it does in a computer). A recent research argues that unlike digital computers, which are designed to follow rules, the computations performed by the neural networks that make up our brain are inherently context dependent. People sometimes make seemingly strange mistakes like thinking that 798 is an odd number despite knowing how to identify odd and even numbers.

Considering 798 to be an odd number is endemic to human cognition, reveals a new study.

Related Articles


A common assumption in the cognitive sciences is that thinking consists of following sets of rules (as it does in a computer). A recent research paper published in Elsevier journal Cognition argues that unlike digital computers, which are designed to follow rules, the computations performed by the neural networks that make up our brain are inherently context dependent.

People sometimes make seemingly strange mistakes like thinking that 798 is an odd number despite knowing how to identify odd and even numbers.Mistakes like this one can be dismissed as carelessness. The experiments described in this paper -- that asked people to classify numbers, shapes, and people into simple categories like evens, triangles, and grandmothers -- provide exhaustive evidence that such errors are actually endemic to human cognition, and are far more common than people imagine. The errors made in the various experiments were made by adults varying in age, level of formal education, and were are observed in both American and Indian participants.

Author of the paper, Gary Lupyan Assistant Professor of Psychology, University of Wisconsin, USA, argues that the reason people mistake 798 to be an odd number is that -- even though they know that only the last digit matters, they can't help but also process the other digits, which in this case are odd. This makes the whole number -- 798 -- seem "almost" odd, and to some people, actually odd. Such gradedness and context dependence demonstrates just how difficult it is for some people to following strict rules and definitions.

"This input-sensitivity is critical for obtaining the enormous behavioral flexibility that humans have, but may come at the cost to the ability to perform certain kinds of formal computations. More broadly, the results tell us that the metaphor of the brain as a digital computer running formal algorithms, is seriously misleading," explains Lupyan.

The question of why people make systematic errors on such seemingly simple problems is also highly relevant for education. Educators for a long time have been uninterested in understanding why children make certain errors, focussing only on bringing them to the right answer. However, although some errors may reflect confusion or inattention, a certain class of errors, actually have a much deeper source and tell us something essential about the human brain.

"Although following simple rules is surprisingly difficult, some people excel at this, and as a society we have invented devices that are capable of blindingly fast and perfectly accurate formal computations (this is what computers were made to do, after all). So the real question we are left with is not why people sometimes mistake 798 for an odd number, but how people ever transcend these limitations, which appear to be inherent to how neurons compute," Lupyan concludes.


Story Source:

The above story is based on materials provided by Elsevier. Note: Materials may be edited for content and length.


Journal Reference:

  1. Gary Lupyan. The difficulties of executing simple algorithms: Why brains make mistakes computers don’t. Cognition, 2013; 129 (3): 615 DOI: 10.1016/j.cognition.2013.08.015

Cite This Page:

Elsevier. "Understanding the difference between 'human smart' and 'computer smart'." ScienceDaily. ScienceDaily, 30 October 2013. <www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2013/10/131030103556.htm>.
Elsevier. (2013, October 30). Understanding the difference between 'human smart' and 'computer smart'. ScienceDaily. Retrieved October 24, 2014 from www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2013/10/131030103556.htm
Elsevier. "Understanding the difference between 'human smart' and 'computer smart'." ScienceDaily. www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2013/10/131030103556.htm (accessed October 24, 2014).

Share This



More Computers & Math News

Friday, October 24, 2014

Featured Research

from universities, journals, and other organizations


Featured Videos

from AP, Reuters, AFP, and other news services

Microsoft Riding High On Strong Surface, Cloud Performance

Microsoft Riding High On Strong Surface, Cloud Performance

Newsy (Oct. 24, 2014) — Microsoft's Q3 earnings showed its tablets and cloud services are really hitting their stride. Video provided by Newsy
Powered by NewsLook.com
The Best Apps to Organize Your Life

The Best Apps to Organize Your Life

Buzz60 (Oct. 23, 2014) — Need help organizing your bills, schedules and other things? Ko Im (@konakafe) has the best apps to help you stay on top of it all! Video provided by Buzz60
Powered by NewsLook.com
Nike And Apple Team Up To Create Wearable ... Something

Nike And Apple Team Up To Create Wearable ... Something

Newsy (Oct. 23, 2014) — For those looking for wearable tech that's significantly less nerdy than Google Glass, Nike CEO Mark Parker says don't worry, It's on the way. Video provided by Newsy
Powered by NewsLook.com
Chameleon Camouflage to Give Tanks Cloaking Capabilities

Chameleon Camouflage to Give Tanks Cloaking Capabilities

Reuters - Innovations Video Online (Oct. 22, 2014) — Inspired by the way a chameleon changes its colour to disguise itself; scientists in Poland want to replace traditional camouflage paint with thousands of electrochromic plates that will continuously change colour to blend with its surroundings. The first PL-01 concept tank prototype will be tested within a few years, with scientists predicting that a similar technology could even be woven into the fabric of a soldiers' clothing making them virtually invisible to the naked eye. Matthew Stock reports. Video provided by Reuters
Powered by NewsLook.com

Search ScienceDaily

Number of stories in archives: 140,361

Find with keyword(s):
 
Enter a keyword or phrase to search ScienceDaily for related topics and research stories.

Save/Print:
Share:  

Breaking News:

Strange & Offbeat Stories

 

Space & Time

Matter & Energy

Computers & Math

In Other News

... from NewsDaily.com

Science News

Health News

Environment News

Technology News



Save/Print:
Share:  

Free Subscriptions


Get the latest science news with ScienceDaily's free email newsletters, updated daily and weekly. Or view hourly updated newsfeeds in your RSS reader:

Get Social & Mobile


Keep up to date with the latest news from ScienceDaily via social networks and mobile apps:

Have Feedback?


Tell us what you think of ScienceDaily -- we welcome both positive and negative comments. Have any problems using the site? Questions?
Mobile iPhone Android Web
Follow Facebook Twitter Google+
Subscribe RSS Feeds Email Newsletters
Latest Headlines Health & Medicine Mind & Brain Space & Time Matter & Energy Computers & Math Plants & Animals Earth & Climate Fossils & Ruins