Abstract:Dual-process theories play a central role in both psychology and neuroscience, figuring prominently in domains ranging from executive control to reward-based learning to judgment and decision making. In each of these domains, two mechanisms appear to operate concurrently, one relatively high in computational complexity, the other relatively simple. Why is neural information processing organized in this way? We propose an answer to this question based on the notion of compression. The key insight is that dual-process structure can enhance adaptive behavior by allowing an agent to minimize the description length of its own behavior. We apply a single model based on this observation to findings from research on executive control, reward-based learning, and judgment and decision making, showing that seemingly diverse dual-process phenomena can be understood as domain-specific consequences of a single underlying set of computational principles. Since the founding of psychology as a scientific discipline, scientists have recognized that much of human and animal behavior falls into two separate categories: slow, effortful deliberation (e.g., solving math problems) and fast, automatic habitual action selection (e.g., signing your name). Such "dual process" theories of cognition have since been developed to explain a number of phenomena from across psychology and neuroscience. Despite all of these experimental results, understanding why this pattern in behavior exists has proven elusive. In this work, we develop a model of dual process cognition which can be derived independently from experimental observations about the brain. Our theory proposes that the division between effortful and automatic behavior emerges as a natural result of the need to balance mastery of the tasks we have to complete every day and flexibility to adapt to new circumstances. In a large number of computer simulations, our model captures many behavioral phenomena associated with "dual process" cognition across multiple subfields of cognitive science.

Normative Processing Needs Multiple Levels of Explanation: From Algorithm to Implementation

Rule-Based and Word-Level Statistics-Based Processing of Language: Insights from Neuroscience

A pluralistic framework for the psychology of norms

Rethinking Norm Psychology

Human and nonhuman norms: a dimensional framework

Naïve Normativity: The Social Foundation of Moral Cognition

Normative Feeling: Socially Patterned Affective Mechanisms

Understanding dual process cognition via the minimum description length principle

Normology: Integrating insights about social norms to understand cultural dynamics

Norm Dynamics: Interdisciplinary Perspectives on Social Norm Emergence, Persistence, and Change

Normative decision rules in changing environments

How we learn social norms: a three-stage model for social norm learning

Understanding Norm Change: An Evolutionary Game-Theoretic Approach (Extended Version)

Synthesizing Proximate and Distal Levels of Explanation: Toward an Evolution-Informed Sociology

Norms and the Flexibility of Moral Action

Dual-processing accounts of reasoning, judgment, and social cognition.

In search of animal normativity: a framework for studying social norms in non‐human animals

Levels of analysis and explanatory progress in psychology: Integrating frameworks from biology and cognitive science for a more comprehensive science of the mind.

Processing Fluency and Predictive Processing: How the Predictive Mind Becomes Aware of its Cognitive Limitations

A Neuroscience Levels of Explanation Approach to the Mind and the Brain

Norm Learning, Teaching, and Change