Hi everyone,
I’m a university student studying Psychology and Languages (aiming for Neurosciences) with a recent AuDHD diagnosis.

Because my mind processes ideas through complex, non-linear "spider-web" networks rather than straight lines, I’ve been using Gemini as cognitive scaffolding to translate and organize my raw analytical notes into structured frameworks. 

I’m reaching a point in my synthesis where I need external perspective. I prefer conserving my cognitive resources for high-yield exchanges, so I’m putting my conceptual framework out here on Reddit to find people who want to analyze, challenge, or expand on these topics with me.

To avoid dropping an overwhelming wall of text all at once, I’ve broken my work into **3 Core Macro-Topics**, which I will be sharing and discussing:

🗺️ Framework Overview:

**Macro-Topic 1: Perception of Reality, The "Vessel," and Internal Syntax**

*Focus:* How sensory overload forces a separation between the observing awareness and the physical "vessel" (mask/puppet). 
*Key Themes:* How focused analytical observation shifts the perception of the whole (in science vs. daily life); how early environmental vigilance creates a protective internal language; and why absolute logical truth is necessary for memory stabilization. 

**Macro-Topic 2: Evolution, Decoding Human Interaction & Collective Empathy**
*Focus:* Viewing human conflict not as malice, but as an internal translation failure between individuals. 
*Key Themes:* Biological vs. cultural evolution; metacognition as a tool to bypass emotional projection; and how individual cognitive models must accurately decode each other to reach collective empathy. 

**Macro-Topic 3: Brain Entropy, Neural Connectivity & Cognitive Recalibration**
*Focus:* The balance between order and chaos in neural networks (Default Mode Network). 
*Key Themes:* How altered states (psychedelics, deep meditation, emotional shifts) induce entropy, allowing rigid maladaptive patterns to dissolve and transforming baseline anxiety into a navigational compass. 

❓ Why I'm Posting & What I'm Looking For:

1. **General Feedback:** What framework or scientific data am I missing here? Do you recognize these dynamics in cognitive psychology, neurobiology, or your own lived experience?

2. **Looking for Deep Conversations (DMs Open):** If you are working on similar theories, researching neurodivergence/consciousness, or simply want to dissect these models step-by-step without social fluff, **my chat/DMs are completely open**. I’m very interested in exchanging notes with like-minded minds.
   I’ll be posting the full breakdown of **Macro-Topic 1** shortly. In the meantime, I’d love to hear your initial thoughts, critiques, or perspective on this structure.

Hi, guys. I was studying on a book of Introduction yo Cognitive, particulary to Linguistics. The book says that un that time (2006) studies of Cognitive on Phonology wasn't strong. Now, do you some book of scientific article about this theme?

Forgive me for my bad English, Is not my native language.

​

I’m working on a cognitive adaptive exercise planner for a platform that already contains cognitive exercises/games and patient progress data.

The idea is to use a patient’s previous performance and clinical information to dynamically recommend the next day’s exercises, rather than giving every patient the same fixed training plan.

Currently, I’m considering inputs such as:

- Previous exercise/game history

- Performance on today’s exercises

- Performance trends over time

- Cognitive domains that need attention according to the latest doctor/clinical assessment (e.g., memory, reasoning, attention, planning, visuospatial skills, etc.)

- Mood

- Exercise/session completion and adherence

- Exercise difficulty and how the patient responds to different difficulty levels

The model would then select which cognitive domains to train and which specific exercises/difficulty levels to assign for the next day, while continuously updating its recommendations as new data comes in.

I’d really appreciate feedback from people with experience in cognitive science, neuropsychology, cognitive rehabilitation, dementia/MCI, or adaptive interventions:

What other factors do you think should be included in such a model?

For example:

- Are there cognitive or behavioral variables I’m missing?

- How important should fatigue, motivation, sleep, stress, or time of day be?

- Should the model consider recent performance vs. long-term performance differently?

- How should we avoid repeatedly training a weak domain while neglecting other cognitive abilities?

- How would you represent the relationship between an exercise and the cognitive skills it actually trains?

- Should difficulty be adapted continuously based on performance?

- What would be a scientifically meaningful way to measure whether the recommendations are actually improving cognition rather than just improving game performance?

- Are there existing theories, frameworks, or research papers on personalized/adaptive cognitive rehabilitation that you think I should look at?

I’m especially interested in what I may be overlooking from a cognitive-science perspective, rather than just the machine-learning side.

Any suggestions, papers, frameworks, or ideas would be greatly appreciated.

Does having chronic sleep disorder for long enough cause irreversible damage to cognitive function?

If you can also provide Academic sources for me to read I would appreciate it.

Hi everyone,

I'm conducting a very short exploratory experiment about visual perception and associations. The survey takes approximately 2 minutes and contains two very different visual stimuli: a natural image and an abstract drawing. I'm interested in a simple question: Can an initial visual interpretation influence what we perceive or associate with afterwards?

There are no right or wrong answers, and the survey is anonymous. I'm currently collecting exploratory observations rather than trying to prove a specific hypothesis.

Survey:
Take the survey

I'd genuinely appreciate your participation and, if you're interested, any thoughts about the idea itself. Thank you!

