Iris van Rooij 💭
@irisvanrooij.bsky.social
Professor of Computational Cognitive Science | @AI_Radboud | @[email protected] on 🦣 | http://cognitionandintractability.com | she/they 🏳️🌈
Pinned
![Figure 1
Illustration of why AI systems cannot realistically scale to human cognition within the foreseeable future: (b) Human cognitive capacities (such as reasoning, communication, problem solving, learning, concept formation, planning etc.) can handle unbounded situations across many domains, ranging from simple to complex. (a) Engineers create AI systems using machine learning from human data. (d) In an attempt to approximate human cognition a lot of data is consumed. (c) Making AI systems that approximate human cognition is intractable (van Rooij, Guest, et al., 2024), i.e., the required resources (e.g. time, data) grows prohibitively fast as input domains get more complex, leading to diminishing returns. (a) Any existing AI system is
created in limited time (hours, months or years, not millennia or eons). Therefore, existing AI systems cannot realistically have the domain-general cognitive capacities that humans have. [Made with elements from freepik.com.]](https://cdn.bsky.app/img/feed_thumbnail/plain/did:plc:24ngrqljhck7hpvbgrg7a23k/bafkreie5dbxbxpaszqwfbgne6pi7kf26im6chq45olvzxyyrg7eitq6uue@jpeg)
✨ Updated preprint ✨
Iris van Rooij & Olivia Guest (2026). Combining Psychology with Artificial Intelligence: What Could Possibly Go Wrong? PsyArXiv osf.io/preprints/psyarxiv/aue4m_v2 @olivia.science
Our aim is to make these ideas accessible for a.o. psych students. Hope we succeeded 🙂
Iris van Rooij & Olivia Guest (2026). Combining Psychology with Artificial Intelligence: What Could Possibly Go Wrong? PsyArXiv osf.io/preprints/psyarxiv/aue4m_v2 @olivia.science
Our aim is to make these ideas accessible for a.o. psych students. Hope we succeeded 🙂
Reposted by Iris van Rooij 💭
If you find our educational materials of use, we’d love to know.
And don’t forget to cite us 🙏
Blokpoel, Mark & van Rooij, Iris (2021-2025). Theoretical modeling for cognitive science and psychology. computationalcognitivescience.github.io/lovelace/.
And don’t forget to cite us 🙏
Blokpoel, Mark & van Rooij, Iris (2021-2025). Theoretical modeling for cognitive science and psychology. computationalcognitivescience.github.io/lovelace/.
THEORETICAL MODELING
for cognitive science and psychology
computationalcognitivescience.github.io
December 27, 2025 at 9:02 PM
If you find our educational materials of use, we’d love to know.
And don’t forget to cite us 🙏
Blokpoel, Mark & van Rooij, Iris (2021-2025). Theoretical modeling for cognitive science and psychology. computationalcognitivescience.github.io/lovelace/.
And don’t forget to cite us 🙏
Blokpoel, Mark & van Rooij, Iris (2021-2025). Theoretical modeling for cognitive science and psychology. computationalcognitivescience.github.io/lovelace/.
Reposted by Iris van Rooij 💭
We use this textbook also in online workshops that we have organised over the last two years. In 2027 we may move to organise a Radboud Summer School on the topic.
computationalcognitivescience.github.io/workshop/
computationalcognitivescience.github.io/workshop/
Theoretical Modeling Workshop
Cognitive and/or psychological theories often start as verbal descriptions of observed regularities in human behavior and some intuitive ideas about their causal origins. Such informal verbal theories...
computationalcognitivescience.github.io
December 27, 2025 at 9:02 PM
We use this textbook also in online workshops that we have organised over the last two years. In 2027 we may move to organise a Radboud Summer School on the topic.
computationalcognitivescience.github.io/workshop/
computationalcognitivescience.github.io/workshop/
Reposted by Iris van Rooij 💭
Mark Blokpoel & I have maintain a living open interactive textbook “Theoretical Modeling for Cognitive Science and Psychology.”
