Cited by 31Embodied and Extended CognitionCognitive Science and Education ResearchPhilosophy and Theoretical Science

The multiple, interacting levels of cognitive systems (MILCS) perspective on group cognition

Goldstone, Robert L., Theiner, Georg·2017·Philosophical Psychology

Abstract

We lay out a multiple, interacting levels of cognitive systems (MILCS) framework to account for the cognitive capacities of individuals and the groups to which they belong. The goal of MILCS is to explain the kinds of cognitive processes typically studied by cognitive scientists, such as perception, attention, memory, categorization, decision-making, problem solving, judgment, and flexible behavior. Two such systems are considered in some detail—lateral inhibition within a network for selecting the most attractive option from a candidate set and a diffusion process for accumulating evidence to reach a rapid and accurate decision. These system descriptions are aptly applied at multiple levels, including within and across people. These systems provide accounts that unify cognitive processes across multiple levels, can be expressed in a common vocabulary provided by network science, are inductively powerful yet appropriately constrained, and are applicable to a large number of superficially diverse cognitive systems. Given group identification processes, cognitively resourceful people will frequently form groups that effectively employ cognitive systems at higher levels than the individual. The impressive cognitive capacities of individual people do not eliminate the need to talk about group cognition. Instead, smart people can provide the interacting parts for smart groups

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/09515089.2017.1295635

Cites

106 of 106 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • There are agents at multiple levels of organisation within a system.

    “This gives us the possibility of explaining how it can be that there are agents at multiple levels of organisation within a system which solves puzzles raised by colonies of single celled organisms such as slime moulds”

    From Traces of thinking: a stigmergic approach to 4E cognition (2025) · cites this paper as Goldstone & Theiner, 2017

  • Other theorists have not shied away from multiple levels of agency: Hutchins explores agents consisting of agents in distributed cognitive systems, Goldstone and Theiner offer a computational systems account of group cognition in such terms, and Godfrey-Smith explores the transition between single and multicelled organisms in terms of agency and subjectivity.

    “Hutchins explores the dynamics of agents consisting of agents in distributed cognitive systems (Hutchins, 1995a) Goldstone and Theiner (2017 ) offer a computational systems account of group cognition in such terms, and Peter Godfrey-Smith (2016) explores the transition between single and multicelled organisms in terms of agency and subjectivity.”

    From Traces of thinking: a stigmergic approach to 4E cognition (2025) · cites this paper as Goldstone and Theiner (2017)

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

8 of the 114 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Goldstone, R. L., & Theiner, G.
Affiliations
  • Indiana University Bloomington (US)
  • Villanova University (US)
Corresponding author
Goldstone, Robert L.
Venue
Philosophical Psychology
Published
2017-04-03
Volume
30
Issue
3
Pages
338-372
ISSN
  • 0951-5089 (ISSN-L)
  • 1465-394X
OpenAlex
W2604126156
Cited by
31
References
114
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 3
FWCI
2.04
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Philosophical Psychology (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Embodied and Extended Cognition
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Cognitive Science and Education Research
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Philosophy and Theoretical Science
Keywords
group cognition, lateral inhibition, diffusion models, decision-making, group identification, cognitive networks, behavioral flexibility, categorization

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review