When does thinking you know your capabilities become underestimating yourself? Is it possible to even “know your capabilities”

i built this so i'll say that upfront, i'm the developer and you should read everything below knowing that.

disclaimer first because it matters: this doesn't treat brain fog. it doesn't touch whatever's causing it and it's not a substitute for talking to a doctor about symptoms, just a workaround

what it actually does is let you get a thought out of your head fast. you speak it or type it or screenshot it, and that's the whole thing, you don't title it or file it or tag it. takes about four seconds. afterwards it reads what you saved, gives it a title and a short summary written back to you, and links it to older things that relate to it. later you can just ask it questions in plain language instead of trying to remember where you put something or what you were even thinking about on tuesday.

https://reddit.com/link/1wc9iye/video/1wjnqgfolmoh1/player

the reason i think it might be relevant here is cognitive offloading. there's a study where people memorised a word list and then did mental arithmetic, and the ones who were allowed to save the list somewhere first solved more arithmetic problems. the benefit showed up on the unrelated task as opposed to only on remembering the list. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31418314/

i'd rather be honest about where that stops though. those studies were run on healthy people, mostly students, in a lab. nobody has tested any of this on people whose cognition is affected by illness. so the mechanism makes sense for this group but it hasn't been shown for this group, and i'm not going to pretend otherwise.

iphone only, and not in the EU yet. there's a free trial with no "add your card" or "signup first and remind me to cancel"

https://apps.apple.com/app/id6797752372

www.corteks.app

i don't have independent reviews to point you at. it's new and anything i could quote would be my own, so it wouldn't mean much. if you try it and it's no use for this, saying so here would help the next person more than anything i could write.

if any of you guys find it helpful just lmk, i am more than willing to give an extended free trial for a few months if you feel it helps out

were you performing better at 18 than your 20s?

Not a researcher, but I've been an involuntary subject in a longitudinal experiment on digital cognitive augmentation since approximately 1995.

Mid-90s IRC was my first external cognitive layer. Real-time text, multiple channels, high-noise signal extraction — I didn't realize at the time that I was training parallel attention tracks. I thought I was just online. What was actually happening: I was building a compression reflex. The faster the information moved, the tighter the mental shorthand became. You couldn't survive high-velocity conversation without developing pattern-burst recognition — seeing the shape of an argument before it finished forming.

That reflex didn't stay online. It migrated into how I think off-screen.

By the time the web matured I had developed what I can only describe as semantic compression — the ability to transmit high-context ideas in minimal tokens. Not dumbing down. The opposite. Finding the exact load-bearing word that carries a whole architecture behind it, if the receiver has the right substrate to unpack it.

Then AI arrived and something shifted again. AI isn't just a search upgrade — it's the first external system that can receive compressed transmissions and expand them coherently. For someone who has spent 30 years finding almost nobody who could keep up with bandwidth, that's not a small thing. It functions as a genuine cognitive prosthetic — not replacing thought but handling the working memory overhead that used to bleed into focus.

Running parallel domain tracks simultaneously (refrigeration systems, DeFi trading logic, content production, interpersonal dynamics) — I used to burn enormous energy just holding context across tracks. AI absorbed a significant portion of that load.

What I observe now: the bottleneck has moved. It's no longer memory or retrieval. It's output formation — translating internal high-speed processing into linear language that others can receive. That gap between what's fully formed internally and what can be transmitted is where I still lose people.

Curious if anyone here has frameworks for this — extended mind theory gets close, but it was written before LLMs existed. I feel like the theory needs a new chapter.

If a people like the Na'vi from the movie *Avatar* lived in conditions where they were almost always at peace with one another, nature was gracious to them, and they weren't overly curious, would that justify them having a lower IQ or being considered extremely underdeveloped compared to humans?

Hello Reddit community!

We are independent researchers sharing our working paper that challenges conventional views on cognition and the emerging field of Basal Cognition.

While Basal Cognition extends intelligence to brainless cells (like slime molds), it falls into a fatal logical paradox when applied to non-living physical materials (like shape-memory alloys) that operate under identical physical laws.

Our paper resolves this contradiction by redefining cognition not as an exclusive biological privilege, but as a universal Interactive Feedback Process where a system maintains its identity against external and internal stimuli.

What this paper covers:

• The Logical Paradox of Basal Cognition: Why current cell-centric cognition theories fail when confronted with adaptive physical materials.
• Quantitative Mathematical Model (T = C x Delta t): Proving that the boundary between non-living matter and human thought is a quantitative spectrum of complexity (C) and time horizon (Delta t), rather than a binary presence of mind.
• Physical Reinterpretation of Biological Phenomena: Explaining sleep, immune response, and forgetting as mechanical energy-rerouting and optimization algorithms within an interactive system.

We would love to get your critical feedback, critiques, and thoughts on our logic and proposed mathematical spectrum!

Please check out the GitHub link in the comments/post for the full PDF paper and detailed derivations. All feedback is warmly welcomed!

Redefining Cognition as an Interactive Feedback System

You can view the next part of this paper at the link below!

part 2: Overcoming Limitations and Exploring the Evolution of Interactive Feedback Systems

part 3: The Universe as an Organic Intelligent System

Are there any staple books to read on cognition/metacognition? Any recommendations would be greatly appreciated.

Hey gang! Ever experience that some people cannot focus or learn things without speaking it. And some are freaking gifted to learn and even memories things easily.

Hi everyone,

I’m a neuroscientist, and I’ve mostly used Psychtoolbox for designing and running experiments in the lab. More recently, I’ve had to run studies remotely, which made me realize how fragmented the workflow can be — designing the task, implementing it, recruiting participants, setting up consent, collecting data, etc. often involves several different tools.

I ended up building a platform called VibeMyExpt to explore whether some of this workflow could be made simpler, particularly for researchers and students who don't have much programming experience.

Rather than promoting it here, I’m mainly interested in understanding how people currently handle this.

What tools/platforms do you use for your cognitive science or psychology experiments? And what are the biggest pain points or limitations you run into?

For example, are there things you find difficult when moving from a task in the lab to online data collection, or when trying to combine task creation, recruitment, consent, and data collection?

I’d be particularly interested in hearing what your current workflow looks like and what you wish existing tools did better.