Recently, Mark updated Ch 9 & 10 so they have embedded, running and editable, code again.
Check it out! ✨
computationalcognitivescience.github.io/lovelace/
Recently, Mark updated Ch 9 & 10 so they have embedded, running and editable, code again.
Check it out! ✨
computationalcognitivescience.github.io/lovelace/
December 27, 2025 at 8:43 PM
Mark Blokpoel & I have maintain a living open interactive textbook “Theoretical Modeling for Cognitive Science and Psychology.”
Recently, Mark updated Ch 9 & 10 so they have embedded, running and editable, code again.
Check it out! ✨
computationalcognitivescience.github.io/lovelace/
Recently, Mark updated Ch 9 & 10 so they have embedded, running and editable, code again.
Check it out! ✨
computationalcognitivescience.github.io/lovelace/
Reposted by Iris van Rooij 💭
I also like Ryle's way of saying it that we used here: philsci-archive.pitt.edu/25289
> Paralogisms and antinomies are the evidence that an
expression is systematically misleading. — Ryle (1931, p. 168)
which I'm sure inspired my "terminological disarray" ofc, see: www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fxyg...
> Paralogisms and antinomies are the evidence that an
expression is systematically misleading. — Ryle (1931, p. 168)
which I'm sure inspired my "terminological disarray" ofc, see: www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fxyg...
February 14, 2026 at 7:34 PM
I also like Ryle's way of saying it that we used here: philsci-archive.pitt.edu/25289
> Paralogisms and antinomies are the evidence that an
expression is systematically misleading. — Ryle (1931, p. 168)
which I'm sure inspired my "terminological disarray" ofc, see: www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fxyg...
> Paralogisms and antinomies are the evidence that an
expression is systematically misleading. — Ryle (1931, p. 168)
which I'm sure inspired my "terminological disarray" ofc, see: www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fxyg...
Reposted by Iris van Rooij 💭
And — final one promise and sorry! — this one with @irisvanrooij.bsky.social and my PhD candidate Natalia, that I think might help people protect themselves from some very unwanted theoretical issues that fly under the radar nonetheless! bsky.app/profile/oliv...
I've felt for a while that a mainstream method, reverse engineering, in cognitive science & AI is incompatible w computationalism‼️ So I wrote "Modern Alchemy: Neurocognitive Reverse Engineering" w the wonderful Natalia S. & @irisvanrooij.bsky.social to elaborate: philsci-archive.pitt.edu/25289/
1/n
1/n
February 17, 2026 at 6:19 PM
And — final one promise and sorry! — this one with @irisvanrooij.bsky.social and my PhD candidate Natalia, that I think might help people protect themselves from some very unwanted theoretical issues that fly under the radar nonetheless! bsky.app/profile/oliv...
Reposted by Iris van Rooij 💭
Also this one, esp that Box in the quoted post below, for theories that allow mental / neurocognitive representations — obviously not idea if useful for you, but maybe? If not, feel free to ignore me obviously! bsky.app/profile/oliv...
Tired but happy to say this is out w @andreaeyleen.bsky.social: Are Neurocognitive Representations 'Small Cakes'? philsci-archive.pitt.edu/24834/
We analyse cog neuro theories showing how vicious regress, e.g. the homunculus fallacy, is (sadly) alive and well — and importantly how to avoid it. 1/
We analyse cog neuro theories showing how vicious regress, e.g. the homunculus fallacy, is (sadly) alive and well — and importantly how to avoid it. 1/
February 17, 2026 at 6:16 PM
Also this one, esp that Box in the quoted post below, for theories that allow mental / neurocognitive representations — obviously not idea if useful for you, but maybe? If not, feel free to ignore me obviously! bsky.app/profile/oliv...
Reposted by Iris van Rooij 💭
Thank you for sharing these! I am sure I saw this before, maybe you posted it back on twitter? Great list. Have you seen my work w @andreaeyleen.bsky.social here, might be useful on some of the more nuanced aspects of the ANN/LLM/etc theorising; particularly proud of this 1: bsky.app/profile/oliv...
