Linas Nasvytis
@linasnasvytis.bsky.social
PhD @Stanford studying cognitive science & AI
Prev: Pre-doc Fellow @Harvard, Econ & CS research with Paul Romer, Stats & ML @UniofOxford, Econ @Columbia
Prev: Pre-doc Fellow @Harvard, Econ & CS research with Paul Romer, Stats & ML @UniofOxford, Econ @Columbia
Belief neglect is different from correspondence bias:
People DO account for environmental constraints (e.g., locked doors).
But they skip reasoning about what the agent believes about the environment.
It’s a mid-level shortcut.
People DO account for environmental constraints (e.g., locked doors).
But they skip reasoning about what the agent believes about the environment.
It’s a mid-level shortcut.
September 17, 2025 at 12:58 AM
Belief neglect is different from correspondence bias:
People DO account for environmental constraints (e.g., locked doors).
But they skip reasoning about what the agent believes about the environment.
It’s a mid-level shortcut.
People DO account for environmental constraints (e.g., locked doors).
But they skip reasoning about what the agent believes about the environment.
It’s a mid-level shortcut.
In our task, participants watched agents navigate grid worlds to collect gems.
Sometimes, gems are hidden behind doors. Participants were told that some agents falsely believed that they couldn't open these doors.
They then had to infer which gem the agents preferred.
Sometimes, gems are hidden behind doors. Participants were told that some agents falsely believed that they couldn't open these doors.
They then had to infer which gem the agents preferred.
September 17, 2025 at 12:58 AM
In our task, participants watched agents navigate grid worlds to collect gems.
Sometimes, gems are hidden behind doors. Participants were told that some agents falsely believed that they couldn't open these doors.
They then had to infer which gem the agents preferred.
Sometimes, gems are hidden behind doors. Participants were told that some agents falsely believed that they couldn't open these doors.
They then had to infer which gem the agents preferred.
🚨New paper out w/ @gershbrain.bsky.social & @fierycushman.bsky.social from my time @Harvard!
Humans are capable of sophisticated theory of mind, but when do we use it?
We formalize & document a new cognitive shortcut: belief neglect — inferring others' preferences, as if their beliefs are correct🧵
Humans are capable of sophisticated theory of mind, but when do we use it?
We formalize & document a new cognitive shortcut: belief neglect — inferring others' preferences, as if their beliefs are correct🧵
September 17, 2025 at 12:58 AM
🚨New paper out w/ @gershbrain.bsky.social & @fierycushman.bsky.social from my time @Harvard!
Humans are capable of sophisticated theory of mind, but when do we use it?
We formalize & document a new cognitive shortcut: belief neglect — inferring others' preferences, as if their beliefs are correct🧵
Humans are capable of sophisticated theory of mind, but when do we use it?
We formalize & document a new cognitive shortcut: belief neglect — inferring others' preferences, as if their beliefs are correct🧵