Proudly published with @andreaeyleen.bsky.social:
A metatheory of classical and modern connectionism. doi.org/10.1037/rev0...
We touch on what has been up with connectionism as a framework for computational modelling — & for everything it seems these days with AI and LLMs — pre-2010 vs post.
1/n
A metatheory of classical and modern connectionism. doi.org/10.1037/rev0...
We touch on what has been up with connectionism as a framework for computational modelling — & for everything it seems these days with AI and LLMs — pre-2010 vs post.
1/n
February 17, 2026 at 6:15 PM
Thank you for sharing these! I am sure I saw this before, maybe you posted it back on twitter? Great list. Have you seen my work w @andreaeyleen.bsky.social here, might be useful on some of the more nuanced aspects of the ANN/LLM/etc theorising; particularly proud of this 1: bsky.app/profile/oliv...
Reposted by Iris van Rooij 💭
Since I'm pontificating about good scientific practice (while procrastinating & not actually doing science), here's a reminder of my guide on the role of theory in cognitive science (NB I do not claim to be a theory-driven science expert - comments welcome
docs.google.com/document/d/1...
docs.google.com/document/d/1...
Theory: What to read
The role of theory in cognitive science Or: my guide to what to read if you really want to understand how to do good, robust , theory-driven cognitive science. (disclaimer: this is an aspirational gu...
docs.google.com
February 17, 2026 at 6:01 PM
Since I'm pontificating about good scientific practice (while procrastinating & not actually doing science), here's a reminder of my guide on the role of theory in cognitive science (NB I do not claim to be a theory-driven science expert - comments welcome
docs.google.com/document/d/1...
docs.google.com/document/d/1...
Reposted by Iris van Rooij 💭
100% and please, people, consider signing "Open Letter: Stop the Uncritical Adoption of AI Technologies in Academia." olivia.science/ai/#activism
direct link to sign: openletter.earth/open-letter-...
direct link to sign: openletter.earth/open-letter-...
Critical AI
On this page are some resources for Critical AI Literacy (CAIL) from my perspective.
olivia.science
February 17, 2026 at 6:01 PM
100% and please, people, consider signing "Open Letter: Stop the Uncritical Adoption of AI Technologies in Academia." olivia.science/ai/#activism
direct link to sign: openletter.earth/open-letter-...
direct link to sign: openletter.earth/open-letter-...
Reposted by Iris van Rooij 💭
Reposted by Iris van Rooij 💭
💔 predictable, painful, disgusting,
I helped build the FAccT academic conference, and white men like Seth have to come along and make sure that the people we tried to get away from, the TESCREAL eugenicist ghouls, have every academic space in addition to the billions they're drowning in.
February 17, 2026 at 5:26 PM
💔 predictable, painful, disgusting,
Reposted by Iris van Rooij 💭
I helped build the FAccT academic conference, and white men like Seth have to come along and make sure that the people we tried to get away from, the TESCREAL eugenicist ghouls, have every academic space in addition to the billions they're drowning in.
February 17, 2026 at 4:20 PM
I helped build the FAccT academic conference, and white men like Seth have to come along and make sure that the people we tried to get away from, the TESCREAL eugenicist ghouls, have every academic space in addition to the billions they're drowning in.
Reposted by Iris van Rooij 💭
'Punishing the poor' is an evergreen.
If you aren't calling things by their name — this is a combination of phrenology, physiognomy and astrology — you're not a journalist, you're just the megaphone of power.
@olivia.science @irisvanrooij.bsky.social
web.archive.org/web/20260215...
If you aren't calling things by their name — this is a combination of phrenology, physiognomy and astrology — you're not a journalist, you're just the megaphone of power.
@olivia.science @irisvanrooij.bsky.social
web.archive.org/web/20260215...
The machines that will predict the criminals of the future
The Ministry of Justice will deploy machine learning to identify at-risk children for early intervention and to help prevent them falling into a life of crime
web.archive.org
February 17, 2026 at 1:18 PM
'Punishing the poor' is an evergreen.
If you aren't calling things by their name — this is a combination of phrenology, physiognomy and astrology — you're not a journalist, you're just the megaphone of power.
@olivia.science @irisvanrooij.bsky.social
web.archive.org/web/20260215...
If you aren't calling things by their name — this is a combination of phrenology, physiognomy and astrology — you're not a journalist, you're just the megaphone of power.
@olivia.science @irisvanrooij.bsky.social
web.archive.org/web/20260215...
Reposted by Iris van Rooij 💭
also notable is this, the conceptual creation of neuronal networks, i.e. biological neural networks, back at the turn of the previous century 100+ years ago
bsky.app/profile/oliv...
bsky.app/profile/oliv...
Thank you 🥰
...and you (and anybody familiar with racism) can predict what it is: they wanted to show Black people have less interconnected neurons or something just as bonkers. No different to more modern neurosexism in illogical form. meson.press/books/neural...
...and you (and anybody familiar with racism) can predict what it is: they wanted to show Black people have less interconnected neurons or something just as bonkers. No different to more modern neurosexism in illogical form. meson.press/books/neural...
Neural Networks › meson press
A critical examination of the figure of the neural network as it mediates neuroscientific and computational discourses and technical practices
meson.press
February 17, 2026 at 8:53 AM
also notable is this, the conceptual creation of neuronal networks, i.e. biological neural networks, back at the turn of the previous century 100+ years ago
bsky.app/profile/oliv...
bsky.app/profile/oliv...
Reposted by Iris van Rooij 💭
the opening quote here too:
[A]ll science would be superfluous if the outward appearance and the essence of things directly coincided. (Marx, 1894, p. 592) doi.org/10.1007/s421...
bsky.app/profile/oliv...
[A]ll science would be superfluous if the outward appearance and the essence of things directly coincided. (Marx, 1894, p. 592) doi.org/10.1007/s421...
bsky.app/profile/oliv...
"Just because a model correlates with neural and behavioral data, it is not sufficient for us to infer that the model is performing cognition: correlation does not imply cognition."
On Logical Inference over Brains, Behaviour, and Artificial Neural Networks. doi.org/10.1007/s421...
3/n
On Logical Inference over Brains, Behaviour, and Artificial Neural Networks. doi.org/10.1007/s421...
3/n
On Logical Inference over Brains, Behaviour, and Artificial Neural Networks - Computational Brain & Behavior
In the cognitive, computational, and neuro-sciences, practitioners often reason about what computational models represent or learn, as well as what algorithm is instantiated. The putative goal of such...
doi.org
February 17, 2026 at 8:49 AM
the opening quote here too:
[A]ll science would be superfluous if the outward appearance and the essence of things directly coincided. (Marx, 1894, p. 592) doi.org/10.1007/s421...
bsky.app/profile/oliv...
[A]ll science would be superfluous if the outward appearance and the essence of things directly coincided. (Marx, 1894, p. 592) doi.org/10.1007/s421...
bsky.app/profile/oliv...
Reposted by Iris van Rooij 💭
funnily or perhaps predictably enough that is related to correlationism, discussed further down and also directly related to the Turing test's logics: olivia.science/turing/#logi... and more here too: bsky.app/profile/oliv...
February 17, 2026 at 8:48 AM
funnily or perhaps predictably enough that is related to correlationism, discussed further down and also directly related to the Turing test's logics: olivia.science/turing/#logi... and more here too: bsky.app/profile/oliv...
Reposted by Iris van Rooij 💭
it's — this Pygmalionesque framing — also what we have seen recently where women like @emilymbender.bsky.social are subjected to when bros snidely remark "no, YOU show you're conscious" or whatever as a retort to her saying LLMs aren't on the same cognitive footing to humans
bsky.app/profile/emil...
bsky.app/profile/emil...
Here's an example of the reaction I'm describing here, and I appreciate something this particular poster makes clear: They neither understand nor respect boundaries. There's no policing happening here, just my own decisions about who I will have a conversation with.
February 17, 2026 at 7:06 AM
it's — this Pygmalionesque framing — also what we have seen recently where women like @emilymbender.bsky.social are subjected to when bros snidely remark "no, YOU show you're conscious" or whatever as a retort to her saying LLMs aren't on the same cognitive footing to humans
bsky.app/profile/emil...
bsky.app/profile/emil...
Reposted by Iris van Rooij 💭
This is so fascinating (as a lay nerd interested in Turing and gender).
There's been a kind of grim side conversation about Turing due to the recorded means of his death, a poisoned apple (and obvious links to the myth of the princess Snow White).
There's been a kind of grim side conversation about Turing due to the recorded means of his death, a poisoned apple (and obvious links to the myth of the princess Snow White).
OK! I collected much of what I @spookyachu.bsky.social @andreaeyleen.bsky.social (and other collaborators not on here) have said on the Turing test (from critical, gendered, etc. angles) as it keeps being relevant: olivia.science/turing — hope it's useful for others too. Happy Sunday! 🤖💭
February 17, 2026 at 6:36 AM
This is so fascinating (as a lay nerd interested in Turing and gender).
There's been a kind of grim side conversation about Turing due to the recorded means of his death, a poisoned apple (and obvious links to the myth of the princess Snow White).
There's been a kind of grim side conversation about Turing due to the recorded means of his death, a poisoned apple (and obvious links to the myth of the princess Snow White).
Reposted by Iris van Rooij 💭
Re: the quote post …
I am a scientist, I don’t use products that generate text (“suggestions”) for me, like Grammerly, ChatGPT, Claude, etc. and I think none of these products should be anywhere near academic writing. It is not as hard as you want to make it seem. We can write our own texts.
I am a scientist, I don’t use products that generate text (“suggestions”) for me, like Grammerly, ChatGPT, Claude, etc. and I think none of these products should be anywhere near academic writing. It is not as hard as you want to make it seem. We can write our own texts.
February 16, 2026 at 9:23 PM
Re: the quote post …
I am a scientist, I don’t use products that generate text (“suggestions”) for me, like Grammerly, ChatGPT, Claude, etc. and I think none of these products should be anywhere near academic writing. It is not as hard as you want to make it seem. We can write our own texts.
I am a scientist, I don’t use products that generate text (“suggestions”) for me, like Grammerly, ChatGPT, Claude, etc. and I think none of these products should be anywhere near academic writing. It is not as hard as you want to make it seem. We can write our own texts.
Reposted by Iris van Rooij 💭
Indeed, and that was the academic integrity norm for ages until opportunists decided misconduct pays. Ghost authorship is well-trodden fraud and COPE has a flowchart for handling it (the crime is deceiving the audience about the author having performed the cognitive processes to write the paper).
Senior academics organizing these conferences laid the groundwork for this denial of service attack, creating explicit policies to welcome LLM-generated "papers", to normalize LLM-generated "reviews", and partnered with tech companies in PR/lobbying campaigns.
www.theguardian.com/technology/2...
www.theguardian.com/technology/2...
February 17, 2026 at 5:07 AM
Indeed, and that was the academic integrity norm for ages until opportunists decided misconduct pays. Ghost authorship is well-trodden fraud and COPE has a flowchart for handling it (the crime is deceiving the audience about the author having performed the cognitive processes to write the paper).
Reposted by Iris van Rooij 💭
Absolutely. If a robot wrote your paper, please don’t waste my time and ask a robot to review it.
Seeing ppl debate how to deal with paper submissions that are partly written by “AI”. Why are we having that conversation?
I would refuse to review or edit any paper that was not 100% written by its authors (i.e., the people who have authorial responsibility for the creation of a papers content).
I would refuse to review or edit any paper that was not 100% written by its authors (i.e., the people who have authorial responsibility for the creation of a papers content).
February 16, 2026 at 9:25 PM
Absolutely. If a robot wrote your paper, please don’t waste my time and ask a robot to review it.
Reposted by Iris van Rooij 💭
Me too
Seeing ppl debate how to deal with paper submissions that are partly written by “AI”. Why are we having that conversation?
I would refuse to review or edit any paper that was not 100% written by its authors (i.e., the people who have authorial responsibility for the creation of a papers content).
I would refuse to review or edit any paper that was not 100% written by its authors (i.e., the people who have authorial responsibility for the creation of a papers content).
February 16, 2026 at 9:04 PM
Me too
Reposted by Iris van Rooij 💭
Morgen de eerste lezing van de lezingenreeks "Eugenics: Critical Perspectives on a Creeping Concept Between Science and Ideology". Ook te volgen via live-stream!
Dinsdag 17/2/2026
Inleidende lezingen door de organisatoren (Dorian Accoe, Dries Josten, Seppe Segers, Gertrudis Van de Vijver, Clemence Van Ginneken en mezelf). Mijn deel gaat over hedendaagse eugenetica en connecties met racistische pseudowetenschap.
event.ugent.be/registration...
Inleidende lezingen door de organisatoren (Dorian Accoe, Dries Josten, Seppe Segers, Gertrudis Van de Vijver, Clemence Van Ginneken en mezelf). Mijn deel gaat over hedendaagse eugenetica en connecties met racistische pseudowetenschap.
event.ugent.be/registration...
Event Registration
event.ugent.be
February 16, 2026 at 4:15 PM
Morgen de eerste lezing van de lezingenreeks "Eugenics: Critical Perspectives on a Creeping Concept Between Science and Ideology". Ook te volgen via live-stream!
Seeing ppl debate how to deal with paper submissions that are partly written by “AI”. Why are we having that conversation?
I would refuse to review or edit any paper that was not 100% written by its authors (i.e., the people who have authorial responsibility for the creation of a papers content).
I would refuse to review or edit any paper that was not 100% written by its authors (i.e., the people who have authorial responsibility for the creation of a papers content).
February 16, 2026 at 8:43 PM
Seeing ppl debate how to deal with paper submissions that are partly written by “AI”. Why are we having that conversation?
I would refuse to review or edit any paper that was not 100% written by its authors (i.e., the people who have authorial responsibility for the creation of a papers content).
I would refuse to review or edit any paper that was not 100% written by its authors (i.e., the people who have authorial responsibility for the creation of a papers content).
Reposted by Iris van Rooij 💭
Henle is so so good.
One favorite from her motivated reasoning work: "There are two curious omissions in this study which purports to show the influence of attitudes on subjects’ reasoning: the authors neglected to determine the attitudes of their subjects and failed to study how they reasoned."
One favorite from her motivated reasoning work: "There are two curious omissions in this study which purports to show the influence of attitudes on subjects’ reasoning: the authors neglected to determine the attitudes of their subjects and failed to study how they reasoned."
Ouch, Mary Henle, ouch!
But also very true, still today in 2026!
… Yes looking at you behaviorist-LLM enthusiasts in cognitive science 👀
11/🧵
Screenshot from:
📖 Henle, M. (1976). Why study the history of psychology? nyaspubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/...
But also very true, still today in 2026!
… Yes looking at you behaviorist-LLM enthusiasts in cognitive science 👀
11/🧵
Screenshot from:
📖 Henle, M. (1976). Why study the history of psychology? nyaspubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/...
February 16, 2026 at 3:55 PM
Henle is so so good.
One favorite from her motivated reasoning work: "There are two curious omissions in this study which purports to show the influence of attitudes on subjects’ reasoning: the authors neglected to determine the attitudes of their subjects and failed to study how they reasoned."
One favorite from her motivated reasoning work: "There are two curious omissions in this study which purports to show the influence of attitudes on subjects’ reasoning: the authors neglected to determine the attitudes of their subjects and failed to study how they reasoned."